Empty archives syndrome and democratising archival information

In the preface of a newish compilation Freedom of Information: Open Access, Empty Archives (Routledge, 2009) co-editors Dr Andrew Flinn and Dr Harriett Jones highlight so-called Empty Archive syndrome.

To quote them, the concept refers to situation when “faced with the possibility that potentially controversial decisions could be released immediately into the public domain, politicians and civil servants might simply avoid committing themselves on paper, leading to an ‘oral’ culture of policy-making that renders government unaccountable, not only in short term, but also potentially damaging the historical record” (p. 5).

Quite strikingly the phenomenon seems to have hit hardest in the Swedish archives. According to Dr Fredrik Eriksson and prof Kjell Östberg the culture in Sweden, whose Freedom of the Press Act is regarded the oldest in the world and thus cited as a source of a national pride (p.113), causes severe problems concerning the public scrutiny of highly important documents.

Eriksson and Östberg mention several critics of the Swedish system, who argue that the Swedish freedom of information is merely a myth because most of what is of the greatest interest is not written down and hence not available for scrutiny (p.118).

Tightened government secrecy clearly isn’t a suitable solution to the problem of empty archives, although historians tend to love the newly opened archives of security organisations and other archives, whose administrators have not had the need to wonder whether their documents would go under public scrutiny or not at the time of their creation.

In  a case where polical culture is somewhat questionable the possible solution should arise from below. In modern Sweden – and EU in general – there should be no reason for authorities to fear written documentation and its public scrutiny. As Eriksson and Östberg also point out, “the real problem is that the authorities are flouting the rules and that a culture of oral decision-making has been allowed to prevail” (p.123). It is indeed our duty as citizens to demand better handling of public information.

In a larger scale, the whole idea of information created mostly by state authorities is rather arguable. We still tend to consider information as something that is given to us from above. Information created in the daily life of a democratic civic society is generally not regarded as important as the official documents with the state stamps on them.

Still, history – and politics – is made as much in the grassroot level as in the chambers of Whitehall or Riksdagen. And every social phenomenon regardless of its origins needs information of different sorts as its fuel.There is a golden opportunity for archivists and other information professionals to enhance the general consciousness of the proper usage of information.

One question relevant enough to be asked is, whether the empty archives syndrome would still take place in the case of deliberatively and openly created community archives? Would the full democratisation of archival information result in archives, where there would be no need to fear the consequences of the disclosure of documents?

Archives, archivists and nation-building

Just a quick thought to put an end to over a month-long silence.

I’ve been wondering if there are some extensive studies made on the role of archives and archivists in nation-building and even as gate keepers of history and thus altering the human thought and ideas, which – according to Collingwood – history is all about. Question is, that shouldn’t archives be construed as a construction or an interpretation itself? It is always a conscious decision which documents are to be kept safe and which destroyed. Destruction of national heritage is also a widely used mean of warfare, recently used in e.g. the savagery of Bosnia in 1990’s.

Deliberate disposal of information on behalf of political goals is widely recognised phenomenon, but the formation of archives should be put under closer scrutiny, as well. An example: I was in the archives of Finnish foreign ministry looking for information on the Finnish-Hungarian relations and how Finnish diplomats used to emphasise the idea of a special kinship between Finns and Hungarians. An interesting notice was, that there is a specific dossier for the documents concerning the “kindred nations” (mainly Hungary and Estonia) although the whole idea of kinship between separate nations is nowadays rather disputable.

In addition to state archives there is the daily, grass root level archive forming where the archivist doesn’t serve any political or national goals. Even so, it is up to her/him how the future historian will construe the thoughts and ideas of her/his time. It would be interesting to compare archives from different decades and see if there are some patterns which could be derived from the zeitgeist of the respective time, assuming that deriving something from the “zeitgeist” is even possible.

