Cultural Memory in Danger: Sustainable Information, Preservation, and Technology in the Humanities: A Theoretical Approach. (2024)

Introduction

Collaboration is a vital component connecting the extensive arrayof technical functions and patron services in information organizations.Such operations as interlibrary loan have generally democratized accessto resources regardless of institution, even expanding borrowingprivileges to selective content in special collections and archives. (1)

Materials processing has been significantly enhanced by OCLCWorldCat MARC records (including OAIster open access records). (2) Thevast repository of metadata and cataloging records has generated moreefficient and consistent workflows in technical services departments,expediting access to new content for patrons.

The formation of, and participation in consortia offer considerablevalue to libraries--with services including negotiating favorablepurchasing deals, spearheading shared print and digital preservationprojects, and granting access to immense repositories of content.Harnessing the power of multiple libraries and information organizationselicits strategic directions for guidance in the contemporaryinformation environment.

Among institutions formally or informally united by utilization ofthe same integrated library system, shared system queries via the cloudand LISTSERVs provide invaluable advice and training for librarians. Ina larger scope, library literature documenting case studies and researchempower librarians to apply practical solutions to issues encountered inthe profession. Reliance upon group assistance occurs in innumerableways to strengthen the versatility of academic libraries.

Just as collaboration can prove beneficial, it can also induceadverse side effects, inimical to the sustainability of informationorganizations. Oversight risks damaging consequences, and requires aholistic assessment of the network connection to identify problematicfunctions. As information organizations continue to expand in thedigital environment, it is critical to ask, "Is the networkconnection empowering or hindering research in the humanities?" Itis theoretically proposed that in certain instances to be examined, ouroverextension of collaboration in the digital environment demonstratesunsustainable access and preservation methods, evidenced by data loss.It further suggests the potential for larger pockets of data loss inhumanities content are possible if precarious practices are notrectified.

The Current Limiting Factors of Library Collaboration

Capacity and Organization

Among shared discourse on the future of libraries, the concept offinite capacity is increasingly problematic. In an organization thatdemands continual accession, the present trend of sacrificing stackspace for learning spaces (3) is becoming a contentious issue.

Proponents of expanding user spaces cite trends of decliningcirculation statistics, the high-cost of maintaining traditional stacks,(4) increased electronic resource use, and greater patron demand forcollaborative spaces. (5) Conversely, advocates for retaining physicalcollections contend such conditions protect essential humanitiesresearch practices of browsing and serendipitous discovery. (6),Irresolution of this debate is particularly concerning, considering"space reclamation" (7) of humanities collections have alreadyoccurred at Syracuse University, with similar plans being ventured atthe University of Wisconsin at Madison and the University of Texas atAustin--slating the entire Doty Fine Arts Library for repositorystorage--for the purpose of renovating the previously occupied area fora makerspace floor. (8) (However, both initiatives were promptlyreconsidered after vehement protests by students, faculty, and thelibrary community atlarge). (9)

Ideological differences have compelled a need for compromise andalternative storage options. In addition to high-capacity shelving, (10)automated storage and retrieval systems, (11) and high-density annexeson or near campuses, (12) libraries are developing collaborative storagenetworks through inter-university partnerships, (13) regional universitysystem agreements, (14) consortia efforts, (15) or as nationallyorganized repository systems. (16) While storage collaborations havemitigated collection capacity constraints and preserved materials,lingering effects persist as a result of user separation (17) fromresources (resource displacement), producing significant obstacles inresearch processes of humanities scholars. (18)

In addition to high-density or shared collections, the transitionfrom print to electronic resources sought to liberate libraries fromspace limitations. In many respects it was a successful plan, but theconsequences of format substitution have shifted the problems of spatialrestrictions to technological literacy. Commonly recognizable databases,such as Artstor, JSTOR, and the MLA International Bibliography offerextensive collections of content at the convenience of an electronicdevice. In spite of these advancements, the continued production ofprint, (19) electronic resources, and data (20) has subsequentlyinhibited strategic acquisition, organization, and access in ameaningful context. Information escalation-continually producedresources on a large scale-has concomitantly magnified resourcedisplacement, resulting in immense volumes of information operating onmultiple electronic platforms, and print material existing in discordantphysical locations. Repercussive impediments have compromised thecollaborative mission of libraries and information organizations: toimprove usability and retrieve relevant content.

