Cataloguing for Xmas

It’s been so long since my last post. This is partly because I have nothing interesting to say, archival or otherwise, and partly because I’ve been busy. Xmas is almost here and my plans for this week have gone awry. I wanted to be cataloguing and instead I’m checking digital files.

Why is there never time to catalogue?

For me, Xmas itself should be quiet and full of food, wine and TV. New Years will be louder. I’m travelling up north where I hope to visit ruined medieval monasteries, read many books and drink much. It's gonna be really cold.

NY resolution #1: do more cataloguing

Ain't technology amazing?

I have taken a toddling step closer towards the 21st Century. I have used bluetooth technology to move images from my phone into the computer. So, here they are. Images from around London taken over the past year:

Eric Ketelaar giving the 2nd Jenkinsonian Lecture

"authentic Japanese tapas" sign

the amazing Park Chan-wook talking at the London Korean Film Festival

Planned regional closures at the National Archives of Australia

When TNA announced budget problems earlier this year their coping strategy included limiting opening hours and having dirtier windows (as well as firing people – I don’t want to suggest bad things aren’t happening). The Australians, being on a much larger geographical scale, are responding to budget difficulties by planning to close 3 of their regional offices: Darwin, Adelaide and Hobart. The NAA’s Director-General, Ross Gibbs, put up a statement today on their webpages. In it, he notes that: “The decision to close the Adelaide, Darwin and Hobart offices was based on the knowledge that they could not endure any more budget cuts while still maintaining the high level of service that they are known for.”

This is kind of outrageous. How is no service at all better than one that includes, for example, fewer opening hours and more grime on the glass. It doesn't seem right, in a democratic society, to hinder people's access to government records.

Stories straight to your mobile

From an article in the Times on the possible demise of storytelling (put up by the American listserv – thanks guys) I discovered Keitai Shosetsu, novels written for, and sent to, the mobile phones of Japanese mobile phone owners, and the Centre for Future Storytelling.

These need further investigation.

Old diaries in blog form

I haven’t been paying much attention for the past couple of weeks. In general that is. But, I have been avidly reading these two blogs: Voyage of the Vampire and My Diary and my secret.

Quite a few archives are doing this sort of thing, posting old diary entries in real time in blog format. It’s brilliant.

Blog Action Day 2009 - climate change

The topic for blog action day 2009 is “climate change”. I’ve been thinking about what to write for most of the week and I’m surprised to find that climate change doesn’t strike me as particularly relevant to the archival world. Extreme weather will obviously threaten our buildings and infrastructure. Worst case scenario sees the archive slide away in an earthquake induced mud-slide. Lest worst case sees our air-conditioning bills rise.

Archives will become more important, I think, once the damage is done. After the world has frozen over and then thawed out, or been swallowed by the sea and then re-emerged, whoever remains will be able to trace the growth and effect of climate change on the earth and on human society. Provided we have our collecting policies in order. Post-end-of-the-world researchers will certainly have an advantage over current day climate change researchers. For starters they’ll have a much larger body of documentary records to consult such as science reports on fossil and rock samples, adverts for green light bulbs and washing machines, debates on the causes of climate change, campaign material aimed at limiting the devastating effects on poorer countries, etc. Let’s hope the surviving people can read and that the computer servers etc still work.

Perhaps climate change won't be apocalyptic. In either case, archives and libraries should be accumulating a wide diverstiy of resources related to climate change and to the debate, reaction, controversy, etc that surrounds it.

Visit to Birmingham

On Friday I took annual leave and travelled up to Birmingham to look at the Staffordshire Hoard. We took the coach and then waited in line for almost 3 hours to see the display. Was it worth is? Yes. The items were lovely; such amazingly intricate patterns.

But, we thought Birmingham Museum could’ve stepped up to the plate in better form. Two criticisms: firstly, finances and secondly, crowd movement.

In order to keep the hoard local a lot of money needs to be raised. Yet the museum shop had no Anglo-Saxon themed merchandise. Considering the crowds of people willing to travel long distances and queue for hours it should follow that we’d want to buy a souvenir of this “one off, must do thing to tell your kids about”. I wanted to buy a book and look at the usual Celtic jewellery. My companion expected to take home a cheap mug. What a wasted opportunity to raise funds.

