Interview with Eira Tansey about “A Green New Deal for Archives”

Today’s post is an interview with Eira Tansey, with questions formulated by Burkely Hermann, Metadata Librarian for the National Security Archive and current I&A Blog Coordinator.
 
Eira Tansey is a researcher and archivist who focuses on climate change impacts on cultural heritage and archives. She also founded Memory Rising, in December 2022, which provides archival, consulting, and research services for humanities and cultural organizations, and worked in academic libraries from 2008 to 2023, first at the Louisiana Research Collection of Tulane University Library, and more recently at the Archives and Rare Books Library of the University of Cincinnati. This post is an interview with Tansey about her recently published report “A Green New Deal for Archives,” which was published by CLIR in July.

Question 1: The public policy program, which you propose in your report, outlines three foundational principles for a Green New Deal for Archives (increasing permanent staffing for archives “that steward vital public records”, “create a nationwide plan for collection continuity and emergency response,” and developing “climate change documentation projects organized by watersheds”). Do you envision this program as applying to community archives or activist archives, in the United States, which are not formal institutions? 

Eira Tansey: In a Green New Deal for Archives policy platform I think there’s an important role for community archives to play in documenting watersheds and local environmental problems. Community and activist archives can do this in ways that government archives likely could not or would not. Even in the original Historical Records Survey which I explore in the publication, WPA workers did important work to identify archives from informal institutions. I think that work can and should be replicated in a Green New Deal for Archives.

With that said, there is a reason why I put the first priority as increasing staffing at archives that steward vital public records, because I think this is the most important priority facing American archives. To be clear, vital records have a specific definition: “a record necessary to begin recovery of business after a disaster, as well as a record necessary to protect the assets, obligations, and resources of an organization” and “a record that documents significant life events, including births, deaths, marriages, and divorces.”

Vital records are usually stewarded by public-facing archives like local, state, and federal government archives. Without the preservation and access of vital public records, we are at major risk of losing individual rights and the collective ability to hold public institutions accountable. Like the original New Deal that emphasized the importance of strengthening government institutions as a means to better serve the public (instead of primarily relying on the private sector), I believe we need to apply similar thinking to meet the scale of climate change adaptation in archives.

My stance on this is shaped by my professional trajectory, which comes from working in academic libraries for 15 years until I left earlier this year to build my business. In my last role I was the records manager for one of the largest public universities in the state of Ohio for nearly a decade. Records management work, even in higher education, has far more in common with the kind of archives work carried out by government archivists than a topical focused curatorial collecting model. Even though my institution was legally mandated by Ohio law to carry out records management, and retention scheduling directly supported our most popular use area – university archives – I received zero dedicated budget resources for records management. Meanwhile collections of non-institutional materials that had comparatively little use had endowed funds. This led me to appreciate how the records that receive the most use and are required to be managed according to law rarely receive the resources needed to do this work effectively, and are especially vulnerable to becoming unfunded mandates.

In my city of Cincinnati, we do not have a municipal archive that makes the records of the city easily available to the public. So based on my own local experience, I’m not convinced that formal institutional archives are always receiving the support they need to make the records of government and public institutions accessible and accountable to local residents. In many cases, they don’t exist to begin with.

Librarians – regardless of where they work – understand that public libraries are integral to the larger enterprise of librarianship and that public libraries are an essential part of the democratic experiment. I’d like to see archivists – regardless of where they work – embrace the same kind of support for government and other archives that serve the larger public. This is why although I hope A Green New Deal for Archives will resonate with all archivists, I assert that the priority needs to be on bolstering the capacity of archives that have a broad public mandate.

Question 2: In your view, how should readers, who agree with your “Green New Deal for Archives” public policy proposal, share their support? 

Eira Tansey: Learning how to advocate on behalf of archives to elected officials is really important. Within SAA, the Committee on Public Policy has done great work on this front, especially with the Archives on the Hill event that happens when SAA meets in Washington DC.

I have been excited to have some encouraging recent conversations with Congressional staffers about the importance of archives. There are a lot of folks in Congress who care both about climate change and archives, but they don’t necessarily connect the dots between how archives can both identify climate risks and help communities be more resilient in the face of climate disaster. It’s up to archivists to have these conversations and put this issue squarely in front of our elected officials.

