Library Juice 3:41 - November 1, 2000


  1. Cool Dutch "Librarians Rule" page
  2. Libdex
  3. Hennen's American Public Library Ratings 2000
  4. Chronicle of Higher Ed article on LC and DMCA
  5. "Librarian" of Congress betrays America's libraries
  6. Another Cuban Library tour, and some commentary
  7. Quirky Google OR
  8. ELITE Project
  9. New SACS accreditation criteria concerning libraries
  10. Background on "Open Secrets Act"

Quote for the week:

"You are not hearts to them, hearts that feel, feel and understand what
others feel; you are not brains to them, hearts and brains that hate
injustice and wrongs, so that time after time people act to change what is
not right, you are only hands and bodies, farm hands, work hands, etc...
that the powers that be will not and even the schools may not repect...
Give to our children what their hearts and brains need to grow, feed
upon... Take them to the library, where the great world of books will open
up to them."

-Eugene Victor Debs, as remembered by Tillie Olsen

Homepage of the week: Miranda


1. Cool Dutch "Librarians Rule" page

This Miranda person is a talented web designer. If you are interested in
artistic and interesting web design, check out the rest of her site at

Her "Librarians Rule" page is the best compilation on library culture (the
hip, rad kind) that I've seen. Unnecessary at this point but worth seeing
just because it is so well done. And there are links to amusing pages that
I hadn't seen before.

So is Miranda a librarian? Miranda, if you are reading this, let us know.

2. Libdex

Edited by Peter Scott, Internet Projects Manager at the University of
Saskatchewan Libraries, this new directory indexes library homepages,
Web-OPACs, Friends of Libraries pages, and library e-commerce
affiliate links. The index is browseable by country, OPAC vendor, and
Friends of the Libraries, or keyword searchable for libraries.
Library entries include name, city, country, library type, and links
to the library homepage and Web catalog. The site is
advertiser-supported, but banner ads are limited to one per page. [MD]

From The Scout Report, Copyright Internet Scout Project 1994-2000.

3. Hennen's American Public Library Ratings 2000

The newly revised and completely re-designed HAPLR Web site was re-opened
with new data today announced Thomas J. Hennen Jr., its author.

HAPLR 2000 is featured in the November 2000 issue of American Libraries
magazine, a publication of the American Libraries Association. The previous
edition was featured in the September 1999 issue. For the complete text of
the articles see:

For ratings and further information see:

Hennen's American Public Library Rating system, HAPLR (tm), attempts to
identify the best public libraries in America. Statistics cannot do it
alone, but they are part of the answer.

The HAPLR Index uses six input and nine output measures. The author added
the scores for each library within a population category to develop a
weighted score. The population categories change at 1,000, 2,500, 5,000,
10,000, 25,000, 50,000, 100,000, 250,000, and 500,000.

The HAPLR Index is similar to an ACT or SAT score with a theoretical minimum
of 1 and a maximum of 1,000, although most libraries score between 260 and
The HAPLR Index web site expands on the information in American Libraries
articles. The site provides a method for obtaining score cards and rating
sheets for individual public libraries. It also provides further information
on the rating index and other services provided by the author.

The first two editions saw extensive media attention. This edition is
expected to receive even more attention. The American Library Association
has issued press releases on the ratings to hundreds of newspapers and

The top 10 public libraries nationally are:

Denver Public Library
Santa Clara County Free Library, San Jose, Calif.
Naperville (Ill.) Public Libraries
Lower Merion Library System, Ardmore, Pa.
Washington-Centerville (Ohio) Public Library
Hays (Kans.) Public Library
Morris (Minn.) Public Library
Hagerstown (Ind.)–Jefferson Township Public Library
Hazel L. Meyer Memorial Library, De Smet, S. Dak.
Lynnville (Iowa) Public Library

Thomas J. Hennen Jr.
Voice: 262-886-1625
Fax: 262-886-5424
6014 Spring Street
Racine, WI 53406

"Share knowledge, seek wisdom."


4. Chronicle of Higher Ed article on LC and DMCA

New Interpretation of Digital-Copyright Provision Disappoints Scholars

Chronicle of Higher Education

Scholars are denouncing a Library of Congress rule that sharply limits when
people can sidestep technological devices designed to restrict the use of
online material protected under copyright law.