Library Budget

The reduction of space and purchasing power (21) have persuadedlibraries to seek alternative means of provision and cost-savingmeasures. The decline of monographs and media purchases, and therefore,decreased access to these materials have been temporarily resolved bythe use of rentals, (22) demand driven acquisition programs, sharedconsortium electronic book plans, (23) and aggregators combined withinterlibrary loan. (24)

Journal subscriptions, subjected to higher inflation rates and moreaccess restrictions, have resulted in the use of pay-per-view services,(25) interlibrary loan, illegal faculty file sharing, (26) tailoredjournal packages, and subscriptions to, or cancellation of (27) Big Dealpackages. Regardless of method, libraries are adversely impacted byreoccurring "service fee" increases and inflation, or remainforcibly wedded to costly packages (of mostly low-use journals), butcontain a small number core titles required for accreditation. Increasedproduction of resources and unsustainable vendor practices haveactualized severe collection gaps and reduced access to researchmaterials.

The present environment of spatial and budgetary constraints ispressuring libraries to seek outward collaborators, as we have failed(or have been set up to fail) to meet internal user needs in the currentinformation climate.

Network Connection

Collection deficiencies are positioning libraries to activelyparticipate in "network connection." (28) Network connectionrelies upon extended partnerships of libraries, information vendors, andinformation professionals maintaining a system of shared resources,storage space, standards, and technologies. Libraries and informationorganizations collaboratively function within the network, determiningthe capacity to which they can mutually contribute to, or receivesupport from the collective system. Although optimistically beneficialin many areas, a lack of sustainability and guidance by leadinginformation organizations threatens the access and preservation ofresources.

Humanities Research and the Network Connection

Libraries exist as a fundamental component of humanities research,as the physical building, print collections, and electronic resourcesare perceived as analogous to laboratories in science disciplines. (29)The deficiencies of electronic bibliographic databases, (30) and thehigh use of print monographs, (31) particularly interdisciplinaryresources, (32) necessitates browsing physical stacks for serendipitousdiscovery. (33) Interaction with original objects, or in lack thereof,surrogates or high-quality digitized images, (34) is also a cardinalneed for research; such evidence concludes that physical spaces areinextricably linked with humanities scholars.

While electronic resources have provided a treasure trove ofmaterials previously inaccessible or undiscovered (e.g. Early EnglishBooks Online), scholars have consistently deduced that electronic imagepreservation available through the network connection is below standard.(35) Humanities scholars have discovered that many journals areincompletely scanned (e.g. JSTOR), omitting important cultural artifactssuch as front and back covers, ads, minor features, main articles,tables of contents, letters to the editor, society news, and classifiedads. (36) E-book and resource removal from databases without notice isprevalent, (37) occurring in, but not limited to ProQuest Ebook Central(38) and even JSTOR, (39) posing a major threat to information accessand preservation. (40) These practices are considered unconscionable tohumanities scholars, who are expected to be stewards of the culturalrecord. It has been rationally concluded that the print medium is abetter method of ensuring long-term preservation and contextualintegrity, (41) reducing the chance of distorted perceptions andanalysis from low quality and incomplete works. (42)

Increasing partnerships between libraries and the digitalhumanities have further altered the dynamic of the network connection,adding open access content to the system. Notwithstanding the potentialbenefits associated with the digital humanities, such as the creation offree, novel, and competing content to proprietary commercial products,the network must attempt to accommodate highly ephemeral sites, (43)which increase disorganization (entropy) in the system. These problemsmust be addressed to successfully integrate digital humanities withinthe network connection.