Question 3: If you could make a change (or changes) to the core values statement (which states that archivists “must necessarily involve an ongoing awareness of the impact of archival work on the environment”) or recent strategic plan of the Society of American Archivists, based on what you have written in your report, what would you change?

Eira Tansey: SAA’s Core Values statement includes Sustainability, and that section is very thoughtfully worded. However, the current Strategic Plan does not specifically address or name environmental concerns or climate change among its activities. I’d like to see this change in future iterations. For example, many of the strategic plan actions rightfully focus on workforce issues. There is a climate change link here – as increasingly severe and frequent disasters disproportionately impact more vulnerable communities, how will this impact hiring and retention of archivists? Climate change is already affecting our work, and will only continue to do so. Our strategic plan should reflect those realities so we can prepare and respond accordingly.

End of Year Steering Share: Rachel Mandell—Looking Forward and Reflecting Back

Steering Shares are an opportunity to find out more about the I&A Steering Committee. This end-of-the-year post is from I&A Vice Chair/Chair-Elect Rachel Mandell, Metadata Librarian at the University of Southern California Digital Library.

This year has been an exciting whirlwind for me—from starting a new job as a permanent library faculty member to deciding to continue with the Issues and Advocacy Section as the incoming Chair, I have taken on more responsibility, learned a lot more about what it means to be a professional archivist/ librarian, and have just started to figure out how to juggle it all.

As we wind down in our current positions with the Issues and Advocacy Section and look forward to our official section meeting in Portland, I want to take this opportunity to thank Hope Dunbar, our outgoing Chair, who has been a great leader throughout this past year.  I also want to thank the rest of the amazing Steering Committee for your enthusiasm and dedication to the section and the cause! I will need to ask for your continued support next year—I hope I can live up to the legacy that Hope is leaving behind.  

As I prepare myself to step into my new role as Chair, I want to use this post to reflect on what we accomplished this year and what I hope to continue working towards next year. This list is by no means comprehensive—these are just some of the achievements that stick out for me personally.

  1. Our nomination for SAA’s J. Franklin Jameson award was selectedThe Steering Committee nominated The Environmental Data & Governance Initiative & The Technoscience Research Unit, University of Toronto, and it was selected!  We are so proud!
  2. Updated the Issues and Advocacy ToolkitOne of our amazing Steering Committee members, Laurel Bowen, spearheaded the toolkit update this year.  She added significant content from the history and historic preservations professions, which provide substantive ideas on how to think about the value and impact of archives, to craft value statements about archives, and how to lobby or energize the support of decision-makers to relevant content on other websites.
  3. Social media updates: Daria Labinsky, another one of our esteemed Steering Committee members, was our social media rock star—she was on top of promoting all of our blog posts and getting important information out to our members through our Facebook page and Twitter feed.
  4. Maintained an Active I&A Blog: A HUGE shootout to Steering Committee member Stephanie Bennett—who coordinated and posted blog posts. We were able to maintain an active blog this year across our four series: Archivists on the Issues, In Case You Missed It (ICYMI), Research Posts, and Steering Shares.
  5. Research teams: This year we had Legislators Research and General News Monitoring Research Teams. These are logistically difficult to coordinate, but our teams and team leaders did a great job this year keeping up on the issues that affect our profession. You can check out some of the teams’ findings in our Research Posts category in our blog.
  6. Coordinated a great panel for our section meeting at SAA this year: This year, we’ll have a panel discussing experiences with controversial archival collections as well as their best practices for access and display. Promises to be an interesting discussion! Come check it out—Friday, July 28th from 11:15-12:30p during SAA in Portland. 
  7. Monthly meetings/Bi-annual joint calls: Every month, Hope leads a Steering Committee meeting as well as two joint calls with our collaborators: the Regional Archival Associations Consortium (RAAC) Advocacy Subcommittee, the Committee on Public Policy, and the Committee on Public Awareness.  It’s exciting to see where our groups’ interests align and we can develop collaborative initiatives. 

Looking towards next year, which officially starts after the SAA Annual Meeting in Portland, I hope to get started on the following:

  • Library Design Share PortalPossible pilot project for I&A, and collaborators, modeled after the Library Design Share Portal, where we could create templates that could be used for advocating for the library.
  • An Issues and Advocacy Intern: We have decided to join SAA in a call for interns. We hope to offer our intern some great experience of working with our toolkit, perhaps overseeing legislative or general research teams or coordinating some of our outreach efforts. I actually started with I&A as an intern, so it’s very exciting for me to guide our intern.
  • Continue with the momentum of our blog: I really hope to keep up with our blog presence!!  Can’t let the momentum run out now!