The final rule, which took effect Saturday, clarifies a vaguely worded
provision in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The provision allows
people to circumvent the blocking devices under limited circumstances, but
doesn't spell out what those circumstances are.

Full story at:


5. "Librarian" of Congress betrays America's libraries

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:03:33 -0400
From: Mark Rosenzweig <
To: srrtac-l[at], plgnet-l[at]
Cc: member-forum[at], alacoun[at]
Reply to: iskra[at]

I think I should bring this to your attention if you haven't read it
already or highlight it if you have.

This is about a legal development which brings us to the brink of the
completely "pay-per-view/pay-per-use" information environment in libraries
which 'radicals' in the library field have been warning about.

The below item from the ALA Washington Office reveals that James
Billington, "Librarian" of Congress, has sold out libraries of all kinds
and their patrons by denying the rights of "fair use" of digital

Please read this carefully and, if possible, examine the linked documents.

Maybe I'm naive, but I think that if ALA mobilized librarians and their
communities by educating them about this kind of thing, instead of
depending ENTIRELY on back-room lobbying, popular pressure could have been
exerted to stay Billington's hand.

It is also an excellent illustration of why we need a real LIBRARIAN as
Librarian of Congress!

I think we need, as well,to understand that public campaigns by ALA on
issues of public information policy are needed , campaigns where
librarianship joins with other sectors to raise public conscioousness about
matters of the most serious concern to all those who have an interest in
protecting the rights of citizens to freely access information.

Things are moving quickly and I anticipate being told after the fact that
all means were exhausted when these means have been restricted to legal
briefs and lobbying efforts, with no effort to create mass suppport or
concern (even among librarians, never mind the public we serve!).

Mark Rosenzweig
ALA Councilor at large

>Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 15:15:00 -0500
>From: "Don Wood" <dwood[at]>
>Reply-To: member-forum[at]
>Sender: owner-member-forum[at]
>ALAWON: American Library Association Washington Office Newsline
>Volume 9, Number 85
>October 26, 2000
>In this issue:
>The Librarian of Congress James Billington has ruled against the
>American public and library users by negating fair use in the
>digital arena. Billington allowed only two exceptions in the fair
>use proceeding involving the 1201 anticircumvention provision of
>the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).
>A preliminary review of the ruling reveals that Billington adopted
>recommendations by Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, to
>provide exemptions only for malfunctions and to determine which
>sites are blocked by filtering software. The exemption related to
>circumventing filtering software may be useful although
>The library community as well as members of Congress, the U.S.
>Department of Commerce, the K-12 and higher education communities,
>and many others have argued in the 1201 proceeding and elsewhere,
>that the longstanding principle of fair use must continue in the
>digital era. Because of this decision users of digital information
>will have fewer rights and opportunities than users of print
>information. In fact, the pay-for-use scenario that librarians
>have feared appears to have now become a reality with this rule.
>"The Copyright Office has issued a misguided ruling taking away
>from students, researchers, teachers and librarians the long
>standing basic right of "fair use" to our Nation's digital
>resources," said Nancy Kranich, ALA president. "All library users
>will be impacted."
>ALA, in conjunction with the American Association of Law
>Libraries, the Association of Research Libraries, the Medical
>Library Association and the Special Libraries, submitted strong
>filings and testimony in the proceeding arguing that there should
>be exemptions from the Copyright Act's new restrictions against
>accessing copyright works that are protected by technological
>Peters' conclusion in her recommendations to the Librarian of
>Congress reads as follows:
>Pursuant to the mandate of 17 U.S.C. 1201 (b) and having
>considered the evidence in the record, the contentions of the
>parties, and the statutory objectives, the Register of Copyrights
>recommends that the Librarian of Congress publish two classes of
>copyrighted works where the Register has found that non-infringing
>uses by users of such copyrighted works are, or are likely to be,
>adversely affected, and the prohibition found in 17 U.S.C., 1201
>(a) should not apply to such users with respect to such class of
>work for the ensuing 3-year period. The classes of work so
>identified are:
>1. Compilations consisting of lists of Websites blocked by
>filtering software applications; and
>2. Literary works, including computer programs and databases,
>protected by access control mechanisms that fail to permit
>access because of malfunction, damage or obsoleteness.
>The Register notes that any exemption of classes of copyrighted
>works published by the Librarian will be effective only until
>October 28, 2003. Before the period expires, the Register will
>initiate a new rulemaking to consider de novo what classes of
>copyright works, if any, should be exempt from 1201 (a)(1)(A)
>commencing October 28, 2003.
>ALA is reviewing the ruling in great detail. Options now include
>requesting a reconsideration of the ruling as well as litigation.
>For background see ALAWON volume 9, number 16:
>and volume 9, number 33:
>and the ALA Issue Brief:
>The Librarian's ruling is expected to be published in the Federal
>Register on October 27th or 30th. For information about the
>rulemaking process, see the Library of Congress web site:
>ALAWON (ISSN 1069-7799) is a free, irregular publication of the
>American Library Association Washington Office. All materials
>subject to copyright by the American Library Association may be
>reprinted or redistributed for noncommercial purposes with
>appropriate credits.
>To subscribe to ALAWON, send the message: subscribe ala-wo
>[your_firstname] [your_lastname] to listproc[at] or go to
> To unsubscribe to ALAWON, send
>the message: unsubscribe ala-wo to listproc[at] ALAWON
>archives at
>ALA Washington Office, 1301 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Suite 403,
>Washington, D.C. 20004-1701; phone: 202.628.8410 or 800.941.8478
>toll-free; fax: 202.628.8419; e-mail: alawash[at]; Web
>site: Executive Director: Emily
>Sheketoff. Office of Government Relations: Lynne Bradley,
>Director; Mary Costabile, Peter Kaplan, Miriam Nisbet and
>Claudette Tennant. Office for Information Technology Policy: Rick
>Weingarten, Director; Jennifer Hendrix, Carrie Russell and Saundra
>Shirley. ALAWON Editor: Bernadette Murphy.

