The Meaning of Open Access in a Digital Environment

IS-431: Archives, Records and Memory

Fall 2015

Abstract
Records are documents, or materials, that serve as evidence for past cultures and/or actions.
Nowadays, both the records themselves and the archives that hold them could potentially be
digitalized, and they could be put on open access. Open access has a lot of benefits, as well
as dangers, especially with the rise of digital technologies. Archivists have to think
carefully about the dangers and benefits of releasing records, including sensitive ones, into
the digital environment. Open access, its benefits, its limitations, and its dangers, will have
to be defined within the context of a digital world. This paper explores the controversies
that can result from putting a record on open access, such as the case of the Dead Sea
Scrolls. It then explains the dangers that are associated with digital technologies by
describing recent cases of security hacks and document leaks. The paper then analyzes the
controversy revolving around Edward Snowdens NSA leak, which demonstrates how
keeping certain sensitive records secret might not be the best solution all the times, but
arbitrarily releasing records is not the right answer, either. After analyzing the benefits and
damage that Snowdens leak had done, the paper moves on to analyze issues relating to
indigenous records, and what the term open access may really mean for indigenous
groups, and how open access can benefit and harm indigenous groups in various ways.

In the past, sharing a record would be very time consuming. A record would have to
be physically moved around, which might take hours or even months before it could reach
its destination. With the rise of electronic records and digital technologies, such as emails
and the Internet, records can now be easily and quickly shared. This facilitates open access
of information, as well as the digitalization of archives and records. Thus, some had argued
that the public should have open and easy access to records the government and other
institutions keep, which, theoretically, should not be a problem with todays technologies.
Indeed, open access and digital technologies have a lot of potential and benefits that should
be explored. However, open access is a term that is often misconstrued by many people.
While keeping the records closed to the public is not the best course of action all the times,
allowing open access to records, especially sensitive ones, and releasing them to the digital
environment can also be problematic, and even dangerous. The recent Edward Snowden
affair demonstrated both the dangers and benefits of digital technologies, and raised
questions about how much access should be allowed for sensitive materials, be they top
secret documents or cultural materials. In order to understand the issues regarding open
access and releasing sensitive records in the digital age, we will need to take a look at
several cases, including the Edward Snowden affair, as well as the issues relating to records
of indigenous groups.
When certain records are released to the public, they would most likely gain a lot of
attention from many groups, including the public and scholars. Records such as the Dead
Sea Scrolls, for example, stirred up a huge storm of controversy and received a great deal of
publicity when their access restrictions were lifted, and they became the focus of many

debates.1 One can wonder how the simple act of releasing the scrolls can cause such a huge
storm, but there is no simple answer. One the one hand, due to the historical value of the
scrolls, they became valuable research materials for many scholars, especially now that
their access restrictions had been removed. Holding back the scrolls release would also
violate the spirit of intellectual freedom and open access.2 On the other hand, there are
groups that want to keep access to the scrolls restricted for various reasons, such as the
murky status of the scrolls ownership, the risk of violating ownership rights, and so on.3
The case of the Dead Sea Scrolls is still very relevant to todays archival world, because
archivists will have to deal with sensitive materials and the question of access eventually,
which has become even more complicated with emerging digital technologies. With the
development of advanced digital and networking technologies, the concept of open access,
its benefits, its limitations, as well as its dangers, will have to be analyzed and defined
within the context of a networked digital environment.
Open access is a term that had become very prominent, especially in todays digital
world. Yet, at the same time, despite its prominence, many are not aware of the limitations
and problems behind open access. If we are to take it at face value, open access just simply
means that anyone can have access to certain information or records, without any kind of
restriction. Open access is much easier to achieve nowadays than it was in the past, due to
the rise in digital and networking technologies. All it takes is uploading a record to the
Internet, and theoretically, anyone with Internet access would be able to access that
1

2
3

Sara S. Hodson, Freeing the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Question of Access, The
American Archivist 56.4 (1993): 690.
Ibid., 693.
Ibid., 698.