Crowd movement within the display room was also a problem. The items were in a largish room, in short rectangular cases. We thought they let too many of us in at a time. This meant we were 3 or 4 deep around each case and had to wait ages to get near enough to see. We thought the use of long cases would’ve spread us out. Also, if there had been information provided (about the find, about Anglo-Saxon life, etc) say on the walls between the cases, this would also have spread us out, or at least distracted us from the frustration of not being able to see. Arguably this would also have encouraged us to linger, rather than keep moving, but we couldn’t move anyway. Another idea we had was if they provided a staff member at each case to tell us about one or more of the items, after their short speech we’d’ve felt that we’d done that case and there would’ve been a natural progression around to the next case.

After seeing the Hoard a trip to the British Museum was in order, to once more look at the Sutton Hoo exhibit. The sword hilts and bosses are identical to those from Staffordshire. It will be interesting to see what the experts make of this new find.

AfL 2009 conference

On Saturday I went to the annual Archives for London conference to hear about London’s history of riots and rebellions. As usual, it was excellent. The speakers were all knowledgeable and engaging. It was the perfect way to spend a miserable, cold English October day.

Mashup mania

Something that came out strongly at the SoA conference this year was the fear and caution with which archivists usually approach digital access of their material via the web. And then the Australians do this – a Mashup competition held by the Government 2.0 taskforce. Unsurprisingly, seeing as Adrian Cunningham is on the taskforce, the National Archives of Australia is participating by making some of their material available. But what? Catalogues? Actual images of historical government records? Other participating archive repositories include the Australian War Memorial, Powerhouse Museum (who also have a member on the taskforce) and State Libraries of both Queensland and New South Wales.

Mashup Australia aims to be a practical demonstration of the benefits of providing easily accessible information created by the Australian government. The ‘About’ section of the site reveals that similar contests have been held in America and the UK. The UK Power of Information Taskforce ran a competition last year called “Show us a better way”. The Taskforce was looking for better ways for public information to be communicated.

US banned book week 2009

America is currently observing its annual Banned Book Week. As organiser, the ALA has lots of well organised information and links on its website (including the titbit that Hemmingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls was declared non-mailable by the U.S. Post Office in 1940). The week allows people the opportunity to reflect on their current freedoms, especially the freedom of expression. I think everybody should do this and feel a little upset that the UK doesn’t have a similar occasion.

While looking through the ALA site I discovered that fighting censorship is part of the US Library Bill of Rights. Two of the six articles in the Bill are directed toward ensuring freedom from censorship:

III. Libraries should challenge censorship in the fulfilment of their responsibility to provide information and enlightenment.
IV. Libraries should cooperate with all persons and groups concerned with resisting abridgment of free expression and free access to ideas

Kudos to that.

So I checked out the “10 most frequently challenged books of 2008”. Top of the list (consecutively since 2006) is And Tango Makes Three, a cute looking book about gay penguins. According to the BBC this is based on a true story. Number 2 is the His Dark Materials Trilogy, and the only entry on the list that I’ve actually read.

Anglo-Saxon treasure

What an amazing thing! Anglo-Saxon treasure has been found in Staffordshire. Samples from the hoard will be on display at the Birmingham Museum from tomorrow until October 13. Not a very large window of opportunity for people to organise a trip, but great that the chance is there. Pictures are available on flickr. Some of the items look a bit squished. All of them look amazing.

Review of the conference 2

As mentioned before, I felt that the conference favoured access over preservation. This actually mirrors a trend I’ve noticed in UK archivists – an inclination toward access as the sole, or most important, aim of archives. Without access, it’s asked, what is the point of saving anything at all? Thus outreach activities are seen as the most vital thing, overshadowing the other core archival functions of collecting, appraising, cataloguing/describing and preserving.

OK, it would be sacrilegious of me to deny the importance of access. But I think we need to put this back into context, especially in relation to digital material. It seems to me that we’re constantly informing people that digitisation should form part of a comprehensive preservation strategy. Yet, we don’t seem as proud of our preservation work as we do of the access that comes from it. But mainly, preservation allows access to happen and we should allocate it the bulk of our efforts.

If I can use this to lead onto another point, this fixation with access also limits the ways in which we define our profession. It was pointed out several times during the conference that archivists have a difficult time articulating the value of archival work. Peter Emmerson noted this in his opening speech, urging us to re-think why archives are important and to extend our concept of who benefits. I think that by focusing on access as our reason for being we limit the ways we can express our value to benefiting the small number of people who consciously use us. As Professor Jimerson pointed out, almost nobody will make a connection between archives and records managers and the document trail behind current events such as the release of the convicted Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi. Yet our profession is responsible for good government records management, via TNA.