"De omnibus dubitandem"

6. Another Cuban Library tour, and some commentary

Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 21:29:34 -0500 (EST)
From: Susan Weber <susanaquerida[at]>
To: SRRT Action Council <srrtac-l[at]>
Reply to: srrtac-l[at]

After reading the allegations made by Robert Kent and
discovering the sources of funds for his group, the
Friends of Cuban Libraries(FCL) to be Freedom
House, an anti-Castro organization which receives US
government funding, and the Centre for a Free Cuba,
funded by the US Agency for International Development,
it becomes very apparent Mr. Kent is simply acting as
a spokesperson for the Cuban-American anti-Castro
lobby and the U.S. Government, both of which finance
his efforts to slander the Cuban library system and
government, in general.

Librarians who have traveled in the rest of Latin
America can attest to how poor and heavily censored
this public service can be especially outside the
national capitals. In contrast, Cuba's libraries
arewell-stocked, can be found in any town or city,
lend books, have extended hours of operation, and are
open to the public at large.

Cubans are very proud of their achievements in this
sector, even as the U.S. economic blockade affects
their ability to purchase and stock American published
books. It is then not surprising that the U.S.
Government, through its spin doctors would try to find
some way to attack Cuba's best accomplishments in
order to demonize the Castro government.

We could not think of a better response than to
organize a tour of Cuba for North American Librarians
so that they can see for themselves what an excellent
service their Cuban colleagues offer the people of
this island nation.

Towards this purpose, the Cuban Arts Project is
offering a 2-week escorted tour departing on February
19th, 2001, which will include one week of
professional activities and one week of sightseeing
and fun in the sun.

There will be library tours,
interviews with Cuban government officials, informal
meetings with Cuban librarians, we well as sightseeing
excursions and plenty of free time to enjoy Cuba
individually. If you are interested, please reply to

Susan Weber, email: susanaquerida[at] and
include your e-mail address or other contact
information. Itinerary details and costs will be sent
in a separate message.