I am really looking forward to serving as Chair next year. I want to do a good job and be a good leader.  I hope that the rest of the steering committee holds me to that! Thanks for a great year everyone! Go Team!

Police-Worn Body Camera Footage: A Public Record? Part 2

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. If you have an issue you would like to write about for this blog series or a previous post that you would like to respond to, please email archivesissues@gmail.com. Please note that opinions expressed in Archivists on the Issues posts do not indicate an official stance of SAA or the Issues and Advocacy Roundtable.

This post, written by Rachel Mattson, is part two in a two-part series regarding the debate regarding police body-camera footage’s classification as a public record. Part 1 is available here.

BWCs: The Wild West of Records Requests
Requestors seeking access to police-worn body camera footage nationwide have encountered a diversity of other obstacles. Indeed, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) recently called police body cam footage “the Wild West of open records requests,” noting that obtaining access to these records “is proving to be an uncertain and challenging endeavor.”[1] One justification that agencies often use for the withholding of footage is its sensitive nature. BWC footage raises serious concerns about privacy, security, and confidentiality. But as RCFP’s Adam Marshall notes—and as video archivists who work with human rights documentation have long known—there exists a wide range of tech and policy strategies that can make video available to the public while protecting individual privacy and security.[2]

Possibly the greatest threat to the public’s ability to access BWC going forward may be the efforts currently underway in many states to pass legislation that would exempt BWC footage from public records laws. In July 2016, North Carolina made national news when governor Pat McCrory signed a bill declaring that “body camera and dash camera footage are not public record[s].” Similar bills are currently being considered in Michigan, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Louisiana, and California, among other states. In Utah, one lawmaker has even proposed a bill that would officially classify all footage as “a private government record” if it depicts any “images of nudity, death, or gruesome events.” Who determines if an image is gruesome? “Something’s gruesome if police say it is.”[3]

In the view of many observers, access to police BWC footage, especially of fatal police shootings, is “crucial” to both “the public’s ability to hold police responsible for their conduct” and officers’ ability to exonerate themselves when wrongly accused of misconduct.[4] And the potential privacy and security concerns that these records raise remain separate from the question of whether these videos should be officially classified as public records. Indeed, many confidential and sensitive records, including federal intelligence records, are classified as public records under law. Body camera footage is not more sensitive than these kinds of records, and should not treated as such.[5]

It may be the case, as several activist groups have claimed, that equipping the police with cameras is the wrong strategy for addressing the larger problems of police accountability and racial justice. A broad base of community and activist groups have critiqued the practice of equipping police with BWCs. For instance, We Charge Genocide, a Chicago-based group working toward restorative justice solutions for police misconduct, suggests that “when police control the cameras, those cameras are at the service of police violence.” In fact, they observe that one body camera manufacturer “actually uses the slogan ‘Made by Cops for Cops. Prove Your Truth.’” The recent “Vision for Black Lives” Statement put forth by the Movement for Black Lives likewise includes a demand to “End the Use of Technologies that Criminalize and Target Our Communities (Including IMSI Catchers, Drones, Body Cameras, and Predictive Policing Software).”[6]

Nonetheless, the calls for and deployment of police-worn body cameras increase every day. As more local policing agencies equip officers with BWCs, we have a responsibility to engage with challenges that these government-generated records present. Indeed, as professional archivists and records managers, some of us may soon manage BWC footage as part of our official responsibilities. As we have learned recently, making this video a public record will not in-and-of-itself put an end to police murder of black and brown people. In order for that to occur, access to documentation will have to be coupled with mechanisms that make it possible to hold public servants accountable for their actions. But for BWC footage to be used in the pursuit of accountability and justice, it has to be a public record first. [7]

