With the overwhelming support of the Senate, Dr. Carla Hayden has been approved as the next librarian of Congress. Hayden, the head of Baltimore's public library system and the former president of the American Library Association, is the first woman and the first African-American to hold the post. It's actually rather newsworthy that the next librarian of Congress is, well, a librarian. Many previous librarians of Congress have been scholars or writers. Both Billington and his predecessor, Daniel J. Boorstin, were historians. Before Hayden's nomination, the American Library Association (which Hayden used to lead) had called for Obama to nominate a professional librarian for the post. And, as many have noted, all the previous Librarians of Congress were white men. In nominating Hayden, Obama said it was "long overdue" for that to change.
Congratulations, Dr. Hayden!!
President Obama has tried to diversify the federal judiciary by appointing more black judges, and there are currently more black judges in the federal judiciary that at any other time in history. But data shows that black federal district court judges are overturned on appeal 10 percent more often than white judges.
In 2015, Harvard Political Science Professor, Maya Sen, analyzed how often black judges were appealed between years 2000 and 2012. During that time, black judges were overruled at significantly higher rates.
In real terms, this means that between 2000 and 2012, a black federal district judge will have statistically had around 20 extra rulings overturned than if they had been white. The average number of cases authored by black judges and reversed over that period is 196.
Being overturned generally means that higher courts are questioning the legal reasoning of an opinion.
So is this phenomena really a factor of race? Or just a different view of law? The researchers controlled for ideological differences, and they still found a gap by race.
The researchers went on to hypothesize that it may be implicit bias at work. Implicit bias refers to subtle forms of possibly unintentional prejudice affecting judgment and social behavior. In this case, implicit bias appears to be held against black federal judges, and carried by their mostly white colleagues at the federal appellate level.
Presidents have tried to diversify the judiciary to have a broader point of view, promote public confidence, create better and richer decision making, assure that different perspectives are included, establish role models, and contradict prejudices.
As it stands, the judicial system is still overwhelmingly and disproportionately white and male, and the diversity point is being overruled by the higher courts.
Librarians and archivists are currently in an ongoing conversation about preserving digital content.
What we're finding is that some of the most clever commentary on pop culture and politics is thriving deep in hashtags on Twitter. Social media is as essential to understanding the preoccupations and temperature of our time. But preserving materials from the internet is much harder than sealing them under glass.
Building an [internet] archive has always required asking a couple of simple but thorny questions: What will we save and how? Whose stories are the most important and why? In theory, the internet already functions as a kind of archive: Any document, video or photo can in principle remain there indefinitely, available to be viewed by anyone with a connection. But in reality, things disappear constantly. Search engines like Google continually trawl for pages to organize and index for retrieval, but they can’t catch everything. And as the web evolves, it becomes harder to preserve. It is estimated that 75 percent of all websites are inactive, and domains are abandoned every day. Links can rot when sites disappear, images vanish when servers go offline and fluctuations in economic tides and social trends can wipe out entire ecosystems. (Look up a blog post from a decade ago and see how many of the images, media or links still work.) Tumblr and even Twitter may eventually end up ancient internet history because of their financial instability.
The internet, and social media, in particular, might one day offer a dazzling, and even overwhelming, array of source material for historians. Such an abundance presents a logistical challenge (the total number of tweets ever written is nearing half a trillion) as well as an ethical one (will people get to opt out of having ephemeral thoughts entered into the historical record?). But this plethora of new media and materials may function as a totally new type of archive: a multidimensional ledger of events that academics, scholars, researchers and the general public can parse to generate a more prismatic recollection of history.
Because historians are constantly updating the record by looking for primary sources that were overlooked in earlier eras, often from marginalized figures, social media may be the very key to those primary sources into the future. This will allow us to provide an updated, more complete historical record than ever before.
The term "library anxiety" has existed in the professional lexicon since 1986 when "Library Anxiety: A Grounded Theory and Its Development” by Constance A. Mellon was published in the March issue of College & Research Libraries. Librarians have been discussing the general phenomenon since at least the mid-to-late 1970s, says Ann Campion Riley, president of the Association of College & Research Libraries, but it was Mellon who first gave it a name three decades ago. Her original study was based on analysis of journal entries college students had been required by their instructors to keep during the research process. After reading the student diaries, Mellon concluded, “Seventy-five to 85 percent of students in each class described their initial response to the library in terms of fear or anxiety.”