We would also like to comment on the so-called
investigation by FAIFE, which limited itself to
telephoning the parties who claimed harassment and
confirming that they had made such allegations. It is
ridiculous to think that this is any sort of
reasonable inquiry. Confirming that they made such
claims does not confirm that the events actually took

For FAIFE to have taken the step of publicizing and
thus drawing attention to these alleged incidents
could be passed off as naivete; to criticize the
Cuban Library system and Government on the basis of
such one-sided accusations made by faceless voices
over the phone is not only unfair and irresponsible,
it also plays into the hands of the enemies of Cuba.
I respectfully demand that FAIFE review their
so-called investigation, reprimand the officials
involved, and issue an apology to the Cuban Government
and people. The C.L.A. letter, on the other hand, was
a carefully worded natural response to the bogus
information provided by FAIFE. However, CLA's letter
was also careful to acknowledge the many gains and
accomplishments made by the Cuban government in
literacy and education.


Roberto Carrasco, M.A.
Founding Director, Cuban Arts Project

Susan Weber, MLS
Media Librarian

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

              Cuba Library Tour
        for librarians and their friends

An invitation to join the First organized tour of Cuba's libraries
direct from Canada leaving Feb. 19th, 2001 for 2 weeks

Join Cuban colleagues, visit Public libraries, the National Library, the
National Medical Library, the University of Havana, and tour schools.

Visit four distinct regions of this Island paradise:
* the beach at Varadero,
* the restored colonial city of Trinidad,
* the capital of Havana,
* the lush agricultural valley of Vinales.
See a Farmers' Coop, a Botanical Garden, the natural caves of Vinales and
other sites.

Learn how the Cuban people have access to free public libraries, free
education, and have a very high literacy rate.

Cost: Can$2500 (US$1675) from Vancouver, B.C. or Calgary or Edmonton
or Can$2300 (US$1565) from Toronto or Halifax. Includes airfare, all hotels,
ground transportation on air-conditioned buses, modified meal plan (all
breakfasts, most suppers), tourist visa, translator and guides, admission
to organized tours and cultural events. Canadian taxes and single supplement

A deposit of $250 is required by December 1st.

For more information, call Roberto Carrasco, M.A., Cuban Arts Project,
(604) 736-0931 or Susan Weber, MLS (604) 876-6917
email: Susanaquerida[at]

Travel arrangements made by Joyce Holmes, Friendship Tours
The Cuban Arts Project is a non-profit organization promoting cultural and
education exchanges.

Susan Weber, MLS

email: susanaquerida[at]

7. Quirky Google OR

>From Tara Calishain's Research Buzz

A couple of readers tried Google's new OR support and found
that the results were not what they expected. One reader
tried using the OR operand in conjunction with a phrase. Try
it yourself; here's one that works well:

"sour persimmons cousin" OR cat

That only gets about 16 results. "sour persimmons cousin"
gets about 20, so it looks like OR is instead acting as AND.

Enclosing the phrase in parens doesn't work, unfortunately:

("sour persimmons cousin") OR cat

Now, here's what's interesting.

sour persimmons cousin OR cat

doesn't work either. Neither does

(sour persimmons cousin) OR cat

.. This DOES work, however:

sour OR persimmons OR cousin OR cat

It looks like this OR is very limited function. I'm kicking
myself for not doing this kind of searching before. (Thanks
to reader EO who did try it and sent me these results.)

Playing with this a little bit more shows that special
syntaxes don't appear to work. The query

snipsville OR

gives you zero results, meaning that the search didn't work.

OR for single-word query elements appears to work fine, but
get much more complicated than that and it breaks. Maybe
that's the reason Google hasn't made any noise about it.
(They also haven't made any noise about the new index page
count on the front of their site: 1,247,340,000. Wonder how
they got that count?)

8. ELITE Project

Excellent information about distance access to libraries.
There is up-to-date information about, and links to,
libraries using conferencing, chat, MOOs, e-mail and
Web forms, and "MyLibrary" interfaces. Maintained by
the Electronic Library, IT and staff Education Project
(ELITE) at the University of Leicester. Resources
include examples of libraries using the various ways of
providing remote access to users, articles on the topic,
and companies providing the hardware/software. See
also LiveRef(sm): A Registry of Real-Time Digital
Reference Services, maintained by librarian Gerry
McKiernan at Iowa State University. - cl

>From Librarians' Index to the Internet -

9. New SACS accreditation criteria concerning libraries

Posted: October 9, 2000



The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on
Colleges has proposed a new draft of Principles and Requirements for
Accreditation. This proposed draft is intended to replace the current
Commission's handbook, Criteria for Accreditation. Periodically
reviewed and revised by the College Delegate Assembly, this document
provides consistent guidelines for peer review and forms the basis of
the accreditation process.