The issue is fairly topical on a state-level scale, as some form of state-building is constantly taking place somewhere. Frederik Rosén has come up with an interesting article (Off the record: outsourcing security and state building to private firms and the question of record keeping, archives, and collective memory. Archival Science, vol. 8, 1/2008 p. 1-14), on which he raises a question on how privatisation of post-war recovery and security governance causes a lack of proper record keeping and archiving. He argues that this might severely affect future dynamics of societal memory and cause black holes in the history of a nation.

In my point of view, it isn’t enough to treat a single document as a subjective source of information, but the whole archives as well. Questions like who formed the archives, how it was formed, how the dossiers were named and what kind of documents were put in certain dossiers are not to be neglected. Archives itself can reveal suprisingly lot about thought and ideas of the time of its formation. It would be intriguing to read more on that particular subject.

The Missing Link

Good news from the field of civic society and open governance. A group working on i.a. the enhancement of the feasibility of web 2.0 in civic participation has published its final report, on which the Ministry of Finance is currently requesting for comments.

It is no secret that Finnish public sector still lacks certain dynamics when it comes to information policy and its usage on behalf of  deliberative e-Democracy and e-Participation. Right information for the right people at the right time is an old cliché used by data management professionals, by which we try to justify our existence. It is time this cliché was put more effectively in use.

A cliché it may be, but a justifiable one. In fact, the role of data management could be even bigger in public agencies. I tend to speak about extended data management (fin. laaja tiedonhallinta), which connects the traditional parts of data management – registry (kirjaamo), record management (asiakirjahallinto) and archiving (arkistointi) - with public relations/communication (viestintä/tiedotus), knowledge management (tietämyksenhallinta) and even data administration (tietohallinto).

I believe that in order to reach the aim of above-mentioned cliché and thus effeticely promote electronic civic participation certain measures need to be taken. The preceding clarification of the roles of different branches of information policy is one of them. Nowadays it can be quite unclear who is in charge of issues concerning the promotion of civic participation and freedom of information.

Someone should have a clear vision on the big picture and have a control of every dimension of information. For example, public relations and communication are capable of transmitting the information here and now, but in order to control the time-dimension of information archives are needed. They handle different dimensions of the same information but may never be in any contact with each other. Also, in order to fully utilize the benefits of an active civic society the whole idea of distributing only selected pieces of information is way behind the times. Limitations caused by the law on freedom of information (621/1999 24§) must naturally be taken into account.

A mere enhancement of the feasibility of civic participation is a good start but not enough. From the historian’s point of view equally important issue is the preservation of the context and provenance of the on-line discussions and other forms of deliberative policymaking. It is relatively easy to draw rules for the document management of authorities, but constantly developing and open-to-all wiki-environment is a whole new ballgame, so to say.

In order to achieve a sufficient level of preservation we need historically, societally and technologically savvy information professionals who are aware of the amount, type and provenance of the information as well as legislative issues. In addition to all that, they should be able to innovatively promote civic activity and civic society by means of freely and easily accessible information. Nowadays the gap between a technologically illiterate archivist and a wiki-conscious, microblogging pr-officer can be huge although their jobs should be inter-related in many ways.

Briefly on SMS-messages and Historians

American Electronic Frontier Foundation submitted quite recently a request, in which they ask for disclosure of information concerning White House policies governing the creation, retention and preservation of records generated through the use of electronic communications systems by the President, Vice President and White House staff. The concern is mostly over the President’s use of his BlackBerry.

Similar request could be sent to Finnish administration, as well. Preservation of e-mail records is well under consideration but issue of wireless communication systems is far more difficult. Historians love to get their hands on unofficial records – that is information, which was created in the preparation phase of the final protocols. So far it has been possible and relatively easy, as the correspondence usually took place in paper form. SMS-messages and other forms of wireless communication tend to be deleted.

Fortunately in the ministry of Foreign Affairs the preservation of SMS-messages is taken seriously, according to head of information services, Mr. Jyrki Paloposki, a historian himself. Mr. Paloposki has expressed his concern over the loss of SMS-messages with historical importance, and the results are hopefully to be seen in the future.