SAA and BWCs
This fall, I will work to start a conversation about BWCs among SAA members and hope to put forth proposal to the Society of American Archivists’ Committee on Public Policy (COPP) that SAA take a public stand supporting policies that, at a minimum, ensure that police BWC footage be officially classified as a public record.[8] I hope you’ll support—or join!—this conversation and effort. On its main webpage, COPP heralds the power of archival records to “ensure the protection of citizens’ rights, the accountability of organizations and governments, and the accessibility of historical information,” noting that the SAA “believes that archivists must take an active role in advocating for the public policies and resources necessary to ensure that these records are preserved and made accessible.” As BWCs gain widespread usage by U.S. police departments, the footage they generate will become an ever-more pervasive part of the criminal justice system. Ensuring that videos remain public records is something that, as an archival organization committed to “the public’s right to equal and equitable access to government information found in archives,” we should support wholeheartedly.[9]

Rachel Mattson is a Brooklyn-based historian and archivist. She currently works as the Manager of Special Projects in the Archives of La MaMa Experimental Theatre Club and is a core member of the XFR Collective. She previously volunteered for I-Witness Video, a group that used citizen video and archival strategies to oppose police misconduct. Mattson holds a PhD in U.S. History from NYU and an MLIS from UIUC. Her writing has appeared in publications including Radical History Reviewthe Scholar and the FeministMovement Research Performance Journal, and in books published by Routledge, Washington Square, and Thread Makes Blanket Press.

Citations
[1] Adam Marshall, “Police Bodycam Videos: The Wild West of Open Records Requests,” rcfp.org/bodycam-video-access.
[2] Marshall, “Police Bodycam Videos: The Wild West of Open Records Requests.”
[3] “North Carolina Keeps Public From Seeing Police Camera Video,” Winston Salem Journal, July 11, 2016; Sophia Murguia, “More States Set Privacy Restrictions on Bodycam Video,” rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/news/more-states-set-privacy-restrictions-bodycam-video; “Police Bodycam Footage is a Vital Public Record; Don’t Restrict It,” the Utah Standard-Examiner, February 12, 2016.
[4]“Police Bodycam Footage is a Vital Public Record; Don’t Restrict It,” Standard-Examiner.
[5] I thank Eileen Clancy for reminding me of this fact. For more on the parameters of the federal records laws, see e.g. Douglas Cox, “Burn After Viewing: The CIA’s Destruction of the Abu Zubaydah Tapes and the Law of Federal Records,” Journal of National Security Law and Policy, Vol. 5, 2011, pp. 131-177.
[6] We Charge Genocide, “Statement on Cops and Cameras,” http://wechargegenocide.org/statement-on-cops-and-cameras; The Movement for Black Lives, “A Vision for Black Lives, Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice,” policy.m4bl.org/end-war-on-black-people/. See also Caruso, Burns, and Converse, “Slow Motion Increases Perceived Intent,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (33) May 2016, pnas.org/content/113/33/9250.full; and Williams et al., “Police Body Cameras: What Do You See?” New York Times, April 1, 2016.
[7] For a critical analysis of the complexity of the issues at hand and the kind of work that needs to be done to address them, see Kimberle Crenshaw and Andrea Ritchie’s indispensible report, “Say Her Name: Resisting Police Brutality Against Black Women,” African American Policy Forum, 2015.
[8] The proposal is currently in development. If you wish to contribute or add your name to the list of supporters, please email keepbwcfpublic [at] gmail [dot] com.
[9] SAA Public Policy Agenda, archivists.org/advocacy/publicpolicy/saapublicpolicyagenda#.V6UTso7OlqA; Committee on Public Policy webpage, archivists.org/groups/committee-on-public-policy#.V6Y3N47OlqB

One Year, Nine Months, and Fourteen Days Raising Archival Awareness, and Counting

Archivists on the Issues is a forum for archivists to discuss the issues we are facing today. Below is a post from Sami Norling who is the incoming chair of SAA’s Committee on Public Awareness. If you have an issue you would like to write about for this blog series or a previous post that you would like to respond to, please email archivesissues@gmail.com.

It has been one year, nine months, and fourteen days since the Society of American Archivists’ Committee on Public Awareness (COPA) met for the first time and began to tackle our duties and responsibilities as set by SAA Council. The full description of COPA can be found here but, in short, we are tasked with identifying key audiences that SAA should target its advocacy efforts toward, and to help the SAA Council shape the form, content, and messages presented in those efforts. While there is some overlap between COPA and the more established Committee on Advocacy and Public Policy (CAPP) and the Issues and Advocacy Roundtable they both tend to focus more on opportunities for SAA to shape public policy (legislation) that affects archivists and our profession, institutions, and stakeholders. COPA’s brand of “advocacy” focuses on how we, as individuals and through our professional society, can promote awareness of archivists, archival work, and archives to various audiences.