Essentially, the term describes the feeling that one’s research skills are inadequate and that those shortcomings should be hidden. In some students it’s manifested as an outright fear of libraries and the librarians who work there. To many librarians it’s a phenomenon as real as it is perplexing.
In Mellon's study, three general themes emerged: Students found their own library skills inadequate; they found their perceived shortcomings shameful; they feared seeking out help would only reveal their inadequacy.
Library anxiety is still alive and well today. But these days, a new threat to academic research may be students’ lack of understanding about the value of libraries, rather than anxiety about librarians. “[A] new qualitative project has yielded another surprise: Students in this study weren’t intimidated by librarians or reluctant to lose face by approaching them; they simply had no idea why the librarians were there and what they were for,” Gremmels writes. “Are we labeling as library anxiety phenomena that would more accurately be described as library ignorance or library indifference?”
In law schools, it is a mixture of library anxiety and indifference. Many law students are afraid to ask for help because of how they will be perceived by their peers. Additionally, they are not entirely sure what law librarians do - that is until they start to have research sessions with us.
The best thing I have found to combat both library anxiety and indifference is to be accessible in the classroom teaching the students skills that they need to know to be successful in practice.
My chapter centers around a discussion of Millennial attitudes toward careers, including working for a socially conscious company, and how those attitudes shape the Millennial library leader's role for leading well into the future. The New Librarianship Field Guide "reminds librarians of their mission: to improve society by facilitating knowledge creation in their communities." To this end, the book provides the "tools, arguments, resources, and ideas for fulfilling this mission."
As noted, "this guide is a part of a larger conversation about librarianship, one that gives rise to new tools, new resources, and new ways of convening all the time."
To be part of this conversation and find videos, articles, blog posts, and other resources to better prepare you for improving society through librarianship, go to http://www.NewLibrarianship.org.
In yet another article expounding on the virtues of law librarians, Australia's Lawyers Weekly notes that[While] digitisation ... changes the format of information, the underpinning need remains for the skill set and value add which law librarians bring to law firms as well as our courts and law schools.
In the law firm setting, not only do law librarians perform expert, efficient research, they are often also responsible for maintaining knowledge repositories of high-quality legal documents produced by their lawyers. Law librarians are often also responsible for their organisation’s intranet and to integrate the information systems and tools required in a modern knowledge organisation.
Not only are law librarians still relevant, so are print books. This is especially the case for many mid-tier firms, to which Australian legal publishers are yet to offer viable models enabling such firms to purchase lendable e-books.
While we utilise our online services extensively and make use of numerous databases and even of well-evaluated information available on the internet, often a published book remains the only authoritative source of in-depth information on specialised legal topics.
Thomas.gov was launched on January 5, 1995, after Congressional leadership directed the Library of Congress to make federal legislative information freely available to the public. On September 19, 2012 Congress.gov was introduced to eventually replace Thomas.gov with a more robust, updated system.
Congress.gov's beta label was removed in September 2014, and it is set to officially replace Thomas.gov as the official website for U.S. federal legislative information.
Congress.gov provides access to accurate, timely, and complete legislative information for Members of Congress, legislative agencies, and the public. It is presented by the Library of Congress (LOC) using data from the Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Office of the Secretary of the Senate, the Government Publishing Office, Congressional Budget Office, and the LOC's Congressional Research Service.
The NYTimes announced that it will join the Associated Press this week to change their style rule to lowercase the word "internet."
As noted, "while most publications capitalized the word when it first came into widespread use, the lowercase form has become steadily more common in recent years."
Changes like these provide insight into how style and usage can change over time: More broadly, modern usage tends to favor less capitalization — along with fewer hyphens and less punctuation in general. Capitalizing words when it isn’t strictly necessary can seem archaic to contemporary readers. The Times used to capitalize “Federal” in phrases like “a Federal judge,” and even “Government” when referring to the national government. Now both of those uses would be lowercase under our rules.
Click the link to purchase the full NYTimes style & usage manual.