Storage and budgetary constraints, increased informationproduction, and the instability of the digital humanities haveactualized the phenomena of resource displacement (RD) and informationescalation (IE) within the network connection. Internal limitations ofstorage capacity have resulted in materials residing in multiplelocations within and external to the library:

* Library Branches and Department Libraries

* Storage Annexes

* Government Documents

* Special Collections

* Microform Cabinets

* Print Periodicals/Serials Shelves

* Media and Audio-Visual Collections or Centers

* Course Reserves

* Children's Literature Sections

* Curriculum Materials

* Oversize Books

* Print Reference Collections

* Map Drawers

* Leisure Reading Sections and New Materials

* Misshelved or Lost Books

* E-Resource Platforms (high or low quality)

External pressures of budget cuts and information production haveresulted in the adoption of alternative cost-saving measures:

* Interlibrary Loan

* Monograph Rentals

* E-book Packages

* Demand Driven Acquisition Programs

* Demand Driven Steaming Audio/Visual programs

* Shared Print and Electronic Resource Partnerships

* Database, Journals, and Aggregator Cancellation Projects

* Reliance on unstable Digital Humanities Projects

* Illegal File Sharing

* As a worst-case scenario, Inaccessible Content Due to CopyrightRestrictions

While the initial purpose of the network connection was designed toexpand access, negative aspects such as resource displacement, copyrightrestrictions, complex interfaces, (44) and inconsistent access andpreservation have reduced scholars' ability to locate and retrieverelevant information. Such conditions hinder humanities research, andgenerate the convoluted scholarly biome within the network connection:the liminal environment.

The Liminal Environment

The convergence of libraries, vendors, and digital humanitiesprojects have produced a liminal environment. The liminal environment isa construct containing the multi-format collection of past, present, andemerging technologies and resources, as a result of resourcedisplacement and information escalation. Scholars are de facto placedwithin this setting, participating in a constant struggle to use older(perhaps obsolete) formats, while adapting to cutting edge technologiesto stay current in the field. The network connection encases theboundaries of liminality, yet those boundaries are arbitrarily definedand continue to expand through information escalation, resourcedisplacement, and superseded technology at an unrelenting pace.Connectivity has expanded access, but has neglected to address the mostimportant limiting factor of the network connection, namely entropy: theever-increasing disorganization caused by the unsustainably ofcapriciously connected and questionably compatible resources.

Entropy

Information Entropy

Shannon's Information Theory indicates that a morepredictable, fixed system correlates with less disorder, or a lowercalculated entropy value.

As this concept applies information systems, a system containingfewer resources of similar complexity will generally have less entropythan a system containing many connected resources of similar complexity;entropy will continue to increase as the system adds more resources andbecomes increasingly complex and less predictable, therefore generatingmore disorder. Systems with compatible resources (standardized context)will contain lower entropy than systems that are semi-compatible orincompatible (altered context), requiring more complex technicalworkarounds and higher entropy to make the system function.

However, in the network connection examined in this paper,Shannon's theory can no longer be applied; as the networkconnection and context are not fixed, changing unpredictably and rapidlythroughout the system, it requires an evaluation outside the conceptualframework of traditional information entropy theory. Collaborationbecomes inhibitory in the case of network connection, as entropyincreases through the interaction and addition of multiple systemsrunning in parallel, and sharing information connections on acompatible, semi-compatible, and incompatible random basis. Suchactivity renders it nearly impossible to gauge whether content isactive, obsolete, or preserved for permanent storage; a calculatedentropy value can no longer be ascertained to effectively maintain theinfrastructure of the system. The inability to fully access and managecontent prevents adequate procedures to ensure the sustainablepreservation of humanities resources.

Access Entropy

Divergent and outdated access methods pose significant operabilitychallenges to the network connection. In many cases, technologicalimprovements in the network connection have not progressed at the samerate to accommodate or become compatible with emerging technologies andstandards.

