In 1945 Vannevar Bush developed the idea that one day all human knowledge would be available through a desk like mechanism – A Memex. This idea from 1945 is a close estimation of today’s reality of the Internet. Bush’s concept was one of the leading factors in the development of the Internet; key scientists such as J.C.R. Licklider sketched the structure for a vast network of information to form the basis of the library of the future.

If every computer in the world were connected to the Internet at the same time then we would have something that resembles global memory. Access to every computer without restriction would allow access to a mass of information that would be impossible to disseminate within our own lifetime. We would have access to individual thoughts and opinions, journals, scientific research, and a mass of media files including midis, wav’s, mp3’s, movies and all sorts of images, we would also have access to organised and searchable archives of information that provide a stricter representation of what global memory could be considered as.

Developed with a goal of improved access and enhanced preservation, archives of digital formats exist that could be considered as global memory. These archives of digital formats range from text documents to images, to movies and sound files. The information could be of great academic importance and interest. Making such information available to everyone with access to the Internet fosters creative growth among others and not just those fortunate to have access to it in institutions. Such archives include the Corpus Vitrearum Medii Aevi, a project focusing on the publication of stained glass; they could include art resources such as SCRAN, or collections of newspapers such as the daily archiving of papers at the guardian website. Not all archives hold academic value.

A feature of memory is that it can constantly be accessed and queried, should archives that are digital but cannot be accessed online be considered part of global memory? Even though these archives contribute to global memory, they do not function in the same way as the archives previously mentioned.

Non-academic contributions to global memory that represent cultural artefacts include web forums, web blogs, and web sites. Web blogs represent individual’s personal beliefs but can also form part of a literary project or record important information and views on world topics. Personal websites can feature such blogs but can also feature access to files, works created by the author, even the website programming could be considered an intelligent work that warrants preservation.

The list of digital cultural artefacts that some consider to warrant preservation is extensive. While the creator of a web site may not give a second thought about deleting it and replacing it with another, others believe they need saving – projects such as the wayback machine have been archiving websites since 1996. On the same note, the cultural artefacts some consider aren’t worth saving can be discarded without a second thought by anyone – for example, what would warrant the saving of the Times newspaper over the Sun newspaper, or the Daily Star. Both offer a cultural snapshot of a particular moment in history, and for that both warrant saving, along with other such tabloids and broadsheets.

The idea of all human knowledge being available through a single desktop mechanism is clearly a possibility. A percentage of human knowledge exists on the Internet either in its entirety, partially or as a reference to another resource. However there is a lot of other information that could equally be described as irrelevant at any one point as it is useful at another. Some information available is also misleading or incorrect Broers (2005) states the importance of teaching individuals to be intelligent critics so that they can use information correctly. Currently there exists the dissemination of disinformation and misinformation which whether such information was created on purpose or accidentally could be considered a misuse of the Internet.

Vaughn (2005) looks at the problems involved with the book. He describes the book as inflexible, once printed it cannot be changed, only refuted. The importance for archiving is clear, scientific facts that have been discovered are important because they provide the basis for many of today’s technologies and future discoveries, history and culture is important because it describes who we are as a group; individually, and how we have arrived at this current point in time. Revision however is paramount; the Internet provides a method to allow flexibility and revision.

The collection and storage of digital resources such as websites goes back to the idea of keeping knowledge within books. He describes the book as an agent of inflexible ideologies that have caused such misery in mankind. The storage of everything on the web in projects such as the wayback machine means the disinformation and misinformation described by Broers is stored with it, in the same way it is stored in the book.

If the websites featuring disinformation and misinformation are eventually removed then it is no loss to global memory or culture. Should they be revised and kept updated however with the correct information and facts then the use of the Internet for the world’s knowledge and used by everyone without the fear of being misled becomes a more viable possibility.

References

http://www.archive.org/web/web.php - accessed June 12th 2005

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/reith2005/lectures.shtml#lecture1 - accessed June 12th 2005

Jacobs, J. A. Humphrey, C. Preserving Research Data. Communications of the ACM, 47(9), September 2004, pp27-29

http://oldeee.see.ed.ac.uk/online/internaut/internaut-01/comm.html - accessed June 12th 2005

Rosenbloom, A. The Blogosphere: Introduction. Communications of the ACM, 47(12), December 2004, pp30-33

Vaughn, W. History of Art in the Digital Age. Problems and Possibilities, 2005

Nardi, B. A. Schiano, D. J. Gumbrecht, M. Swartz, L. Why We Blog. Communications of the ACM, 47(12), December 2004, pp41-46