document. However, the tradeoff is that unauthorized personnel can also easily get their
hands on these records and tamper with them. Any digital systems could be compromised
or hacked, leading to document leaks, or worse, the destruction of electronic records.
Despite these tradeoffs, digital technologies are not going away any time soon, and many
people would still be using emails and the Internet due to how convenient they are. The
Internet, in particular, has been so integrated into our lives and so useful, particularly for
information retrieval tasks, that removing it would not be possible. There is no denying that
digital technologies have made records much more accessible, but even then, it does not
mean that everyone should be able to access them, due to various reasons, such as
maintaining security and privacy, which has become increasingly difficult today.
Releasing records to the public nowadays can be very dangerous and can put certain
operations at risk, especially when these records can be easily recreated and shared with
digital technologies. Protecting the privacy of someone and sensitive information can be
rather challenging today.4 Someone could easily post a top secret and highly sensitive
report to anonymous websites, such as 4chan, where practically anyone with Internet access
could get their hands on this report, and it would be very difficult to track down those who
downloaded the report.5 The digital environment can, indeed, be a very dangerous place for
any kind of electronic records. Even when access to the records is restricted, there is no
guarantee that they will stay safe when they enter the digital environment.
4

Basic Principles for Managing Intellectual Property in the Digital Environment: An Archival
Perspective, Society of American Archivists, accessed December 07, 2015,
http://www2.archivists.org/statements/basic-principles-for-managing-intellectual-property-in-thedigital-environment-an-archiva.
Simon Sharwood, Junior Defence Staffer on Trial for 'Posting Secret Dossier to 4chan, The
Register, last modified August 6, 2015,
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/06/oz_4chan_classified_leak_trial/

There have been many incidents of cyber-attack in recent years, including a major
hacking operation against America presumably conducted by China, where personal
information of about 20 million people was stolen.6 Due to the massive scale of the attack,
Americas human intelligence capabilities could potentially be hindered for a generation.7
Thus, if even records with restricted access can be exploited and stolen when they are put
into a digital environment, one can only imagine the kind of danger a digital record can
encounter when it is moved to an open access environment. As convenient as digital
records are, they have many risks associated with them, and thus, it is not unusual that
some people prefer to send out and retrieve official documents via physical mails rather
than emails, since they are believed to be more secure and more difficult to track and steal,
even if they do take a longer time to reach their destinations.8 Regardless, many
governments and agencies are still using digital records out of convenience, and of course,
they would have to try their best to keep these documents from falling into the wrong
hands. At the same time, there are also many people who would disagree with the
governments policies regarding access to these records.
For security purposes, many governments and intelligence agencies put some of
their records under the classified category, and limit their access to only qualified
personnel. However, the government could also be doing something with these records that
the population probably will not agree with. Hence, these classified records, as well as
6

7
8

Natasha Bertrand, Effects of China Hack on US, Business Insider, last modified July 11, 2015,
http://www.businessinsider.com/effects-of-china-hack-on-us-2015-7
Ibid.
Amy Webb, Send Letters, Not Emails, last modified June 12, 2013,
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/data_mine_1/2013/06/nsa_surveillance_why_the_post_offi
ce_doesn_t_spy_on_your_mail_the_way_nsa.html

other governmental records, can be used to hold the government accountable for its actions.
Allowing the public to have access to certain governmental records is a way to let the
population know whether the government is properly doing its job, and make sure that the
government does not abuse its power. And yet, there are certain classified records that
should never be released, no matter how much the public demands it, simply because the
time is not right yet. When it comes to digitally releasing classified and sensitive
governmental records to the public, many things will be at stakes.
A case which showcased this was the Edward Snowden affair in 2013, where a
former CIA employee leaked many documents that revealed several surveillance programs
that were run by the NSA and other intelligence agencies. While Snowden was hailed as a
hero by many for revealing the governments surveillance programs, he was also
condemned by the United States government and others for unauthorized sharing of
classified information and theft of government property. The reason this case was so
controversial is probably that while what Snowden did had a lot of merits, he might have
also indirectly put many in harms way through his actions. There is no denying that what
Snowden did was very courageous and in a way, he did a great favor for many people by
exposing what the government was doing behind the scene. Some archivists would approve
of what he was trying to do, but at the same time, these archivists would also frown at his
actions.
Most archivists know that records can be used to hold the government accountable,
and securing these records and allowing as much access to them as possible is a mission