Discovery services and electronic resources are continuouslychanging systems infrastructure to create more advanced and marketablefeatures. Nascent technologies of new media and augmented reality existas multiple products and versions, (45) and require multiple APIs (andcoding languages) to query databases to provide (46) real-time updates;(47) in many instances, connection to the internet (48) and/or GISsignals is necessary for these discovery and way finder services tofunction properly. (49) Therefore, the network connection must provideconsistent access upgrades of its technological infrastructure toovercome divergent access services and to maintain stable connections toinformation resources. As the network connection is a partnership ofindividual organizations, this creates an admixture of compatible,semi-compatible, and incompatible resources increasing entropy withinthe system.

Aberrant metadata standards limit the functionality betweendiscovery systems and the network connection to retrieve relevant data.In addition to Resource Description and Access (RDA) and Anglo-AmericanCataloging Rules (AACR2), the Digital Curation Centre lists more thanthirty metadata standards used by information organizations. (50)Variations in metadata (or no metadata) used by vendors, libraries, anddigital humanities projects can result in pulling irrelevant searchqueries, or omitting relevant content due to faulty protocols.

Proprietary technologies and indexing repositories from commercialvendors can limit the effectiveness of access in the network connection.The augmented reality system ShelvAR was discontinued as Amazon owns apre-existing patent of similar technology. (51) Commercial discoveryservices, such as those owned by EBSCO and ProQuest, but not limited toonly these vendors, do not fully share complete indexing data with oneanother. (52) Minimal efforts have been made to collaborate throughpoorly constructed APIs, (53) which are needlessly complicated.Proprietary obstinacy obstructs compatibility of systems in the networkconnection and provides patrons with different results despitesubscribing to the same content while utilizing competing discoverysystems.

Such issues illustrate glaring, missing links in the networkconnection that separates the user from sources of information. Multipledivergent standards, incompatible systems, and proprietary barriers arestraining the network connection, as it is forced to develop ad hoc,unstable solutions to provide access to information.

Preservation Entropy

Current production and preservation methods ignore systemic entropyin the network connection. Preservation is reliant upon sustainabilityand interoperability, and yet many preservation services are rarelyinterconnected (often operating in parallel rather than connected), withmany commercial vendors and repositories choosing not to partner withauthoritative preservation organizations. Numerous vendors irresponsiblybackup information through local hosting servers or privatizedpreservation companies. Organizations such as the Digital PreservationNetwork (DPN) and Meta Archive preserve content chosen by libraries on aselected basis, self-creating intentional content gaps. Such practicesare moving toward a level of entropy that can no longer be sustained.Information professionals have failed to analyze the collaborativenetwork connection from an external perspective, a tremendous oversightthat will potentially result in format obsolescence and informationloss.

The preoccupation with immediate access of information hassubsequently resulted in the neglect of sustainable preservationpractices. Competitive and exclusive partnerships create disorganization(entropy) in the preservation management of information. The followingorganizations represent only a small sample of preservation networks anddigital projects available in the information environment:

Preservation Networks

* LOCKSS

* CLOCKSS

* Portico

* Internet Archive

* Internet Archive--Archive-IT

* Digital Preservation Network (DPN)

* Meta Archive

* Western Regional Storage Trust (WEST)

* Shared Monograph Print Networks

* Iron Mountain--National Underground Data

* Center for Research Libraries

* Amazon Glacier Cloud Storage

* DuraCloud

* bepress Digital Commons

Content Producers with Preservation Intentions

* JSTOR/Artstor Dark Storage Initiative (Portico) (54)

* Perseus Project

* Google Books

* ProQuest--Partnered with Iron Mountain

* OCLC CONTENTdm

* Alexander Street Press Media Hosting Service

* HathiTrust--Mirrored sites at the University of Michigan andIndiana University

Preservation requires exorbitant costs, which are subsidized bysubscription fees, library consortia memberships, or grant money tosupport digitization and infrastructure. With the current budgetlimitations of libraries, the information environment exists at ajuncture where it cannot sufficiently pay for both access to materialsand preservation services.