To be honest, the issue is more of a historians’ concern than other information specialists’. Wireless electronic devices are mostly used in quick exchange of thoughts and SMS-messages don’t usually contain any official information, which should be preserved or handled by National Archive’s regulations.

Still, a lot of unequally important information on the history of the state is found in the unofficial correspondence of presidents and other main political figures. This correspondence doesn’t take place in paper form anymore, but in SMS-messages and in other forms of wireless electronic communication. This could turn into a significant problem, although one might argue, that messages with genuine importance are bound to be preserved, which our current Prime minister and former Minister for foreign affairs must – or at least should – realise by now.

The Stasi Debate

The Finnish Vergangenheitsbewältigung is a bit like the day after an university undergraduate’s party. There’s an incoherent babbling taking place on who went to sauna with whom and what they might have done together.

Lately the main role in this debate has been given to possible connections in the 1980’s between Finnish politicians and the East German security organisation Stasi. The right-wingers are undoubtedly eager to trace the possible Stasi-connections of some mainstream Finnish socialists. While doing so, they pride themselves on being on the “right side of the history” as the capitalist system still seems to breath on its own lungs. (Although a respirator is already being warmed up).

Well, what is the role of the archives in this game? The Finnish media, Finnish security police (Supo) and the judiciary have been playing a sort of cat and mouse game for the last decade or so. There is a certain list of names kept tightly in the archive of Supo. This list was given to Supo in the early 1990’s by the West German intelligence service and it contains the names of Finnish citizens who were suspected by the West Germans of keeping contact with the East Germans .

Finnish legislation states that the material of Supo is to be kept secret for 60 years unless it is evident, that the public use of this information will not endanger the security of the state (the law on freedom of information, 621/1999 24§ 9.). Now, it has been decided that the revelation of a document concerning connections with a nowadays non-existent state does not cause any harm to the general security of the Finns. According to this, the document should be published.

On the other hand is the question of the legal protection of those individuals whose names appear on the list. Quite recently in a seminar concerning archives and the history of Finnish foreign ministry former minister of foreign affairs Dr. Erkki Tuomioja stressed the fact that no names with significant political importance are on the list. He had gotten the information from a senior civil servant who was aware of the content of the list. Tuomioja argued that individuals included on the list would have to face a devastating pressure from the media because of something they may never have been involved with. After all, the list itself doesn’t prove any wrong-doings on anyones behalf.

The score of “to publish or not to publish” is now one to one. Supo has an ace up on its sleeve, though. The already mentioned law on freedom of information states also, that “documents concerning the relationship between the state of Finland or the citizens of Finland and a public agency or citizens of a foreign state are to be kept secret if their publication would cause damage to the foreign relations of the state of Finland or to the capability to work within the international community” (621/1999 24§ 2.). There is a common law within international intelligence services, which states that all information given by intelligence service to another should be kept secret. If Supo were to reveal the content of the list it would break this common law and thus its capability to work internationally would diminish significantly. And THAT would endanger the security of the state (remember 24§ 9.).

The game is still on. A recent copy of Finnish newspaper Helsingin Sanomat states that Supreme Administrative Court (KHO) will make a decision next summer whether the list should be published or not. Already in 2003 KHO decided in favor of Supo, that the revelation of the list might endanger the national security and thus the list should be kept secret. However, in 2008 same KHO made a new statement, according which Supo is obliged to publish the list. A new verdict is needed, as Supo decided to appeal against the verdict of 2008.

The head of Supo, mr. Ilkka Salmi has told the media that Supo will reveal the list if KHO’s upcoming verdict so states. The whole issue has swelled into such unreasonably large scale, so whatever the verdict is, some unneccessary stir will be arisen. There are more important issues in Finnish history which need clarification and are in a danger of being buried under the  fuzz about twenty people who may or may have not have met someone or someone else and may or may have not discussed about something or something else.