These are my preliminary thoughts.

Review of the conference 1

So to continue with my impressions of the conference….

As already mentioned, I thought the three keynote speakers were very good. Peter Emmerson opened the proceedings with a clear message that the profession needs to re-think, well, how we think about the profession and come up with a new framework to support our work. He suggested that, here in the UK, archivists are interested in what we were doing, how we are doing it and who it is that does it, rather than why we are doing it and for whose benefit. He thinks we need to be more attuned to the outcomes and consequences of our jobs. He noted that his experience working in commonwealth countries highlighted a difference, internationally, in professional approaches. In Commonwealth countries they felt the need to explain the why in terms of the benefits offered to the organisation/government and benefits to the wider society. [I think this is why projects like Interpares are based in Canada, why the Australians came up with such a good RM Standard and function-based appraisal, and why more attention seems to be paid to records as evidence in other countries].

I hope I’ve summarised Peter’s talk correctly as I thought it a good one.

Randall Jimerson also gave an excellent talk. He spoke about the need for Archivists to realise that objectivity is a myth. From this realisation should come greater appreciation of our role (and power) as shapers of history and truth, and greater awareness that our activities should be carried out in an ethical way that supports social justice. It’s impossible to disagree with this. In fact, I hope this is something we’ve all already thought about. Although we’re all brought up on Jenkinson and Schellenberg, I think we’re equally influenced by the post-modernism that I would say has characterised most recent archival theory. And although I rarely feel very powerful, he’s right that we do have this power. It’s a pity that our funding and staffing resources don’t always allow us to fulfil our world-saving potential.

That’s all for now. I got other things to do.

SoA Conference cont.

Looks like I'm alone in criticising the SoA conference this year. Anna Towlson from the LSE attended the first day. Her report is here. Chris Prom and Caroline Brown from the University of Dundee both thought the conference had a lot to impart. Their notes are here.

Chris Prom is visiting Briton from the University of Illinois. His personal blog has posts on sessions, and a lovely photo of Bath Abbey. His post on the Archives, Records and Artefacts blog indicates that much of the discussion around e-records (and the continuing preservation of these records??) took place in the RM themed talks. I admit I didn't go to any of these as they looked to be mostly theory and strategy rather than action (my reasoning being that I can get theory and strategy from the web). Maybe I was wrong about their content.

Caroline Brown was one of the speakers at the conference. She gave one of the round-ups at the end. I found her talk engaging and agreed with most of it, but was alarmed and dispirited by her use of a quote from Hugh Taylor identifying electronic media and records as a paradigm shift. What was dispiriting about this is that Hugh Taylor wrote it in 1987. Why, 22 years later, are we still seeing electronic records as something we need to get our heads around?

And where has the conference blog gone? The link on the SoA website disappeared immediately after the conference.

Conference report

What can I say about the SoA conference? It was a disappointment really. Too much emphasis on access and not enough attention paid to preservation. Too many indications that we're still not coping with, let alone embracing, many of the challenges and opportunities offered by digital records. The most striking thread running through the week was that archivists are cautious and fearful; that we lack confidence when dealing wiht new technology and researcher behaviour. I find this depressing.

But, there were some good bits:

• the opening speeches were all excellent and thought provoking;
• the Planets project, based at the British Library, looks like it's doing positive and useful stuff;
• Tim Padfield;
• the Southampton University's Non-Contact Surface Scanning Systems for the Retrieval and Protection of Archives Sound Recordings - brilliant; and
• the Victorian lantern show.

The conference gave me stuff to think about which I hope to make the subject of future posts.

SoA Conference 2009

Here is it, the eve of another SoA Conference. I’m off to Bristol tomorrow so as not to waste the long weekend worrying about what to pack. I’ve briefly looked over the programme and there appears to be a lot of “what we should be thinking about”. Thankfully there also appears to be some “we did this and here’s what happened”.

I’m hoping for real life examples and experiences. I feel I’m done thinking about digital preservation. I’ve been doing it for years. Years! Unfortunately, I’m not in a position to act and so must live vicariously through others.

The thing I’m looking forward to the most is staying in a swanky hotel.