Reliance upon vendors to preserve content can set a dangerousprecedent for how academic libraries provide long-term perpetual access."The problem, mostly unaddressed, of long-term retention ofelectronic books [electronic resources] is critical. It is notacceptable for the publisher or aggregator to be the'guarantor' of long-term security of titles." (55) Thevalues of publishers are not necessarily in line with those oflibraries. (56) "Because a publisher or aggregator has theexpectation of future revenue from its stock doesn't mean it willhold indefinitely when the ebook [e-resource] is no longerprofitable." (57) Indeed, we do not currently look to publishersfor access to out-of-print titles--we look to libraries. The same shouldbe said of ebooks [e-resources]. (58)

Disconnected organizations and services prove contradictory to thegoals of preservation: sustainable collection, organization, access, andprotection of resources. The same inefficient methods of preservationderive from the root of the original causative problem; myopic or randomselectivity of preservation is, in essence, emulating the capriciousproduction and access to commercial information resources. Continuedpractice of these methods suggests a high probability that access andpreservation will fail to keep pace with information production. Theincreased entropy generated through resource displacement andinformation escalation is a glaring oversight with the potential forsevere repercussions when combined with precarious preservationprocesses.

Entropy of the Network Connection

The increasing entropy of the network connection is the result ofits inability to organize information production and preservation.Increasing entropy beyond the threshold predicts pocket data loss. Theability or inability to sustainably preserve content will determine howlarge or small that loss will be.

Proposed Solutions to Reduce Entropy

Entropy poses a severe threat to destabilize the network connectionto the extent of humanities data loss. It is proposed that severalinitiatives, under cooperation and guidance of authoritativeorganizations, could develop sustainable processes to counteractnegligent practices and ideally shift toward network equilibrium.

The proposed solutions are not exclusive to humanities content;they would likely offer considerable benefits for social sciences andsciences disciplines, as well as to public, state, and federallibraries. While the focus of the paper is primarily humanities, alldisciplines contribute to the network connection. Synchronized actionwould contribute to added stability, and cooperative models adoptingsuccessful outcomes would greatly enhance the probability ofaccomplishing necessary outcomes.

The introduced solutions to reduce entropy involve a series ofstrategic steps, beginning at the localized level, and moving towardlarger, association-supported initiatives. Such actions are recommended,as the suggestions can operate in parallel to illustrate examples ofsuccess, and create a supportive foundation to prompt a focused vision,(59) as well as buy-in to develop influential collaborativepartnerships.

The ideal solution seeks to actualize three consortia: (1)legislative, (2) access, and (3) preservation. In lieu of investing inexorbitant labor costs to address problems at the institutional level,through the minimal financial backing of many participants, efficaciousand cost-effective consortia could be developed as highly influentialorganizations to defend library interests. Such consortia could alsoconsolidate current organizations and standardize access models toreduce entropy of the network connection. Partnering organizations couldinclude representatives from, but not limited to: the American LibraryAssociation, the International Federation of Library Associations andInstitutions, the Society of American Archivists, the InternationalCouncil on Archives, NASIG, HathiTrust, the Digital Public Library ofAmerica, SPARC, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the NationalEndowment for the Arts, the Alliance of Digital HumanitiesOrganizations, the Humanities, Arts, Science, and Technology Allianceand Collaboratory, and the Library of Congress.

Budgetary Constraints

1. Libraries should adopt an official stance refusing to signlicenses with a non-disclosure clause. Cornell University (60) is aleading defender of this position, indicating that non-disclosureagreements prevent libraries from "negotiating cheaper rates byciting an advantage obtained by another library." (61)Cornell's extensive list of publishers willing to waivenon-disclosure agreements suggest emulation of this practice should bewidely executed by all libraries. Such actions could enable sharing oflicensing terms (and the subsequent creation of databases comparinglicensing terms), empowering libraries to negotiate more equitable andsustainable prices for resources.