What is my opinion on the publication of the list, you may ask. Supo has a strong legislative power to decide on the public use of its documents and they have all the right to use that power. But I also believe in the words of secrecy studies’ grand old woman, Dr. Sissela Bok: “When a government develops secret police powers or control over censorship, the risks are even greater. Secrecy can then become an end in itself, creating subtle changes in those who exercise it, in how they see themselves, and in their willingness to manipulate and coerce in order to uphold the secrecy and thus shield themselves.” (Bok: Secrets – On the Ethics of Concealment and Revelation, p.178)

Few notes on Obama and data management

Finnish media has coveraged the inauguration and the first weeks of President Obama relatively well. Understandably the main focus has been on foreign politics and economics. Yet an issue which was strongly emphasized on Obama’s campaign and which in fact emerged as one of his first Executive Orders as a president has been a bit neglected.

At his first day in the Oval Office Obama gave an Executive Order which revoked the Bush administation’s order 13233 of November 2001. Order 13233 severly limited access by public to presidential records, which baffled historians, archivists and lawyers alike.

The symbolic value of the first Orders by the new president is significant. Historians and data management professionals have already expressed their delight, as the new president has now given a signal, that the freedom of information and the promotion of civic society are themes White House will treat as a serious matter.

Obama’s PR-convoy also has naturally emphasized president’s will to let his actions to be publicly reviewed as well as his commitment to openness. They obviously want to stress the difference to ex-vice president Cheney, who infamously fought for his right to decide which of his vice presidential documents has to be given to NARA for preservation.

In addition, Obama has to make a decision on the new state archivist as Allen Weinstein resigned from his office in late 2008. The appointment will be  another widely reported action concerning data management.

With these two actions alone, Obama’s administration will give a certain boost to the global respect of civic society, archiving and data management. Questions concerning preservation of documents, free access to historical data and general openness of public administration are becoming more and more important as the amount of global information has sky-rocketed during the last decade.

By better access to information and abilities to create information themselves people will understand the value of information better and better. Hopefully this will help our job of making sure that this valuable information will be well-preserved for the coming generations as well.

Unfortunately electronic gadgets don’t make the process of preservation any easier. We still have to count on our historical knowledge and societal understanding when winnowing out the significant information from the insignificant.

Institutional Cooperation Instrument

Last year the Finnish Ministry for Foreign Affairs started a new, promising-sounding program for development cooperation. Inter-institutional development cooperation - Institutional Cooperation Instrument, to be more precise – makes interaction between Finnish public agency and its counterpart in the partner country possible. Thanks to the ICI, Finnish institutions can share their knowledge and know-how with their partner institutions in developing countries and thus strengthen their skills.

According to the Foreign Ministry, years 2008 and 2009 will be the monitoring years, when the Department for Development Cooperation will follow ICIs use and results. If the pilot projects turn out successfully there should be no reason why ICI wouldn’t become even larger-scale program for development cooperation.

Should this be the case, Finnish data management and archiving professionals could take the advantage and distribute their knowledge for the cause of development cooperation. Finnish standards for record keeping and archiving are internationally highly valued and data management an essential part of functional and democratic civic society.

If there is an opportunity to enhance the level of freedom of information and thus the level of democratic civic society we should use it.  Active and efficient cooperation between historians and archiving specialists in Finland and the partner country would be a truly intriguing scenario.

It will be interesting to follow the development of ICI. Right now it seems, that it would be a great opportunity for Finnish archivists and other information specialists to enhance their professional reputation significantly and give a new dimension to existing development policy.

A Brief Introduction

As a result of long consideration I finally started this blog. My purpose is to distribute thoughts mainly on history, data management and their connection with the society at large. If any other interesting tidbits of information pop up on my mind, I’ll be happy to share it with you as well.

Still, two big questions remain: 1) will there ever be enough posts published and 2) will there be anyone reading them. I guess that shall remain to be seen. If this introduction is still the only post next May, you have my permission to consider this blog dead.

I realize, that there are lots of archiving and data management related blogs out there, most of which are American. Hopefully I can attract some of my international colleagues and be able to provide them some thoughts and ideas from the Finnish world of data preservation.

Sharing information IS the best way to learn, as you all may well know.