that many archivists strive to do.9 While it is pretty obvious that Snowden violated the law
by disclosing classified documents without authorization, at the same time, he also released
documents that concerned the interests of the public. Namely, the documents relating to the
NSAs large-scale programs designed to survey and track the populations electronic data.10
The case revolving around Edward Snowden and the NSAs surveillance programs is yet
another proof of how digital technologies can be both potentially useful and dangerous at
the same time. Snowden may have not been the first person to bring up that issue, but he
certainly made many people think about the dangers associated with digital technologies.
Raising the awareness of the population is something that most archivists would probably
want to do, and in a sense, Snowden achieved that by digitally leaking the NSA documents.
Sharing thousands of documents associated with the NSA and other agencies so easily is
something that would only be possible with digital technologies, seeing that carrying
thousands of documents around is much more inconvenient than putting them into a thumb
drive.11 At the same time, digital technologies also allow the government to collect private
data of citizens behind their back,12 and now that the secret is out, the government had
potentially damaged the sense of privacy that many citizens treasured. Another important
issue that the Snowden affair raised is the question of access. Specifically, how many secret
documents are the government allowed to keep from the population, who should be allowed

9
10

11

12

Basic Principles.
Josh Barro, Here's Why Edward Snowden Deserves a Long Prison Sentence, Business Insider, last
modified Jan. 6, 2014, http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-why-edward-snowden-needs-a-longprison-sentence-2014-1.
Michael Kirk, Transcript of United States of Secrets, accessed December 08, 2015,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/united-states-of-secrets/transcript.
Ibid.

to handle these documents, and whether sensitive information should be disclosed to the
public through digital methods.
According to the Society of American Archivists, a copyrighted work might be
received by a governmental agency and as a public record must eventually be made
available to the general public interested in how their government is functioning.13 The
public has to know what the government is doing, especially when what it is doing is a
matter that involved the public itself. It is true that there are certain restrictions with the
surveillance documents, but the interest of the public probably comes first in this case,
since no citizen would want their privacy to be violated, especially when it is done by the
government, an entity that should be trusted by the public. One the other side of the
spectrum, the government justified that the loss of some privacy is a tradeoff for the
security of the nation, and as Barack Obama put it, you cant have 100 percent security
and also then have 100 percent privacy.14 James Comey, Director of the FBI, also noted
that the means by which we conduct surveillance through telecommunication carriers and
those Internet service providers who have developed lawful intercept solutions is an
example of government operating in the way the founders intended.15 It seems that the
government knows that collecting private data from citizens is wrong, but at the same time,
some privacy must be sacrificed to ensure security. If we are to interpret Director James
Comeys words literally, the government also seems to be trying to collect data through

13
14
15

Basic Principles.
Kirk, United States of Secrets.
James B. Comey, Going Dark: Are Technology, Privacy, and Public Safety on a Collision Course?
October 16, 2014, accessed Dec 05, 2015, https://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/going-dark-aretechnology-privacy-and-public-safety-on-a-collision-course

legal means as much as possible, not unlike how many archivists would probably have to
keep the law in mind when they are working with sensitive information.
Hence, one can argue that the NSAs surveillance program was ultimately wellintentioned and was designed with the greater good in mind, especially after what happened
during the 9/11 incident as well as other terrorist incidents, but the fact that the NSA was
collecting data on citizens should have never been a secret to begin with.16 The government
could have explained why conducting surveillance on citizens was necessary instead of
keeping everyone in the dark for so long. Therefore, while many people acknowledged that
what Snowden did was illegal, they also acknowledged that citizens have a right to
demand that the government stop undermining privacy rights.17 In other words, by leaking
the NSA documents, Snowden took a stand for patron privacyfor citizen privacy.18 He
was advocating a cause for the sake of the public, to put it in another way. Similar to what
Snowden did, one of the archivists missions is to serve the public interest, and to ensure
that both current and future generations can have access to records concerning the
governments functions. It would not be fair when the government knows so much about
the citizens activities, and yet, citizens do not know much about what the government is
doing due to restricted access to its records, and citizens cannot hold the government
accountable if they do not know what exactly the government is doing behind closed
doors.19 Some of the governments records will have to be declassified eventually, and be
put on open access so that everyone can look back and see whether the government did its
16
17

18
19

Barro, Long Prison Sentence.

Sarah Shik Lamdan, Social Media Privacy: A Rallying Cry to Librarians, The Library Quarterly:
Information, Community, Policy 85.3 (2015): 265.
Ibid.
Kirt, United States of Secrets.

