On the broad problem of sustaining audio, video, and text forms stored on digital platforms, Cohen and Rosenzweig list durability and inaccessibility and state that digital materials are notoriously fragile and require special attention to withstand changing technologies and user demands. In other words, it costs money and constant attention to produce, and continue to deliver digital media over time. If an effort to maintain a digital site is not undertaken, technology or procedural change may easily make that site inaccessible. Accessibility can also be impacted by market forces. Commercial operators can gain ownership of data and place that data behind a paywall, or limit access to it entirely through the action of perceived market advantage.
Cohen and Rosenzweig also note that with the use of world wide web come problems of quality and authenticity and that one, “…can find plenty of inaccurate history on the web”. Further, they argue that the technical capabilities of digital media provide forgers or the unscrupulous with an easier and cheaper means of production and delivery.
Mat Honan learned the hard way about the durability, accessibility, quality, and authenticity of his digital media, he got hacked. His stored material was modified or destroyed, although he was able to save about 75% of it. He learned from the experience and advocates for online, off-line, and off-site backups of material, stronger access security methods, and an awareness that ultimately the security of a hosted platform is not fully in the owners’ control. Again, an argument that long-term maintenance of a digital site requires thought, effort, and cost.
Jennifer Howard argued those using digital media need to do so with an eye towards long term archival strategy. Without such a strategy, digital media will disappear into inaccessibility. For Ms. Howard, libraries and digital media centers need to play a role in the long-term storage of digital production, “if it is going to be around to be of use and influence”. In Augustine’s case, his autobiography would not be with us if many librarians of the ancient world and medieval worlds hadn’t preserved copies in libraries and archives. To survive in the long run, digital media may need similar care.
Safiya Noble is disturbed and offended by the lack of hierarchical control in digital media and networks. She argued that that the ability to produce and deliver unregulated speech helps to maintain and perpetuate racial and sexual stereotypes with uneducated or unsuspecting audiences. She advocates for government regulation of digital media content providers like Google. Ms. Noble’s concerns on group stereotyping and the licentiousness of some web content are valid. Whether the appropriate path is for the imposition of some form of censorship, controlled by the government as she advocates is not at all clear. The first question would be, which government? Ultimately, Ms. Noble’s concern, like the other authors is one of the quality and accuracy of the material. My thought is that in free market societies, the selections made by libraries or digital centers will determine the long-term survivability of historical materials on digital media. In societies not governed by the free market, political or ideological concerns will create the criteria, and funding, for preservation.
