Podcasting as a tool

Podcast:

Links to websites mentioned in my podcast:

TED

Academic Earth

LSE Public Lectures

Election on Twitter

Much focus has been placed on the importance of television in the UK General Election (as for the first time there have been three live TV debates between the leaders of the main political parties) - This however has occurred at a time when the internet has played a major role in the election.

The "digital election" has been well reported, from interesting (though at times silly) blogs, more series articles on the phenomenon, as well as the websites and social media accounts of candidates.

One example of Web2.0 at work in the election is this attempt by the Guardian for readers to assess the campaigning in their constituency. Readers simply enter their post code, the party campaigning and a rating from 1-5 of how "active" that political party has been. The map is formed by users tweeting the data to them:

Tweet your score, postcode and the party abbreviation with the hashtag #ukvote - eg N1 LAB 3 #ukvote or CV32 CON 4 #ukvote -

What does this have to do with digital history? Isn't this simply election journalism in the internet age? Well I thought about this for a while, is this really something of historical value?

I think that this is of historical value as it potentially shows us where political parties are focusing on, it provides a lot of data albeit in a rather simplistic way. In twenty years time if we were to assess the 2010 UK General Election it might be of use to look at a collaborative effort such as this to see where campaigns were highly fought.

Twitter in Elections:

The screen shot above is from my Twitter account, while I was using a Google Chrome extension for Twitter. The image is annotated to show the differing tweets from those involved in the General Election.

The Google Enlightenment

Previously I mentioned (and indeed welcomed) the digitizing of books by Google.

Digitizing books has to be welcomed as I have shown in my blog for the following reasons:

• It reduces the reliance on the likes of Wikipedia, by making academic sources easier to access.
• Preserves historic books which other wise may decay.
• Helps disabled students to access material.
• In addition digitizing books allows small libraries the wealth of books only otherwise available at national libraries.

An article in The New York Review of Books on the role of Google and the future of books makes interesting reading.

While Robert Darnton is supportive of the role Google have adopted in the digitizing of books, Darnton points out concerns in the "monopoly" they have on this potentially lucrative area.

Darnton fixes his gaze to the 18th Century and looks at the Enlightenment values which were so valued by Voltaire, Rousseau, Franklin and Jefferson and indeed led to the creation of the "Republic of Letters".

Yet he cleverly highlights that debates in the period on copyright legislation (first brought created in 1790) were seen as a balance between the interests of authors and the interests of the public. Darnton argues that despite the hypocrisy of many at the time - the original copyright act put public interests ahead of those of the author (material could only be copyrighted for a maximum of 28 years) yet still recognised the need to reward talent.

Darnton's article critisies changes to copyright legislation which has extended protection until 70 years after the death of the author. Darnton also raises issues about the public interest in this mass digitizing process and the need to hold "the digitizers responsible to the citizenry".

A class action suit against Google in October 2008 resulted in a settlement between the company and a group of authors and publishers which has set the precedent for the future of digitizing books. Copyrighted material which is in print can be purchased as normal (and indeed can be sold as e-books) however copyrighted material which is out of print can be accessed through Google by purchase of a "consumer license" (of which Google retain 37% and rightsholders receive 63%)

Of the 7 million books Google had digitized by November 2008, 5 million are books in copyright but out of print. Thus perhaps making the consumer license a lucrative opportunity for the company (thought Darnton dismisses the idea).

Despite the concerns about copyright acts, and the reduced access to Google's material, the article overall highlights the benefit of the work of Google in making books available online, especially at a time when Microsoft and other have wound down their digitizing programs.

It also states that Google is acting in the public interest and can "make the Enlightenment dream come true", Darnton only hopes the management at Google remains.

Technology defeating disability

On Friday I took part in a survey for the Disability Service in UCC. The aim of the survey was to look at students general "learning experience" in UCC and attempt to see if there were distinctions between the experience of disabled students and those not disabled (which included myself).

I was interviewed by a blind postgraduate (this survey being part of his thesis) but was immediately amazed by how technically advanced the interview was! I was recorded by a digital dictaphone which my interviewer was listening to through headphones to check the quality of the recording, the questions were read from a laptop which was connected to an electronic braille reader, which could also be heard through speakers.

Near the end of the survey questions arose about the use of technology in my time at university. Examples I gave included:

• Use of Blackboard & Moodle.
• Access to lecture notes and articles online.
• Online discussion groups on Blackboard & Moodle.
• Email correspondence from lecturers.
• Module outlines available online.