10

job properly. However, the keywords here are public interest and eventually. Perhaps
Snowden had picked the wrong timing to release these documents, and what he released,
while serving the public in a sense, can also potentially damage the public at the same time.
While the government should not have kept the fact that it was collecting data from
its citizens a secret, there were also other sensitive records besides the surveillance
documents that Snowden probably should have never released, or he could have picked a
different occasion. What Snowden did was heroic, but also reckless, because among the
NSA documents, there were many other documents that could potentially hamper a
countrys effort to safeguard its citizens if they were released. Also, many of the documents
that Snowden leaked had nothing to do with Americas privacy issues, and thus, would not
really be serving the interests of the American public even if he leaked them.20 In a speech
regarding the NSA surveillance, Barack Obama said that if any individual who objects to
government policy can take it into their own hands to publicly disclose classified
information, then we will not be able to keep our people safe, or conduct foreign policy. 21
At the same time, Obama also acknowledged that the American government being able to
collect so much data from citizens can potentially lead to abuse.22 And yet, the government
still has to keep certain things secret because of how easy it is for data to be stolen in the
digital environment, if the recent security hacks and leaks following the Edward Snowden
affair are any indication. In a sense, the American governments decision to keep certain
things secret is not so different from what archivists have to deal with today. Namely, the
20
21

22

Barro, Long Prison Sentence.

Transcript of President Obama's Speech on NSA Reforms, NPR, last modified January 17, 2014,
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/01/17/263480199/transcript-of-president-obamasspeech-on-nsa-reforms.
Ibid.

11

question of whether a record should be put on open access or not. Some records just have to
stay buried and hidden for the moment, because otherwise, there can be long lasting
consequences. And indeed, Edward Snowdens leaks will no doubt have long-term
consequences that will not be fixed any time soon.
When Snowden was leaking the NSA documents, the documents that he disclosed
were supposedly also obtained and decrypted by China and Russia.23 Because of this,
several western intelligence agencies had to halt their operations, and the UK was also
forced to pull some of its agents out of hostile countries.24 The documents that Edward
Snowden leaked might have allowed foreign nations to identify potential American and
British agents who were operating within hostile countries, as well as hacking operations
conducted in countries such as North Korea and Iran.25 Hence, by leaking these documents,
Edward Snowden also potentially exposed the identities of several agents, and while no
harm had been done to them,26 it would still be dangerous for them to stay in the countries
that they were operating in. It is quite ironic that while Snowden was advocating for
privacy of American citizens, at the same time, he was also exposing a lot of private
secrets, such as the identities of intelligence agents. It is still unclear what the extent of the
damage was, and whether Snowden leaked these documents to China and Russia
voluntarily,27 but what Snowden did still had the potential to ruin many intelligence
23

24
25

26
27

Michal B. Kelley, Snowden, Russia, China, and NSA Files, Business Insider, last modified June
13, 2015, http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-russia-china-and-nsa-files-2015-6.
Ibid.
Michal B. Kelley, We Now Know A Lot More about Edward Snowden's Epic Heist, Business
Insider, last modified August 17, 2014, http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-russia-china-andnsa-files-2015-6.
Kelley, Snowden, Russia, China.
Snowden Files 'Read by Russia and China': Five Questions for UK Government, The Guardian,
last modified June 14, 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/14/snowden-files-readby-russia-and-china-five-questions-for-uk-government.

12

operations and put intelligence agents into harms way. The government kept the identities
and certain records of its agents secret in order to protect them, as well as their operations.
Some of the documents Snowden leaked had nothing to do with issues relating to civil
liberties in America, and thus, it is not hard to see why Snowden was hailed as a hero by
many, but also condemned as a traitor by many others.
The reason that Snowden was condemned by some people was not necessarily the
records that he was leaking, although leaking classified documents is a major crime itself.
Rather, the manner in which he leaked these documents was the reason a lot of people
condemned Snowden, and indeed, many archivists probably would not approve of his
actions, either. Archivists would need to consult and collaborate with each other and other
concerned parties, including record creators, before releasing certain records to the public.28
However, Snowden was mostly acting on his own, and did not consult with anyone about
the records he obtained. Due to the huge amount of documents he obtained, Snowden did
not exactly know which documents should be released to the public, so he instead decided
to let the journalists and editors whom he collaborated with decide which documents will
be published.29 Considering the kind of documents he was working with, it was probably
not wise to approach anyone about it, and even if he does approach someone, journalists
and editors are probably not the most qualified people to decide which documents will be
released.30 At the very least, he should have collaborated with these journalists to decide
28