Pictures for LibraryThing Pillars group read

Some pictures from Coventry.

The old Cathedral of St Michael's, bombed during the war:

Holy Trinity Church:

Bristol via Rome

Only a week until the SOA Conference, which I'll be attending this year. The topic - digital preservation and access - is relevant to all, and especially to me at the moment as I've turned into one of those new-fangled digital archivists.

Archives for the 21st century

Last Thursday AfL and the Centre for Metropolitan History arranged for 4 representatives from the TNA and some independent voices to discuss the new consultation polity document on Archives for the 21st Century. Seeing as how we’re already in the 21st century this document necessarily looks at where we are and what direction we should take in the coming decades. The key point to remember though, as Nick Kingsley says: “there is no new money”. Recent developments at the TNA re closures and staff reductions are evidence of this.

The discussion took place at the Institute for Historical Research at Senate House. It wasn’t particularly well attended I thought. The panel almost outnumbered the audience. But, this didn’t impede the discussion or Q&A session at the end.

Nick Kingsley opened the consultation with some background to the document, pointing out the joint involvement of the TNA and the MLA and pulling out the 5 key priorities it espouses. Then the 3 external panellists stated their take on the document, what they thought was strong about it and where it fell down. Unfortunately I’m a rubbish reporter and failed to note anybody’s name.

The first speaker was a user of community archives. She had concerns about archive services staying local, rather than having them merged and moved. She feared that in-depth knowledge of the collections and the local area would be lost. She also expressed fears about too much emphasis being put on digital access as this is not always an equitable solution. Some people don’t have computer access at home or are unable to use them because of disabilities. Moreover, electronic access is removed from archival assistance, should it be needed. There is also a risk that the quality of archival research will suffer if people are only able to, or bother to, access material that has been digitised and made available over the web.

I agree with her first point. It’s a strong contention among archivists, expressed in the document, that archives shape and inform people’s sense of identity at national, local and personal levels. We should therefore support community archives and aim to keep the knowledge and expertise of local staff. The TNA and the government should promote local archives.

Her other two points are bound up with the issue of electronic access to digitised material: the not-quite-so-equal access promised by digitisation programmes and the risk to quality archival research. For the first, although I agree that electronic access isn’t a perfectly equitable solution, it does allow greater access to material while supporting the preservation function of the archive (if, of course, done with appropriate and adequate planning and funding). So although it’s not a major thread in the document, I applaud the increased interest in digitisation and the inclusion of both catalogues and content in the TNA’s outlook. With regards to the quality of archival research, I argue that the risk of poor and incomplete research isn’t limited to the digital world. Where exactly does the responsibility of the archives and the archivist lie here? Archival finding aids should alert researchers to the existence of other sources and there should always be a way of asking staff. Lazy or incompetent researchers are not our responsibility.

The second panellist had an interest in national research. She pointed out that people want evidence and don’t care if it’s called archival, or local history, or library etc. Focusing on archival material loses the importance of other, non-archival, material. (from my notes I’m not sure what her point is here unless it’s to argue for a more encompassing view of research sources and a more realistic view of the actual make-up of library, local history and local archive services). She was also worried about people in the future wanting different things than present day researchers. She thought the draft document is missing the desperate need for leadership to raise awareness amongst the public, especially in the face of politicians. This can’t be done at the local level. She thought there is a good need for enforceable minimum requirements for an archival service in terms of staffing etc that the government should be made to provide.

I agree with all of that.

The third panellist works for a university. She thought the consultation document didn’t fulfil on the university involvement and their existence as both in-house repository and centres for research. She pointed out the lack of references to partnership opportunities in the area of digitisation and other research areas between libraries and IT. Overall she thought the document didn’t carry through on it’s exciting possibilities and made it look like the archive sector is in catch-up mode.

A Q&A session followed during which the following issues came up:

Possible need for new legislation
The fact that getting councils to work together is tricky
Deals with commercial digitisaiton firms can be tricky, particularly in the area of access
The vulnerability of smaller services/offices
The problem that local authorities don’t acknowledging the importance of records management
The problem of getting funding from local and national government
The question re how much support from the TNA can local authority archives expect? 4 advocacy? Nick Kingsley responded to this that the TNA is re-sorting its staff in this area to focus on areas highlighted in the draft.
That the document doesn’t really address the issue of diversityThe importance of training for the future of the profession

Changes to The National Archives

Last week TNA announced a set of proposed changes to their operations and public services. They need to cut costs and save money. Specifically, they want to save £4.2 million by the end of March 2010. A consultation period will last until September, followed by a detailed planning process to be finished by January 2010, allowing the plans to be implemented until March 2010.