I was asked about my experience of technology in academia, but then asked if I thought lecturers were aware of the increased diversity of students in university today compared to previous generations and if their teaching style (use of technology was apart of this) reflected this awareness.

There are more disabled students, mature students and students from lower socio-economic backgrounds today - does teaching reflect this?

When thinking about the issue I was aware of the difficulties some mature students experience in academia as a result of technology, perhaps coming to university they have been thrown head first into the online world. What I had completely overlooked was the impact of technology in academia for students with disabilities.

A "disabled student" is a very vague term as it can include a whole array of disabilities and the role of technology in their education will have a varied impact.

My interviewer made several points:

• Lecture notes given at the start of the lecture are of limited use to many disabled students.
• Lecturers who have office hours but are poor at responding to email are difficult to speak to.
• Course material which is in physical not digital format is harder to transfer into audio or braille format.
• Group discussions which take place online (such as through Blackboard) are very useful for disabled students who may otherwise not be as confident (also maybe cannot respond to body language) in a real class discussion.
• Lectures available online (or podcasts) can be reviewed several times.

I started to understand that the technological advances have had huge benefits for disabled students (not only blind students) in pursuing their education.

Therefore "digital history" may benefit me in providing new resources and ways of communicating, but it has [perhaps greater] benefits for disabled students.

Tweeting History

Previously I looked at the role of Twitter, today I wanted to go back to one of the underlying themes running though my blog, the issue of recording history, looking at how Twitter presents challenges and opportunities for historians.

In background reading on the importance of Twitter I came across many articles articulating the value of Twitter for historical research. Shown best by the decision of the US Library of Congress to archive "the collected works of Twitter" stating that "tweets are becoming part of history.”

As mentioned in my previous blog on Twitter most tweets are rather banal, relate to only few individuals and probably have little or no use to any historian.

As a student of diplomatic history I am all to aware that I often ignore the importance of historical resources simply because they do not relate to my notion of a valuable sources. Historical studies which look a the wider society, role of popular culture etc. will potentially see huge benefit in the recording of tweets.

Why are tweets of historical value?

Future studies looking at attitudes towards Sarah Palin during the 2008 US Presidential election may find some benefit in looking through tweets made during her vice-presidential debate with Joe Biden, by then perhaps more efficient methods of analysing huge quantities of data will have emerged allowing for trends to be spotted.

Because tweets are short (a maximum of 140 characters), time stamped and made by so many individuals they are perfect for meta data analysis (if that is not already a term it ought to be...) which is so useful to many historians.

The rise of Twitter

David Cameron once joked that he refrained from using Twitter because "too many tweets make a..." Anyway, at the start of this year there were as many as 55 million tweets being made daily, so while Cameron may be avoiding the social networking website, not everyone else is!

Twitter is being described as the "new Facebook", the extraordinary growth of Facebook in 2008 was being matched in percentage terms by Twitter in 2009.

What is Twitter?

• A micro-blogging website.
• You have your own account like other social networking websites.
• Posts are limited to 140 characters.
• You can "follow" and be "followed" by other users.
• The # key is a tag.
• Tagging allows users to see other "tweets" on similar topics.

Twitter's potential

Until the Summer of 2009 Twitter was seen as yet another internet craze but within a few days it became discussed in the media and being reported on news programmes (such as Newsnight on BBC2). This was because of the role Twitter played in the post-election period in Iran.

In 2009, people in Iran and Moldova created their own searchable tags on Twitter to organize protests against their governments and share information with each other and the world. In April, Moldovans used the network to rally more than 10,000 young people against their country's Communist leadership. And in June, Iranian opposition supporters angry over presidential election results used Twitter and other forms of new media to share news on rallies, police crackdowns on protesters, and analysis.

Twitter became such a vital source of information in Iran at a time when text messaging and mobiles phones were being blocked by authorities. This was shown by the fact that the US State Department even requested the company delay a planned shut down of the site for maintenance, showing the site had become crucial in the coordination of anti-government protests.

As well as being a force against authoritarian governments, Twitter is becoming a vital tool in other ways. The head of the NATO mission in Afghanistan, Stanley McChrystal stated that the website was a tool in mass communication to troops. In the UK during the General Election campaign tweets related to the election are being posted using a variety of tags (including #ge2010 or #ukelection) allowing for everything from the latest opinion polls to spoof posters to be shared.