The new draft has significantly shortened the description regarding
all key accreditation areas. However, this shortening has resulted in
a vague statement regarding the need for librarians with graduate
degrees in library science or related areas. In fact, the proposed
requirements do not even use the words library or librarian.

TLA members are urged send comments to the Commission requesting that
the new requirements contain specific language regarding the need
librarians with graduate degrees in library and information science.

Language on staffing related to learning resources from proposed 2000
Principles and Requirements for Accreditation (Section V):
"The institution ensures a sufficient number of qualified staff with
appropriate education or experiences both in learning resources and in
information technology."

Proposed guidelines:

Language on library staff from 1998 Principles and Requirements for
Accreditation (Section 5.1.6):
Libraries and other learning resources must be adequately staffed by
professionals who hold graduate degrees in library science or in
related fields such as learning resources or information technology.
In exceptional cases, outstanding professional experience and
demonstrated competence may substitute for this academic preparation;
however, in such cases, the institution must justify the exceptions on
an individual basis. Because professional or technical training in
specialized areas is increasingly important in meeting user needs,
professionals with specialized non-library degrees may be employed,
where appropriate, to supervise these areas.

The number of library support staff members must be adequate.
Qualifications or skills needed for these support positions should be
defined by the institution.

Organizational relationships, both external and internal to the
library, should be clearly specified. Institutional policies
concerning faculty status, salary and contractual security for
library personnel must be clearly defined and made known to all
personnel at the time of employment.

1998 guidelines: . The current
accreditation handbook contains several pages of information regarding
the role of libraries and information resources.

The Commission on Colleges of the Southern Association of Colleges and
Schools is the recognized regional accrediting body in the eleven U.S.
Southern states (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and
Virginia. The Commission on Colleges is the representative body of the
College Delegate Assembly and is charged with carrying out the
accreditation process. The College Delegate Assembly, which consists
of one voting representative for each of approximately 800 member
institutions, elects the 77-member Commission
( ). The U.S. Secretary
of Education recognizes accreditation by the Commission on Colleges in
establishing eligibility of higher education institutions to
participate in programs authorized under Title IV of the 1998 Higher
Education Amendments and other federal programs.

Librarians and library supporters are asked to send comments to the
Commission on Colleges by October 16, 2000. Library supporters should
ask the Commission to reinstate language that specifies that libraries
and other learning resources must be adequately staffed by
professionals who hold graduate degrees in library science or related

Talking points:
· Libraries contain the vast majority of the informational resources
of institutions of higher education. Libraries are the primary
mechanism in colleges and universities to administer, organize, and
disseminate those learning resources.
· Librarians are professionals who hold graduate degrees in library
science or related fields. They are uniquely qualified to administer
the complexity of information resources and provide needed instruction
on the effective use of those resources.
· A librarian, knowledgeable in the identification, location, and
evaluation of information resources, must be available to guide
students in the use of the library, whether it is in print or in
digital formats. Given the rise of distance education programs and
the availability of electronic resources, it is more important than
ever to insure that students can rely on the professional guidance of
librarians in the use and evaluation of information.
· Maintaining quality libraries and developing information services to
help meet the needs of students requires the adherence to
professionally established standards for service. In the area of
information resources and training, the library professional has a
long tradition of setting and meeting meaningful benchmarks for
institutions of higher education. The Association of College and
Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association,
has established both qualitative and quantitative standards, which
help provide a basis for successful library programs. These standards
are disseminated primarily through professional associations and
graduate programs for professional librarians. Without this
connection, institutions of higher education will not have access to
the standards, programs, and resources of the broader library

Contact information: The Accreditation Review Project, Commission on
Colleges, Southern Association of Colleges and Schools, 1866 Southern
Lane, Decatur, GA 30033-4397, (fax) 404/679-4517, (email)
ARP[at] For additional information on submitting comments,
go to