29

30

SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics, Society of American Archivists, accessed
December 07, 2015, http://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-ofethics.
Zachary Keck, Yes, Edward Snowden Is a Traitor, The Diplomat, last modified December 21,
2013, http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/yes-edward-snowden-is-a-traitor/.
Ibid.

13

whether to release certain documents or not, instead of leaving them to their own devices.
Plus, with todays social media and the Internet, the articles that these journalists published,
along with the classified records, will spread at a rapid rate, and they will fall into the
wrong hands eventually. Leaving people to their own devices can be a bad idea in the
archival world, since many people will have conflicting interests, and archivists need to
work together with these people to decide the best course of action and try to create a
compromise that benefits as many people as possible. Thus, while Snowden was a very
brave man, and his actions still have a lot of merits to them, some of his leaks did not
benefit the American public in any way, and also indirectly hampered the intelligence
efforts of some countries.
Regardless of whether Edward Snowden was a hero or a traitor, the damage had
already been done, and its impact can clearly be seen. It is not clear who is in the right here,
because both the government and Edward Snowden had valid reasons for keeping certain
records secrets and releasing sensitive information, respectively. Much like the Dead Sea
Scrolls case, the Edward Snowden affair brings up questions relating to access of records,
even though the Edward Snowden affair is much bigger in scale than the Dead Sea Scrolls
case. The Snowden affair will be relevant to the archival world for a long time, especially
now that digital technologies have become very integrated into many peoples lives,
because archivists will have to adjust to these technologies and their downsides, and
continue to deal with the question of access. Simply keeping records secret might not be the
right answer all the times, but arbitrarily putting them on open access would be dangerous
and problematic as well, especially sensitive records like governments and intelligence

14

agencies records. Of course, sensitive records do not just include secret documents the
government might want to keep from the population, but also culturally sensitive records.
Much like the Snowden affair, open access of culturally sensitive records has to be
redefined within the context of the digital world, and we have to keep the indigenous
population, such as Native Americans, in our mind as well.
In some countries, such as the United States, the Internet has become such a
prominent part in the populations daily lives that many simply take it for granted.
However, out of 7.2 billion people in the world, over 4 billion people do not have access to
such technology. This means that roughly 60 percent of the worlds population does not
have access to the Internet.31 Thus, while open access technically means that anyone can
have access to information, in the context of the Internet, a large majority of the world does
not have access to it, meaning they have no way to access the information that has been put
on the Web. In the context of the digital world, the term open access itself only really
applies to those who have access to the Internet in the first place. While being able to
access a document anywhere and anytime is a nice thing, we have to be aware that not all
people have access to the technology that allows them to navigate and access information
on the Internet. Even in developed nations like the United States, access to the Internet is
often limited for certain ethnic groups. This is certainly true for many tribal groups in the
United States and other countries.

31

Roberto A. Ferdman, 4.4 billion people around the world still dont have Internet. Heres where
they live, The Washington Post, October 2, 2014, accessed November 27, 2015,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/02/4-4-billion-people-around-the-worldstill-dont-have-internet-heres-where-they-live/

15

Indigenous people are probably one of the most underrepresented and

misrepresented groups in the world of records and archives. Not only that, their access to
digital technologies is severely limited, sometimes even nonexistent. In the United States, a
major part of the country is connected to the Internet, and generally, many people do not
have any problems with access to the Internet. However, many Native American
reservations are often located in remote areas, which often do not have Internet services or
even cell phone connection. In some cases, a resident of a reservation would have to drive
30 miles just so that he can get online access.32 Some residents do not even have electricity,
laptops, or computers, since they are unavailable in the area or simply because the residents
cannot afford them.33 About less than 10 percent of homes on tribal lands have access to
broadband Internet service,34 which demonstrates how isolated Native Americans are
compared to the rest of Americas population. Hence, when we talk about open access,
we need to think about the implications behind it, especially when indigenous and tribal
people are involved, since many of them are isolated from the technologies that many take
for granted.
Open access of cultural materials can have many benefits for tribal groups. After all,
when certain records or documents are visible on the Internet, it would mean that the
groups that owned or created them will be more visible, and being more visible might help
these groups deal with issues of misrepresentation and underrepresentation. While it is true
that open access can improve visibility, there are still many issues that have to be dealt
32

33
34

Gerry Smith, On Tribal Lands, Digital Divide Brings New Form Of Isolation, The HuffingtonPost,
April 20, 2012, accessed November 27, 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/20/digitaldivide-tribal-lands_n_1403046.html
Ibid.
Ibid.