Does TNA expect to save £4.2 million in three months? I’m not sure how reasonable or otherwise that is, but what happens after that? Presumably, staff now on reduced hours or in unemployment will be left where they are. The lawns will continue to grow a little longer and the windows to remain a little grubby. Money will still be saved.

The change most likely to generate public debate is the proposed closures to the reading rooms and the reduction of staff. A letter to The Times from Dr Nick Barratt on 4 July is evidence of this. As the comments show, the other hot topic, unsurprisingly, is that of digital versus tangible access. There's nothing like holding an original record but while open reading rooms at Kew allow access for Londoners and those who can visit, electronic access allows records to be used by a much wider audience.

The other striking question seems to be: how necessary is the knowledge of “expert staff” to the public’s understanding of public records? Dr Barrett’s letter states: “Specialist knowledge is gained over years of experience, not delivered through search engines and digital images, and the scandalous treatment of such important staff is nothing short of dumbing down.” I don’t disagree. I do, however, hope TNA’s finding aids are sufficiently well-written to provide the advice and information necessary for most of TNA’s visitors to access, interpret and use the records they’re interested in.

I hope the money saved will go toward such things as wages that stay in line with inflation and the writing down of specialist knowledge into sufficiently detailed finding aids.

No news

I've found nothing to blog about recently. Sigh. The "Archives for the 21st century consultation draft" is waiting to be read, and I'm all signed up for the Society Conference in Bristol next month. Maybe these will provide some fodder for thought and comment.

International Archives Day 2009

What did you do to celebrate International Archives Day? It almost passed me by. But then I read the ICA’s announcement and was intrigued to learn that the Day presented archivists with “a tremendous opportunity to promote the cause of records and archives in their country”. Not for the first time, this made me ponder a number of questions: just what is the "cause" of records and archives? why do they/we need a cause anyway? that is, why describe our profession within a framework of struggle? do I have a cause and, if so, what am I willing to sacrifice for it?

A healthy democracy, the protection of human rights and the guardianship of memory and identity - these are the obvious contenters for an archival cause. They are good causes. But, are they the real end goal? I think the answer to that is yes, to the majority of us and at the moment at least.

If we adopt these causes we can boldly proclaim, along with a slightly mis-quoted George Washington: “Our cause is noble; it is the cause of humankind!”

As long as these things are seen as desirable, they will be worth fighting for. Because having a cause implies having something to struggle against. This is a depressing thought. My career, seen from this view, is dedicated to resisting human selfishness and stupidity. And, in part, to documenting and preserving the evidence of its effects.

The dibrary

This article from The Korea Times introduces Seoul’s new National Digital Library. Claiming to be the first such repository in the world, the new 8-story building will offer only digital content to users via a stunning number of computer terminals, laptops and televisions. Patrons can access existing digital information, or use the video and audio recording studios available at the library to create and edit their own digital content and add it to the internet. The building has special facilities to welcome people with disabilities and a zone specifically designed to allow foreign visitors a favourable experience.

This all sounds amazing and I would love to go see it. But, I think I’m missing something. Isn’t the point of digital content that you can access it anywhere? At home for example, in your pyjamas, at midnight? Doesn’t digital access free you from the physical space of the library? Isn’t this a good thing? Why build, or visit, a library whose main holdings can be accessed from the comfort of your own home? (And yes, I know that some material can’t be made available over the web due to IPR and other reasons, but my line of reasoning remains).

More to the point, why spend what must amount to huge amounts of money to do this? My experience of libraries is that there's never enough money to pay for new acquisitions, decent pay, enough staff to retrieve and re-shelve material, extra opening hours, cataloguing backlogs, etc. Not to mention the expanding costs of creating and preserving digital material itself. Running a national library is an expensive undertaking.

Surely there are better areas where this money could be directed? And if you have the space to build a new building, why devote it entirely to digital stuff?

I believe The British Library has plans for a dilibrary (as the article in the Korea Times labelled it). According to the minutes, available on the BL webpages, a proposal was considered by the Library Board when it met in May.