The Committee on Public Awareness is a direct product of SAA’s Strategic Plan for 2014-2018, which places advocacy and raising public awareness as priority No. 1.

ArchiveAWARE image

The Strategic Plan outlines four ways in which SAA will work to reach this goal–three of which relate directly to the work that COPA has been asked to complete:

1.1. Provide leadership in promoting the value of archives and archivists to institutions, communities, and society.

1.2. Educate and influence decision makers about the importance of archives and archivists.

 1.4. Strengthen the ability of those who manage and use archival material to articulate the value of archives.

I entered into this committee appointment (my first within SAA)  fully expecting that the process of developing awareness resources, messages, and/or campaigns would be lengthier than I could imagine, with some very difficult and even unpleasant parts, but I have to admit that I wasn’t expecting the intense groundwork that would have to be laid at that first meeting before we could proceed with any actual planning–groundwork that required us to face head-on some difficult questions about the work that we do and the issues that we all encounter as members of a profession with a surprisingly low level of public visibility. By the end of that first meeting, we had come to terms with the fact that while we do a (relatively) good job at communicating with other archivists about the work that we do, the roles we play professionally, and even a bit about the value of archives and archivists, as a profession we have been unsuccessful at effectively communicating this to non-archivists. The good news is that we DO belong to an inherently interesting and important profession (and that’s not just something we tell ourselves as we work through grad school or the tedious parts of daily archives work, all while facing poor employment prospects and practices).

During that first committee meeting, we came to the conclusion that the audience that we would focus our efforts on would be professional archivists. At first, it may seem like an odd choice of target audience considering that our ultimate goal is to raise overall public understanding and awareness of the value of archivists and archives (after all, professional archivists likely already have a pretty good understanding of archival work and its value). However, we came to the realization that even though archivists have this understanding, many archivists may not have the ability or resources to effectively convey this message to their stakeholders, users, or communities, let alone the general public. By focusing on professional archivists in our efforts—providing resources, sharing ideas and examples, and creating a community of practice for successful, innovative outreach—we would build the capacity of thousands of archivists around the country to convey the value of archivists and archives to a potentially infinite number of audiences—something that we could never hope to do as a ten-person committee.

In the one year, nine months, and fourteen days since the first COPA meeting came to an end, work has been completed in fits and starts, with some notable highlights:

  • Promoting Kathleen Roe’s “Year of Living Dangerously for Archives” calls to action
  • The first #AskAnArchivist Day was held on October 29, 2014
    • 2,000+ participants and 6,000+ tweets (after only six weeks from idea to event!)
  • Launch of the “Archives Change Lives” campaign at the 2015 annual meeting, complete with promotional video (with archivists as target audience)
  • Second annual #AskAnArchivist Day held on October 1, 2014
    • 2,800+ participants and 7,500+ tweets (and a much more concerted promotion effort)
  • Launch of ArchivesAWARE! blog in February 2016
  • Launch of SAA’s new website on March 30, 2016, with a new emphasis on advocacy and awareness with some content aggregated by COPA members

These last two developments are particularly notable in that they reflect COPA’s growing capacity for sustained activity and productivity—something that many new committees struggle with in their early stages. At this time, the ArchivesAWARE! blog is the primary focus of COPA’s work. First conceived as a venue for taking static lists of advocacy/awareness resources and tools—like those listed on the new SAA advocacy pages—and breathing life into them by providing context and showing practical applications, the blog has become much more than that. With explorations into archival outreach theory, interviews with and articles from archivists who are actively creating and implementing innovative outreach projects/programs, an original comic answering the ubiquitous question: “What is an archivist?,” and so much more, ArchivesAWARE! is starting to become a vital community of practice for archival outreach.

As the blog continues to evolve, there is much to look forward to, with many opportunities for archivists to share the work that they are doing to raise awareness, not only of their collections, but of the valuable work that archivists do and the impact this has on their communities. The editors are always eager to hear from archivists with projects, programs, and thoughts to share. To read more about the submission process and editorial guidelines, visit the About page, or e-mail your ideas to archivesaware@archivists.org!

Sami Norling is the Archivist at the Indianapolis Museum of Art and incoming Chair of the Committee on Public Awareness.