
Why the Library of Congress is wrong to archive Twitter - mgunes
http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/17/whyTheLocArchivingTwitterI.html
======
sp332
LoC archives Twitter because only LoC _can_ archive Twitter. Other projects,
notably the Internet Archive, already archive open web sites including blogs.
But IA doesn't have a hope of archiving Twitter. LoC arranged this because if
they didn't, no one would have a Twitter archive.

~~~
eli
I think LoC has partnered with the Internet Archive in the past, but now
they're planning a much more ambitious version at
<http://www.netpreserve.org/about/index.php>

LoC is actually relatively forward-thinking when it comes to digital
archiving. For example, for a while now they've been encouraging people to
digitize archives of their own personal data:
<http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/personalarchiving/>

------
esonderegger
Who says the Library of Congress isn't archiving the open web?

<http://www.loc.gov/webarchiving/faq.html>

Specifically, it states:

 _The types of sites archived include, but are not limited to: United States
government (federal, state, district, local), foreign government, candidates
for political office, political commentary, political parties, media,
religious organizations, support groups, tributes and memorials, advocacy
groups, educational and research institutions, creative expressions (cartoons,
poetry, etc.), and blogs._

~~~
davewiner
Did you miss the note?

[http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/17/whyTheLocArchivingTw...](http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/17/whyTheLocArchivingTwitterI.html)

"(Note: I mean bloggers. The equivalent content that's on Twitter, but not in
a corporate blogging silo.)"

~~~
scott_s
Did you miss the last word of his quote?

~~~
davewiner
No I didn't. But I also noted it was the last word. :-)

~~~
scott_s
So your complaint is not that they don't archive blogs, but that they don't
list it first among that which they archive?

~~~
davewiner
I wrote a blog post that explains my point of view, it's linked to at the
beginning of this thread.

~~~
scott_s
And as esonderegger pointed out, your second point is incorrect. I also think
your second point is the crux of your points; that is, everything you said
assumes that the Library of Congress favors Twitter over blogs. How does that
change your point of view?

~~~
davewiner
Okay you're making an editorial/legal objection, you'd like me to find a way
to merge the note in with the first part. Consider it done.

We need a new acronym to go with IANAL, something like TIJABP -- This Is Just
A Blog Post.

<http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/18/tijabp.html>

~~~
scott_s
Considering how important you think blogging is, I'm surprised you don't feel
the same about the quality of the content.

------
drx
All of his arguments boil down to "open web good, twitter bad, ergo LoC
shouldn't archive twitter".

~~~
quesera
Disingenuous.

He said "twitter private, Library of Congress public. Public preference to one
of several private corps not in public interest, especially when there is a
larger, more archive-worthy corpus that doesn't require private APIs or vendor
discrimination".

Which part of that do you disagree with?

~~~
Retric
I would assume they would want to do both. The advantage to using Twitter is
it copy's a wider range of conversation AND it's easy. Set it up and add some
server-space and be done with it, where to even start on blogs would require
10x the effort and even more space.

------
imgabe
I think the advantage Twitter gets from being archived is greatly
overestimated here. How many people actually consider that when they decide to
sign up for Twitter? I'm also skeptical that Twitter is an alternative to a
traditional blog. The 140 character limit doesn't really let you replace a
blog if that's what you want to do. I think most people who want to blog would
have a blog in addition to Twitter. Likewise, people on Twitter who don't have
a blog, probably just wouldn't publish anything at all in the absence of
Twitter, so it's a net gain in that respect.

Finally, Twitter does have a corporate API, isn't most of it accessible
through the open web any way? Any user's profile can be accessed through the
website unless they've specifically restricted it.

And generally, I don't see the point in NOT archiving something if you can.
Sure it's fine to argue that other things should be archived first, but if
someone is going to archive something, why stop them? We only gain by having a
more complete and accurate historical record.

------
parfe
Tweets can detail events of local, national and global importance which may
only have value in hindsight. To risk losing a stream of tweets regarding a
milestone event because you don't like Twitter's API policy seems quite small
sighted.

99.9999% of what comes through twitter is wasted bits. I still see value in
archiving it all to guarantee capturing a real time log of an historic
election, the death of a notable person, the announcement of a major
discovery, or the day to day thoughts during a protest or revolution.

We have 19th century diaries detailing a rector's daily meals for his entire
adult life while we have recovered nearly nothing regarding the poor living in
slums in London, except through the distant scornful commentary of the gentry.

The LoC shouldn't be endorsing Twitter as a company, but the users of Twitter
have endorsed it by logging the course of human events.

------
davewiner
I posted a follow-up to this piece.

[http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/20/moreOnLocAndTwitter....](http://scripting.com/stories/2012/07/20/moreOnLocAndTwitter.html)

Dave

------
motoford
I always thought this was just a publicity stunt orchestrated by Twitter.

------
coffeegeek
And the NSA is archiving Twitter and everything else.

------
danso
I don't really get it. LoC also archives commercial content that was, at some
point, closed off to non-payers.

As for why Twitter and not your average blogger...well...because there's a
specific endpoint to get all the tweets, each of which is a discrete, well-
defined object. Finding all the blogs on the Internet is likely not as easy.

------
VLM
Core assumption is there is some business advantage in having LoC archive. Not
sure I agree.

Much more fun is to use an analogy. LoC will arbitrarily by their own high
level decision only and exclusively archive ABC TV shows, NBC, CBS, etc, too
bad. Or perhaps if they only archived Ford corporate materials and ignore GM
and all others.

~~~
davewiner
Well there certainly is a business advantage. Or why would Twitter have done
it, and done a big rollout of the deal (I believe it was at SXSW). It was a
huge publicity bonanza, the message was that Twitter is Historic. Don't
believe us, believe the Library of Congress. They didn't do it out of
altruism, they did it because it was excellent publicity. (Probably the LOC
did it for that reason too.)

And we have a say in this in the US, since we pay for the LOC.

~~~
wtvanhest
_Well there certainly is a business advantage. Or why would Twitter have done
it, and done a big rollout of the deal_

You cannot assume companies always act logically. In this case they could have
agreed to it just because it was "cool".

 _They didn't do it out of altruism, they did it because it was excellent
publicity._

This is probably accurate, but it doesn't give them a long term advantage. It
probably gave them a small boost in marketing (I say small because I have
never heard about this). Marketing doesn't hold up without investment. (for
those of you who say iconic brands will hold up, keep in mind that every
iconic brand advertises constantly.)

Further, the government arbitrarily "subsidizes" businesses constantly. In
many cases much more so than Twitter. I agree that any subsidy (whether
monetary or otherwise) should be examined, but in this case it seems to be a
complete nonissue to me.

~~~
davewiner
>>the government arbitrarily "subsidizes" businesses constantly

And people object to it constantly.