The success of Twitter is down to the fact that posts are limited to 140 characters, thus you get a short and brief message - like TED, you get a big idea in a few minutes!

#

No the # was not a typo! Tagging is central to understanding twitter. By tagging your posts (using the # and then a word connected to the topic) it allows for debate and collaboration to occur through the site.

Education & Business using Twitter

If Mike Cosgrave had his way, he would "be well past discussion forums and making them use Twitter" by getting students to use the tag connected to their course (ie. #Hi2007) Twitter as a tool in education is a separate issue, but it shows other areas Twitter can be of use in.

Businesses have been entering the social networking arena in recent years with varied success, Twitter is no exception, as print media advertising becomes less popular (and is increasingly reaching an older demographic) the Twitters of this world are becoming a popular tool to reach people otherwise not accessible to companies. It does have dangers for businesses, as furniture shop Habitat discovered when they tried to piggyback on the popularity of Iranian election tags.

Conclusion

David Cameron might be right to avoid using Twitter based on the number of politicians red faced after making inappropriate comments on the site, or worse sharing the banality of their lives. Twitter is however being used by huge numbers of people and for a huge variety of purposes, which is helping it maintain its success. It is easy however to see it as a place for people to share with their friends what is in the contents of today's sandwich or what they thought of that penalty decision in the final minutes of a match - however it would ignore a huge amount of what Twitter is about and why people use the site.

The Wikipedia Model

I was having debate with one of my Digital History classmates, Gearóid Fitzgerald about Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia that if you haven't heard of you must have just come out of a coma. It started with Gearóid discussing the limitations of the encyclopedia and me singing its praises, and we decided to try and write articles giving counter-arguments to our natural point of view. Thus, this blog today is a response to his blog on the benefits of Wikipedia.

A response to Gearóid

Gearóid started his blog stating that the use of the online encyclopedia really dawned on him when he had an undergraduate assignment, which based on the prevailing view of UCC academics is a fairly bold admission (just as well he has his degree safely vaulted away!) Having the same assignment as three hundred or more undergraduates inevitably results in the university library clearly out of any even partially useful books, or else being left with the 1964 edition of a book which has been updated a dozen times since!

The problem with Gearóid's argument is that if his intention was to access academic sources for an assignment - Wikiepdia was no replacement!

In the rest of the blog Gearóid makes his point that Wikipedia is a good resource because:

• Of its speed.
• Ability to search through the text.
• It's constantly updated.
• Related articles are linked.
• It's digital.
• Pages can be saved and accessed on the go.
• And of course it is free.

It's hard to disagree with the above observations as Wikipedia is truly an excellent resource for many reasons, and we all use it for different things.

What is interesting however from Gearóid's blog is that he praises the format of Wikipedia - it's great because it is online, free, easy to use, up-to-date and so forth. He doesn't mention the philosophy behind it, the core doctrine of collaboration and the benefits of anyone editing an article on the site (though his Kerry footballer friend shows the pitfalls of it!)

Nor did he suggest that Wikipedia is strengthening democracy and is the pioneer of Web 2.0.

The blog I think it good as it looks simply at the end result - what is the benefit to me the user, the student etc. Rather than looking at it overall and it's effect on society, which would be a massive task.

In my critique of Wikipedia I have two seperate issues, one is to look at the model (collaboration, freedom to edit articles etc) and then to look at the format (up-to-date, free, easy to use etc.) I have issues with the core model of Wikipedia (though I still see it as a fantastic source) while I think the format of the site is excellent and can be replicated across different mediums.

Replicating the "Wikipedia model"

The Wikipedia format - up-to-date, fast, digital, free etc. is something that can be replicated, which would allow academic material to be delivered in a Wikipedia style but without the compromse on quality.

Looking back at the original problem Gearóid stated - no books in the university library - Wikipedia is not the "only solution" to this issue, rather there are examples of libraries being digitalised, the idea of there only being one copy of a book thus becomes an alien concept, and doesn't require our student to give up and head to Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is free, and that is something which digitialised libraries will find a difficult model to compete with, can work which has taken years of research be offered for the same cost (no cost) as material uploaded to Wikipedia?