16

with. If we put records and artifacts belonging or related to Native Americans on the
Internet, many people would be able to view them. However, since many Native American
reservations still do not have connection to the Internet, they will not be able to view
records that are related to them or belong to them in the first place. While a tribe can obtain
a record in its physical form, there is also no guarantee that an institution will return a
record back to a tribe, so there is no choice but to obtain a digital copy or view it on the
Internet, which is not an option if the tribe does not have the technology to access it in the
first place. Hence, in a sense, by allowing open access of certain tribal records by putting
them on the Internet, an institution could be indirectly marginalizing and isolating the tribe,
because other ethnic groups with access to Internet could view the records, but the tribes
could not view the records that are rightfully theirs. Also, just because a record is visible on
the Internet does not mean that it can improve visibility for a group in a good way.
When a record is posted on the Internet, it is very likely that some of the contexts of
the original record will be lost. If culturally sensitive records are released to the digital
world without presenting any sufficient context,35 misinterpretations will surely happen.
Much like sensitive governmental records, culturally sensitive records can be exploited,
especially if secret information of a tribe is put on open access, and released to the
Internet. The Internet can spread information very quickly, but it can also spread
misinformation with relative ease as well. Protecting the secret information of a tribe,
much like protecting intelligence agencies records, can be a matter of national security
for tribal groups.36 Thus, if tribal records are digitalized or released without asking for
35

36

Protocols for Native American Archival Materials, First Archivist Circle, accessed December 10,
2015, http://www2.nau.edu/libnap-p/protocols.html.
Ibid.

17

permission or input from a tribe, which might not even allow its records to be released, it
might create resentment between many parties and make cooperation in the future more
difficult. Thus, before digitalizing a cultural archive and making it open access, we need to
consider the culture that we are dealing with. When we digitalize a culture, we have to try
to do so in a way that would be responsible, respectful, and politically meaningful.37
There are ways to digitalize culturally sensitive records in a respectful manner, and
still allowing some amount of access. All of that is possible through digital technologies, as
the Plateau Peoples Web Portal demonstrates.38 This project allows tribal groups to decide
whether certain records are open access or restricted, and is an example that shows how
modern technologies can be integrated with a tribes cultural beliefs to create a digital
archive that strikes the balance between open access and respecting the tribes culture.39
There is still much work to be done, however, because as aforementioned, many tribes still
do not have access to technologies that can help them benefit from this project, but this
topic is beyond the scope of this paper. In any cases, archivists should not disregard digital
technologies, but rather, they have to discover the full potential of technologies to continue
preserving the cultural records. Archivists also have the obligation to limit restrictions and
maximize access, in order to preserve cultural heritage. They also have to compromise and
maximize the benefits for as many people as possible. This is certainly the case when they
have to deal with culturally sensitive materials, as well as governmental records, since there

37

Timothy B. Powell, Digitizing Cherokee Culture: Libraries, Students, and the

Reservation, MELUS 30.2 (2005): 87.

38

Kimberly Christen, Opening Archives: Respectful Repatriation,

American Archivist (Spring 2011): 205.

39

Ibid.

18

often will be many interested parties that will either benefit or suffer from the restrictions,
and in some cases, releases, of these records.
Digital technologies have brought many wonders, and also terrors, to humanity.
Through digital technologies, open access and sharing of records are much easier than
before. However, the tradeoff is that digital technologies can also be exploited, and
sensitive records put on open access can be dangerous. The Edward Snowden affair
demonstrated the dangers as well as benefits of digital technologies, as well as the
consequences of the release of sensitive materials. Nevertheless, digital technologies still
have a lot of potential and benefits that should be explored, such as helping promoting the
visibility of underrepresented groups, and so on. Archivists will have to integrate digital
technologies into their methods, but they also have to understand the dangers and
limitations associated with them, so that they can decide whether sensitive records should
be digitally released to the world or not. Open access in the digital world has many
promising aspects, but before digitally putting something on open access, one should
probably consider what the consequences will be, and whether the benefits are worth
risking irreparable damage that will be caused by releasing records.