TLA-Texline is an irregular publication of the Texas Library
Association mailed directly to members interested in legislative and
governmental issues affecting libraries. To subscribe--or to offer
comments or suggestions contact Gloria Meraz, Director of
Communications, Texas Library Association, gloriam[at]

Previous issues of TLA-Texline are available on the TLA web page at


.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

October 9, 2000
The Accreditation Review Project
Commission on Colleges
Southern Association of Colleges and Schools
1866 Southern Lane
Decatur, GA 30033-4397

Dear Members of the Commission on Colleges:

Absence of word "librarian"

The Texas Library Association is gravely concerned about the proposed
draft, Principles and Requirements for Accreditation. While we
recognize that the updated document shortens the description of all
key accreditation areas, we were dismayed to find that Section V made
absolutely no mention of the need for professional librarians to
administer learning resources. Under Section IV of the same draft,
the professional requirements for faculty are clearly stated. In fact,
at many colleges and universities, librarians are faculty members and
must meet the same rigorous standards as faculty teaching in other
subject disciplines. At institutions of higher learning where
librarians do not have "faculty status", they, nevertheless, have
appropriate graduate level degrees. It is just as important;
therefore, that librarians' credentials be specified in the new
Principles being reviewed as it is to continue to spell out
credentials for faculty in Section IV.

Librarians play a pivotal role in higher education. Like faculty
members in other disciplines, librarians teach, develop courses,
interact with students, evaluate materials, and prepare educational
guides. In additional to these duties, librarians must be
knowledgeable in the identification, location, and evaluation of
information resources. Given the rise of distance education programs
and the availability of electronic resources, it is more important
than ever to insure that students can rely on the professional
guidance of librarians in the use and evaluation of information in
both digital and print formats.

Not everyone can perform library work. In fact, it takes particular
expertise to do so. The requirements in the current draft,
unfortunately however, would allow institutions to hire just about
anyone to administer libraries and maintain library services.
Librarians are professionals who hold graduate degrees in library
science or related fields. They are uniquely qualified to administer
the complexity of information resources and provide needed instruction
on the effective use of those resources.

Descriptors and identifiers not rigorous enough

Another concern with the current draft was the use of general or vague
language such as "adequate," "appropriate," and "sufficient." Frankly,
librarians across Texas have long welcomed a SACS visit as it has
provided them with an opportunity for self-assessment, identifying
gaps and challenges, and then offered them "must" statements to use
for growth and change. While we understand that the trend is away from
purely quantitative standards, there are ways to insure a "minimum but
acceptable" up to "exemplary" support for students. In fact,
definitions describing what "appropriate" means for example, would be
a way to begin to describe what a common ground would be. While it is
important to realize that what is appropriate for a rural Louisiana
college would NOT be appropriate for an inner city college in Texas,
there are ways we can measure given definitions. I recently chaired a
two-year statewide project for the development of standards for the
6,000 K-12 schools in Texas. We struggled with words but felt - as did
the principals and superintendents on the committee - that "less" was
NOT more and specificity was required when talking about staff,
resources and access to both.

Maintaining quality and meeting the needs of students require
adherence to professionally established standards for service. In the
area of information resources and training, the library profession has
a long tradition of setting and meeting meaningful benchmarks for
institutions of higher education. The Association of College and
Research Libraries, a division of the American Library Association,
has established both qualitative and quantitative standards, which
help provide a basis for successful library programs. These standards
are disseminated primarily through professional associations and
graduate programs for professional librarians. Without this
connection, institutions of higher education will not have access to
and substantive knowledge of the standards, programs, and resources of
the broader library community.

On behalf of the 7,500 members and Executive Board of the Texas
Library Association, we ask you to reinstate language in the proposed
guidelines that specifies the need for librarians with a graduate
degree in library science or a related field such as information or
information science to administer at institutions of higher education.
We also urge you to increase language specificity for more rigorous


Dr. Julie Todaro
President of the Texas Library Association and
Dean of Library Services, Austin Community College

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

-----Original Message-----
From: COLLIB-L [mailto:COLLIB-L[at]] On Behalf Of Dr. Alice Bahr
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2000 5:41 AM
To: COLLIB-L[at]
Subject: SACs: Proposed Requirements

Nothing new here, just another voice in the chorus. Here are the comments
I've sent to SACs regarding their proposed requirements for what is now a
phrase I'm learning to hate: Learning Resources.