Cameron Murdoch (of BSkyB) in November 2009 argued about the dangers of subsidiesed news material (namely the BBC) which makes other media models unsustainable. There is no tax to pay for Wikipedia so the issue is significantly different, however Murdoch does make a serious point; that paying for a product is the only way to guarntee its sustainability and quality. Debates around this issues are bound to continue.

How can we alter the fact that while Wikipedia offers "up-to-date" information - a book in a library is antiquated, indeed once books have left the publisher they are often in some measure already "out of date".

Inventions such as e-book readers (or the much hyped iPad) have the potential to revolutionise text books and other academic material which is currently published on paper. Rather than printing a text book (which becomes irrelevent all too quickly) having a text book published in digital format, which can be sold as an e-book and accessed on e-book readers could be updated more frequently and at much lower costs for publishers (or eliminate the need for publishers at all!)

Aside from e-books, there are online models which can deliver the same product. Websites such as Google Books, Google Scholar or online journals provide quality scholarly material which can be accessed online, is searchable, and mostly free to use.

Following an e-book model (in tandem with the digital library model) allows traditional adacemic material to be accessed with the benefits that Gearóid outlined the Wikipedia model held:

Benefits of digital academic material: (Matching beneifts of Wikipedia)

• Easy to use - you could access your academic material on your computer or e-book reader.
• Up to date - because the information would be digital it would be easier and cheaper for the author to update the work and for the user to download an updated edition of a text.
• Universal access - digitalising books prevents the problem Gearóid outlined when required books are no longer available in the library.
• Storage issues - e-book readers have capacity to store thousands of books.
• Search ability - unlike print material, digital sources can be searched through in a similar way to Wikipedia.

Conclusion

Wikipedia offers many benefits to students as outlined by Gearóid. It however is a source which can be used in tandem with academic material, though ought not to be seen as a replacement of the traditional sources of information.

Wikipedia is a good place to start research as it gives basic information on the topic which are often universal facts (dates, numbers, individuals etc), and often outlines differing schools of thought on an issue. Most usefully Wikipedia does reference, and usually provides a list of authors on a topic, key books or journals and often provide links to them in the article.

Wikipedia thus is often a signpost to authorative academic material.

Wikiepida (and its model) creates a challenge to academia for reasons stated, however as e-books and digital libraries show us there are ways of changing the way material is delivered - without altering the material itself (or compromising on quality etc.)

Digital Media = Brevity?

Emily Bell in the Opinion page in The Guardian's Media Suppliment (11th Jan 2010) made fascinating point about a previosuly unknown (unknown to me at least) benefit of digital media.

Unlike her traditional print media article for the paper which has to fill a certain amount of space, digital media allows for a reappraisal of "what is enough in terms of good reporting, or commentary". Unlike the print media, digital media has no minimum or maximum word limit.

Bell points out that the format media is being presented on is changing rapidly as the technology revolution is altering the way we access media. Just as users are questioning the need for music albums as a format (if music is being downloaded why have a dozen tracks when I only like two or three of the songs) or the need for TV channels now that their favourite programmes are available online; we are now questiong the way our news is delivered.

She argues that "content, journalism, programmes and visual communication" will have to become comfortable moving onto the "smaller screen" as we start accessing them on mobile technology.

Despite the need to be versitile (ability to be accessed on the smaller screen) this doesn't translate directly into an increased apitite for brevity.

Despite the success of Twitter (which limits posts to a mere 140 characters) there is evidence according to Bell that "well differentiated long form content is as eagerly consumed as the quick soundbite". She points to statistics on The Guardian website which showed that a feature piece in the G2 suppliment (on Victorian sewers of all things) was the most viewed article of that specific month, which challeneges preconvied ideas of the results of the switch to digital media.

In addition Bell even questions the need for quotes in the new media as journalists can now link to other articles, statements or blogs.

As academic work, research and articles will be increasingly posted and debated online there is a tendancy to assume that for it to compete in the Twitter age the authors will need to be both brief and exciting - however this is an assumption which isn't supported by evidence.

Recording the Presidency

Looking for alternative sources for my dissertation research I read "The Clinton Tapes" by Taylor Branch. The author is no expert on the Clinton Presidency, but rather is an old friend of the President! What makes the book a valuable contribution to the history of the 1990s US Foreign Policy is that it is based on recorded conversations between the author and the President during his two terms in office.