19

Bibliography
Barro, Josh. Here's Why Edward Snowden Deserves a Long Prison Sentence. Business
Insider. Last modified Jan. 6, 2014. http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-whyedward-snowden-needs-a-long-prison-sentence-2014-1.
Bertrand, Natasha. Effects of China Hack on US. Business Insider. Last modified July 11,
2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/effects-of-china-hack-on-us-2015-7
Christen, Kimberly. Opening Archives: Respectful Repatriation. American Archivist
(Spring 2011): 185-210.
Comey, James B. Going Dark: Are Technology, Privacy, and Public Safety on a Collision
Course? October 16, 2014, accessed Dec 05, 2015,
https://www.fbi.gov/news/speeches/going-dark-are-technology-privacy-and-publicsafety-on-a-collision-course.
Ferdman, Roberto A. 4.4 billion people around the world still dont have Internet. Heres
where they live. The Washington Post. October 2, 2014. Accessed November 27,
2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/10/02/4-4-billionpeople-around-the-world-still-dont-have-internet-heres-where-they-live/
First Archivist Circle. Protocols for Native American Archival Materials. Accessed
December 10, 2015. http://www2.nau.edu/libnap-p/protocols.html.
Hodson, Sara S. Freeing the Dead Sea Scrolls: A Question of Access. The American
Archivist 56.4 (1993): 690-703.
Keck, Zachary. Yes, Edward Snowden Is a Traitor. The Diplomat. Last modified
December 21, 2013. http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/yes-edward-snowden-is-atraitor/.
Kelley, Michael B. Snowden, Russia, China, and NSA Files. Business Insider. Last
modified June 13, 2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-russia-china-andnsa-files-2015-6.
.We Now Know A Lot More about Edward Snowden's Epic Heist. Business Insider.
Last modified August 17, 2014. http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-russiachina-and-nsa-files-2015-6.
Kirk, Michael. Transcript of United States of Secrets. Accessed December 08, 2015.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/united-states-of-secrets/transcript.

20

Lamdan, Sarah Shik. Social Media Privacy: A Rallying Cry to Librarians. The Library
Quarterly: Information, Community, Policy 85.3 (2015): 261-277.
NPR. Transcript of President Obama's Speech on NSA Reforms. Last modified January
17, 2014.
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2014/01/17/263480199/transcript-ofpresident-obamas-speech-on-nsa-reforms.
Powell Timothy B. Digitizing Cherokee Culture: Libraries, Students, and the
Reservation. MELUS 30.2 (2005): 79-98.
Sharwood, Simon. Junior Defence Staffer on Trial for 'Posting Secret Dossier to 4chan.
The Register. Last modified August 6, 2015.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/08/06/oz_4chan_classified_leak_trial/
Smith, Gerry. On Tribal Lands, Digital Divide Brings New Form Of Isolation. The
Huffington Post, April 20, 2012. Accessed November 27, 2015.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/20/digital-divide-triballands_n_1403046.html
Society of American Archivists. Basic Principles for Managing Intellectual Property in the
Digital Environment: An Archival Perspective. Accessed December 07, 2015.
http://www2.archivists.org/statements/basic-principles-for-managing-intellectualproperty-in-the-digital-environment-an-archiva
. SAA Core Values Statement and Code of Ethics. Accessed December 07, 2015.
http://www2.archivists.org/statements/saa-core-values-statement-and-code-ofethics
The Guardian. Snowden Files 'Read by Russia and China': Five Questions for UK
Government. Last modified June 14, 2015. http://www.theguardian.com/usnews/2015/jun/14/snowden-files-read-by-russia-and-china-five-questions-for-ukgovernment.
Webb, Amy. Send Letters, Not Emails. Last modified June 12, 2013.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/data_mine_1/2013/06/nsa_surveillance_w
hy_the_post_office_doesn_t_spy_on_your_mail_the_way_nsa.html