RE: Section V. Learning Resources

The new comprehensive requirements in this section ensure flexibility, but
fail to help achieve a more important goal of an accrediting system:
effective self-governance.

It is impossible to regulate and evaluate without a clear statement of
expectations. I might tell my child to be good, but if I dont explain what
that means there is no way to be good, to understand what good means, or to

There is no need to be totally prescriptive, but phrases such as "learning
resources" and "instructional support services" are so vague that they
undermine an understanding of the challenges that all universitiesvirtual
and physicalface trying to provide adequate learning resources in the 21st
Century. Some of these follow:

Adding the word library to learning resources (using the language of the
current criteria, "library and learning resources") would better ground the
proposed requirements. No longer solely a synonym for a physical building,
the word "library," and by extension "librarian," have powerful, stable
connotations. They imply access to a coherently identified range of specific
information resources (collections) selected by those with an investment in
the content of those courses, an understanding of the needs of all curricula,
sufficient expertise in the use of these tools to evaluate their effectiveness
and appropriateness, an intimate knowledge of disciplines different
pedagogical objectives, and an ability to develop programs and services for
faculty and students that integrate these resources into the classroom and
into life long learning.

Without more specificity, the proposed requirement are sure to perplex and
frustrate accreditors, accreditees, and the accrediting process.

Dr. Alice Harrison Bahr
Director of the Library
Spring Hill College
4000 Dauphin Street
Mobile, Alabama 36608
Tel: 334/380-3871
Fax: 334/460-2086
E-mail: bahr[at]

10. Background on "Open Secrets Act"

[ALACOUN:5185] (Fwd) (Fwd)
Background for Letter to White House on "Open Secret

Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 14:37:58 EST
From: "NANCY KRANICH" <kranich[at]>
To: ALA Council List <alacoun[at]>
Cc: leb[at], es[at]
Reply to: kranich[at]

This is background on the "open secrets act". ALA has signed onto
the letter. Individuals are encouraged to act as well. Thanks.

--Nancy Kranich

Forwarded Message Follows -------
Date:          Fri, 27 Oct 2000 11:20:56 -0400
From:          Patrice McDermott <patricem[at]>
Subject:       (Fwd) Background for Letter to WH sign-on  ALERT
To:            Federal information policy listserv

Reply-to:      Federal information policy listserv

Priority:      normal

I realized -- as I was sending the message below out -- that I was
presuming that everyone on the list had been following this issue.
Which is not necessarily the case, of course. My apologies.

The issue -- in capsule -- is: legislation was attached to the
Intelligence Authorization Act -- and the language passed on a voice
vote with never a single hearing or any consideration -- that makes
it a felony for a government employee to disclose any and all
information that the government says is classified -- or
"classifiable" -- even if it is not properly marked.

Two efforts are moving forward simultaneously. One is in the
Congress, to get a rider attached to an appropriations bill to delay
implementation of this section of the Act for a year -- to allow time
for hearings.

The initial effort was to get a rider attached to the Commerce,
State, Justice appropriations bill. That has not happened, but the
President has said that he will veto the bill that _has been_ put
forward -- so there will still be time to get one on the next
version. There is a growing bi-partisan effort to attach such

A related effort is aimed at the White House -- to get them to
support the delay of implementation. There is no real anticipation
that the WH would veto the Intelligence Authorization bill.

The letter that was circulated yesterday -- and is below -- is
directed to the John Podesta, White House Chief of Staff.

Sorry for any confusion that I may have created yesterday. There is
still plenty of time to sign on.


------- Forwarded message follows -------

From:                    Patrice McDermott <patricem[at]>
To:                      Subject:                Letter to WH sign-on ALERT
Send reply to:           patricem[at]
Date sent:               Thu, 26 Oct 2000 16:04:15 -0400

An effort to engage with the White House on this issue has been
strongly encouraged. With the help of others, I have drafted a onepager
with bullets to send to John Podesta.