The Clinton Tapes

The opening chapter gives some insight into why the President decided to initate a series of meetings with Branch, After winning the 1992 election Clinton started to look into methods of recording the history of his presidency, it seems incredible that during the interim period before inauguration when the President-Elect would need to make political appointments and prepare to govern, that Bill Clinton would be able to think about how best to record his legacy.

Branch stated that recording of meetings such as those used by Presidents Johnson and Nixon would not be adopted because of the possibility that the tapes could be subpoenaed. Minutes would not be taken of the informal and yet important meetings between key figures in the administration again because of the fear it could be requested, but also simply because of the issue - who would actually agree to take the minutes!

In March 1993 the first taped interview took place, Clinton stated that he wanted an interviewer and not just to create a "taped diary" as an interviewer could frame the debate, ask the important questions which perhaps if Clinton had recorded himself he would have ignored.

Recording History

The reason for blogging about this book is that it starts with an interesting discussion about the debates surrounding the need to record the presidency. It was widely commented in 2009 that President Obama could no longer use his blackberry because of issues relating to recording his usage of the device.

Preserving the history of a presidency is becoming a greater issue as important political decisions are made not in official settings, such as cabinet or congress but in informal meetings, the type in the UK referred to as the "Sofa government" as it is made of just a few individuals who meet so informally that they literally are on a sofa!

Freedom of Information Acts which have been enacted do in some way preserve history, however overall it discourages politicians from using communications forms which can be requested using the FoI Act, thus making the preservation of the history even more difficult! In "The End of the Party" Andrew Rawnsley quotes Tony Blair saying he wished he never pushed for the Act to begin with!

Creativity in (digital) Education

Following on from my blog on TED, I'm today going to look at how TED can be used as a tool for digital historians or indeed any academic. I'm going to look at the example of the most watched TED talk, given by Sir Ken Robinson on the subject of education, which has been watched over fifteen million times.

Robinson

Robinson is an "educational expert" according to his TED biography (whatever that might be) and has been involved in the creative arts most of his adult life. His talk keeps to the 18 minute limit that I mentioned when blogging about TED, and he is one of the best speakers I have ever listened to. He has a simple message, reform eduction to recognise creativity and innovation, his delivery is excellent and at times very funny. After watching his speech I read his wikipedia entry and eventually bought his book "The Element" which I read on a few days of commuting last summer.

His book is now in the top 1,000 on the Amazon best seller list (it has been out for over a year), so I am not alone in making the transition from watching his video to buying his book. TED seemingly has had a major role in promoting him, his views and his work; so how is TED able to do this, and how can historians use TED and the like to promote an idea or some research?

Why use the likes of TED?

Firstly it must be stated that not anyone can take part in TED! The point of this blog is not to look at TED as the only option, but to look at TED as a type of website, a formula that an inidivual, university or organisation could easily recreate for themselves.

TED is a great platform for academics because of the reputation the website has for quality talks and speakers (therefore is UCC or an organisation were to develop a copycat version of TED it would have to use strict quality controls.

The TED format makes it popular with viewers though is a challenge for academics to meet; yet a successful talk has so many benefits. It firstly will be watched by many on the website, then perhaps shared online through social networking websites such as Facebook and blogged about, providing a huge increase in its influence. Secondly, presuming the topic is interesting the 18 minute talk will serve to whet the apetite of the viewer and they will want to read more on the topic, thus giving an academic a receptive audience.

Authors promote their books on radio and television freqeuntly, TED is in one sense just another method. Some academics have created accompaning television series when they are launching their work. A six-part television series requires viewers to sit down for six hours, a TED talk allows them to be introduced to the idea in less than twenty minutes! In a world where people are and will continue in large numbers to access digital media "on the go" the TED format is far more versatile.

The success of YouTube has perhaps shown us that people have short attention spans and want to be introduced to something quickly.

Practical uses of the TED format

Imagine if lecturers created short TED style talks to introduce their modules? I remember just over a year ago sitting down with with classmates making our choices about classes, the first few module choices were easy to make, they were almost instinctive reactions when we read the title of the class. However I remember almost all of us were stuck with five credits left to allocate, a bad choice would bring misery and suffering on us for several months! Having a TED talk on subject choices or module choices not only helps people see what the class will be like, but also gives some insight into what the lecturer will be like. But in addition to all that it will force to lecturer to give a reason as to why this topic is important and will provide some overview as to what the whole course is about.

