Given all of the talk recently on this listserv regarding web 2.0 and
its impact on records management, I thought this article from the
December 23, 2008 issue of The Nation might be of interest. It describes
potential plans and ideas regarding transforming the social networking
structures set up by the Obama campaign into tools for advocacy,
transparency, and governance:

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090112/melber

The public records implications of this are fascinating. For example,
who would "own" these systems? Could the Obama administration run into
similar controversies as experienced by the Bush administration when
they utilized RNC servers for e-mail? Note how similar questions arise
from completely opposite ends of the issues of transparency and
accountability (BTW, I would not at all be surprised that Obama does not
want to utilize a Blackberry because of similar concerns about pubic
access that the Bush administration's use of RNC servers seemed to
reflect). How would one apply retention, and is retention an outmoded
concept in the web 2.0 world? The recent discussion regarding registry
systems failed to mention a particular type of registry file which
circulated, accumulated, and logged documents related to a given matter
until the matter was closed, at which point the file would, in many
cases, literally be tied up and included in a central repository. Given
the potential for literally millions of ideas, discussions, etc...
occurring in such a social networking structure, would a record series
based retention concept work, or would it quickly be overwhelmed by too
many or too few buckets? Or are we looking at, essentially, the
equivalent of electronic "registry" threads, in which the matters
discussed would ultimately determine varied retentions to be applied
upon "closure"? Who would determine closure? How else could one apply
traditional retention values to such a system? Do goals of transparency
and accountability shorten or lengthen retentions, or do they have any
impact at all? Among the recent discussions here are the dangers of
blogging and other web based activities impacting future employment
prospects. Currently, most such systems assume no responsibility on the
part of service providers to weed content, embarrassing or otherwise.
How about Obama for America 2.0? Would a similar policy be appropriate?
Would people participating in such a system even be aware that it might
be subject to public records requirements (if, in fact, it is)? Would it
be appropriate for users to set retention, in a manner similar to how
many ERM systems operate by selecting various retention options? Would
there be legal liability on the part of the user in such a scenario of
that user choose "wrong"?

Simply put, the potential scale of this endeavor exceeds anything I am
aware of that could possibly be subject to public records requirements,
primarily because it promises to be such a wide open system. Will that
be recognized by those managing the network? Or will it operate as an
independent entity not subject to those rules, and if it does, to what
extent does that undermine the promise of transparency? Will
transparency or accountability become a "fifth" retention value: ie, how
will this retention impact our stakeholders need to know? Or, do
operational and historical values (centered around somewhat different
stakeholder perspectives) suffice?

One final question: Isn't records management interesting?!!

Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution and Stores
(FREDS)
1620 S.E. 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
Phone: (503)988-3741
Fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]