We have been urged to keep it to this length -- so it can be easily
circulated in the White House. Obviously, such a document will not
meet everyone's concerns, but I have tried to highlight the ones I
think will have an impact. I am amenable to some changes -- but
adding one thing will mean deleting something else.

Please -- if you can -- sign on to this. The sense is that one letter
signed by many groups will have greater impact than many separate
letters. Of course, you should also send a letter addressing your key
concerns, if they are not covered here.

And keep writing, calling the relevant Members.

Please have your _organizational_ sign-on to me by Close of Business
on Wednesday, 1 November.(Names of individuals, with their
organization affiliiation are appropriate, but not individuals
signing just for themselves -- unless you are a big contributor, in
which case CALL the White House)

I will "pretty this up" before I fax it.

Please excuse duplicate postings.



John Podesta

We are writing to encourage the President to take the strongest
possible action to prevent – or at the very minimum delay – the
implementation of Section 304 of the Intelligence Authorization Act
(H.R. 4392), “Prohibition on Unauthorized Disclosure of Classified

As you know,

Current law already bans classified leaks, and national security
threats can be prosecuted. There are sufficient protections in
place that guard against the release of specific classified
information that could impact an individual's safety, national
security or national defense. [See 18 U.S.C. §793 (disclosure of
information that would injure national defense); 18 U.S.C. §794
(disclosure of information to aid foreign governments to the
detriment of the United States); 18 U.S.C. §798 (disclosure of
cryptographic information or communication intelligence
activity); 15 U.S.C. §421 (disclosure of information on covert

The fine print in the bill removes all requirements that
classified information be clearly marked to indicate its status.

Under the new law, information could be classified even if there are
no markings or other warning. That revives a discredited concept
from the 1980's know as "classifiable" information, which means
virtually anything." It forces whistleblowers to seek advance
permission before exposing nearly any evidence of bureaucratic
misconduct, or risk criminal liability. Identifying specific
information that deserves special attention in the manner employed
by these statutes represents better public policy than the broad
sweep of Section 304 as it appropriately balances the public's right
to know with legitimate national security and defense concerns.

The bill creates three strikes against the public's right to know – a
principle that this Administration has publicly supported – by:

  1. realistically ending anonymous dissent;
  2. requiring advance permission to exercise free speech rights; and
  3. encouraging the over-classification of information and a
    draconian interpretation of existing classification regulations.
    By labeling information as classified or interpreting it as
    such, the governmental agency involved can obtain substantial
    leverage over even the best-motivated and most publicly-minded
    of its employees - even when information should be released.

If such a provision had been law, the public may never have seen
or known about the Pentagon Papers, the status of arms control
negotiations between the US and Russia in 1996, or the evidence
demonstrating that – contrary to public comments that it was
neutral – the Nixon administration was pro-Pakistani in the 1971
war between India and Pakistan.

As you also know, there is opposition to this bill developing rapidly
in Congress. But time is very short to accomplish any effort to
attach language to appropriations bills to delay its implementation.
The Intelligence Authorization Act has not yet been signed by the
President, who could veto it -- which we urge.

Alternatively, before adjourning, Congress could move back a year the
effective date for the law to take effect, through an amendment to
this year's spending bills. This would allow the House and Senate
Judiciary Committees – which normally review all changes in law – to
hold hearings on the consequences, before Americans lose freedom of
speech through a fait accompli.

At a minimum, we strongly urge the President to support this growing
bi-partisan effort in Congress.

Thank you.


| Library Juice is supported by a voluntary subscription
| fee of $10 per year, variable based on ability and
| desire to pay. You may send a check payable in US funds
| to Rory Litwin, at PO Box 720511, San Jose, CA 95172
| Original material and added value in Library Juice
| is copyright-free; beyond that the publisher makes
| no guarantees. Library Juice is a free weekly
| publication edited and published by Rory Litwin.
| Original senders are credited wherever possible;
| opinions are theirs. If you are the author of some
| email in Library Juice which you want removed from
| the web, please write to me and I will remove it.
| Your comments and suggestions are welcome.
| Rory[at] g">Rory[at]