Ted Talks

TED (Technology, Entertainment, Design - though not limited to those fields anymore it seems!) is a non-profit organisation which is famous for holding regular conferences where they promote "ideas worth spreading" (as their motto frequently states).

Speakers

At the elaborate conferences (mostly held in the US, but also in Europe) there are a series of lectures (or TED talks as they colloquially call them) given by speakers who are both:

1. Experts in their field.
2. Great speakers.

Examples of past speakers include the authors of Freakanomics, the founders of Google, Billy Graham and Al Gore, as well as countless academics, authors and businesspeople.

Format

A key point to note is that TED limit the talks to eighteen minutes. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that TED have produced some physiological research which states that that is the best length for a lecture to last, and a graph mapping the diminishing returns from longer talks!

The format of the conferences most definitely impacts the types of speakers, and thus their disciplines. The focus seems to be solely on the speaker, overuse of a slide-show is looked down upon, and even if used the slide-show ought to be unique in its style (and definitely the software they use!).

The "big ideas" that are put forward in such a small amount of time (compare it to a conventional lecture which would last a full hour or more) forces the speaker to do something nearly impossible, be both interesting (and often humorous) and get an idea across which has perhaps been the basis of several years of research, a great corpus of writing.

How to access

The conferences are recorded and are uploaded regularly to their easy-to-use website (www.ted.com) The website itself is excellent for a few reasons:

• It's simple.
• Their latest videos are on the homepage.
• If you hover over the video it gives all the basic information.
• Videos which are more popular appear as larger thumbnails.
• They have useful filters.
• The quality of the talks is excellent.
• They are downloadable, both as videos or audio files.

Academic resource

Students like to use Wikipedia as a tool for research for a number of reasons, chiefly it is comprehensive in scope, free and easy to use. I think the same can be said of TED, and other similar websites. Obviously TED is not an encyclopedia and comparisons to Wikipedia may seem naive, but the style is similar and that I believe is what makes it such a popular website.

Unlike Wikipedia we know who the person giving the talk is, they are accomplished in their field and are usually putting forward an idea that they have researched and written on. In addition the format (being a short and interesting talk) captures out attention, allows us to give our full attention to the speaker and perhaps be inspired to learn more on the topic.

Next

In the next blog I'm going to look at TED in more detail, using the example of it's most watched talk of all time. Hopefully in this blog was successful in showing the benefit of TED to students, proving that TED is a digital academic source. In the next blog I hope to be able to show the use of TED from the other perspective, not from the user but the provider. Why should academics (and perhaps historians in particular) use TED (and others like it).

Google's role in preserving history

Google have come to an agreement with the Italians to digitise almost one million books!

I posted the article as it makes an interesting point, being digitalised the books are protected "forever" and can not fall victim to disasters;

Mario Resca of the Italian Ministry of Cultural Heritage said the deal would help save the books' content forever, noting that the 1966 Florence flood ruined thousands of books in the city's library

Climategate - loss of history?

If you haven't heard about "Climategate" you have either lived under a rock or work for the IPCC.

In a nutshell thousands of e-mails between scientists working for the Climatic Research Unity (based at the University of East Anglia) were leaked and distributed online, one month before the Climate Conference which took place in Copenhagen in December 2009. They showed the lengths at which scientists went in order to discredit and essentially silence climate change septics.

In one email, Benjamin Santer from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore, Calif., wrote to the director of the climate-study center that he was "tempted to beat" up Mr. Michaels. Mr. Santer couldn't be reached for comment Sunday.

In another, Phil Jones, the director of the East Anglia climate center, suggested to climate scientist Michael Mann of Penn State University that skeptics' research was unwelcome: We "will keep them out somehow -- even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!" Neither man could be reached for comment Sunday.

Wall Street Journal, 23rd November 2009

An article in today's Guardian, How to avoid your own 'climategate' scandal, highlights the risks for academics working in the post Freedom of Information age. The Freedom of Information Act which is so beneficial in many ways inevitably has several unintended consequences, namely;

For sensitive information that you would not want in the public domain, rather than putting it in email or in a document, it may be better to discuss it face-to-face or on the phone.

Documents of historical value will nto exist as academics (but also policy makers etc.) will for fear of a climategate style scandal avoid using communication methods which could become public.

"Every email I write," says a lawyer colleague of mine, "I write as though next week I could be reading it in the newspaper."