I’m interested to see how successful the Seoul library is. Although sceptical about its use value, and suspecting the money could’ve been directed toward other, more deserving areas, I do hope it encourages people to visit the, or a, library, whether in person or on-line.

National something week

It's National Library Week in the US. This made me ask: does the UK have a similar thing? A Google search led me to the National Literacy Trust and their reading events calendar. Every month is covered. No National Library Week but some good looking events. I've missed the Day for April - International Children's Book Day - but all of May is National Share a Story Month. This sounds great. I love stories. I was thus disappointed to see that this seems solely aimed at children. Surely the "power of story" is something that can be appreciated by people of all ages. In fact, earlier this year I went to a performance put on by the Crick Crack Club, who carry on the tradition of storytelling for audiences of different ages. (Think I must have unknowingly participated in National Storytelling Week, which is in February).

The UK may not have a National Library Week, or at best a badly publicised one, but storytelling is alive and well here. The aforementioned National Storytelling Week is connected with the Society for Story Telling. If you're in London there's the London Centre for International Storytelling. These people currently have an HLF grant "to archive and document live recordings of public storytelling by professional performers". The on-line search they've set up is easy to use and gives lots of information. The Archive includes stories from all over the world and on many different subjects.

I'm convinced other countries have events similar to National Library Week. Finding out would involve a more dedicated search than I'm willing to do.

Dreaming in colour

I've been watching Japanese movies lately and as a consequence have been dreaming in anime. Disturbing? Yes, I think so. It's much nicer though then dreaming of numbering boxes or counting files, which it's not uncommon for me to do.

2nd Jenkinson Lecture

Last Thursday I attended the 2nd Jenkinson Lecture organised by UCL. Professor Eric Ketelaar gave a paper entitled Archival Identities which addressed this topic using the records of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia as a reference point, or case study.

It was a pleasure to hear Dr Ketelaar talk. His paper was well presented, easy to listen to and follow, and interesting. It looked, in turn, at meaning, truth, memories, histories, identities, and the proposition of a living archive. Throughout I had the impression of dynamic relationships between records, the reason(s) for their creation or gathering, and their use and re-use.

Dr Ketelaar’s approach allows that records are subject to active re-interpretation. The meaning of a record can be different for individuals and groups depending upon the purpose and context of its creation and re-examination. Different types of truth and different ownerships of truth can be attached to records and can influence memory and identity. Records shape the memories of individuals and collective groups through shared communication. Archives present the evidence of the past but also allow histories to be constructed by people with different interpretations, experiences and purposes. Dr Ketelaar finished with the concept of a living archive - an archive that is used and examined, re-used, re-interpreted, discussed, pondered upon and has meaning(s) added to it through this activity.

The sorry case of the Guantanamo case files

It’s all about government records over there in North America. New President Obama’s blackberry and tech-savvy white house staff are filling the news. So too is his prompt executive order on Presidential Records, a thumbs up to the public’s right to know and a warning for future wannabe megalomaniacal, secretive, vice presidents. Obama also announced that Guantanamo will be closed. Here too, government records are of primary interest, as an article from the Washington Post shows.

The article, Guantanamo Case Files in Disarray, describes a confused state of affairs as to the discoverability of comprehensive case files on individuals detained at Guantanamo. Officials have reportedly found that files are incomplete, physically and virtually spread between offices, don't contain the right sort of information, and that the responsibility for creating and maintaining them is shared by several departments who, by the way, don’t talk to each other. This is only sort of denied by members of the CIA and Defence Department. To me this raises the question: what role did Guantanamo Officials perceive for the case files they were creating?

This is a very serious concern. Was Guantanamo set up to collect evidence from suspected terrorists so that these individuals could be brought to trial? In this scenario the case files they compiled would be of the utmost importance. They would hold the data that would allow the US government, presumably, to thwart future terrorist acts and (leaving aside for the moment the problematic (non-)reliability of evidence obtained under duress) to legally prosecute those responsible.

The WP’s article reports that “former Bush administration officials…said that…the Bush administration’s focus on detention and interrogation made preparation of viable prosecutions a far lower priority”. Detention and interrogation for their own sake overshadowed the creation and accumulation of documentary evidence that could be used to safeguard the country? What went wrong here? I’m alarmed that the US government not only felt able to have such a poor attitude toward the creation of these case files, but also that they’ve gotten away with it.