Fair negotiation would readjust pricing models to a more realisticmarket value. While this solution could be viewed as harmful topublishers, it could prove beneficial as it may increase the numberinstitutions able to purchase affordable content.

2. The Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in theSciences in Humanities (62) should be supported as an aspirationalvision for the provision of open access knowledge and cultural heritage.The declaration in itself does not constitute a formal and bindingagreement; libraries should, however, bolster this endeavor byadvocating for university open access mandates (63) requiring scholarsto provide a copy of their publication in an open access repository.

3. The creation of a consortia specifically focusing uponlegislative protection of humanities resources. Unlike Projeckt DEAL,(64) a German organization that attempts to negotiate fair prices andaccess directly with vendors, it is suggested that libraries bypassvendor mediation (as such tactics are noticeably ineffective) and focusupon legislative action that would prove more tenable. The Fair Accessto Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR) and memorandums by theOffice of Science and Technology Policy provide quicker access topublicly-funded science research. (65) A well-organized legislativeconsortia could appropriately fund legal advisors and lobbyists toinfluence the passage of similar acts, thus protecting open accessthrough reducing embargoes and ensuring preservation of humanitiescontent.

Bridging the he Liminal Environment

1. It is suggested that virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality(AR) have the potential to overcome the limitations of the liminalenvironment (and the barriers of current humanities research), byembedding the patron in a unified physical and digital environment,"imitating the embodied browsing processes that take place in thephysical stacks." (66) With these practices, it is hoped thatresearchers will possess access to the full-range of resourcesavailable.

2. Libraries should continue to support library-driven AR and VRinitiatives, such as Minrva. (67) The Topic Space module (now Minrvaapp) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign appears to be themost promising development of AR for use in libraries. The open-sourceprogram uses OCR and barcode recognition to generate a list of resourcesnearby, in addition to suggesting items of similar interest with theWayfinder feature; a map is embedded in the system and guides users tothe general area of the stacks where items are located. (68) It alsodisplays what books should normally reside on the shelves (shelf order),indicating the status of those materials-checked out, lost, missing,(69) on course reserve, etc. The expanded version of the app also helpsthe user to manage library services including course reserve, checkouts,fines, etc., potentially connecting users to the full array of libraryservices and resources.

3. It is essential that the participatory environment be userfriendly, technologically compatible, and intuitive to properly convergeresearch methodologies with minimal interference. (70) In its currentstate, use of VR and AR in libraries appear propitious, but divergentstandards minimize the effectiveness of these tools. Augmented realitysystems exist as multiple products and versions, (71) and requiremultiple APIs (and coding languages) to query databases to provide (72)real-time updates; (73) in many instances, connection to the internet(74) and/or GIS signals is necessary for discovery and wayfinderservices to function properly (75) (causing increased access entropy).Therefore, it is essential that divergent standards and access modelsbecome compatible, or incompatible standards be discontinued to increaseresearch capability and reduce entropy in the network connection.

Access Entropy

1. Although scholarly literature has identified isolatedlimitations in the information-seeking environment, the library andinformation science field has neglected to responsibly assess theholistic impact of these outcomes and the consequences ofinteroperability failure. In order for humanities resources to surviveand be preserved for future generations, information professionals mustadvocate for the development of sustainable standards,and adhere to thestandards) to establish a compatible and stable network connectionthatreduces system entropy.

2. A consortium should be created for the specific purpose offocusing upon access standards: metadata, protocols, programming, andformat. A shared vision must focus on the creation of, and adherence toselected standards. It is essential for sustainable access andpreservation that systems are compatible, suggesting that use ofdivergent and incompatible standards be discontinued.

Newly developed initiatives, such as Bibframe, are in the processof transforming MARC21 into web friendly bibliographic data. (76) Inaddition, companies like Zepheira are attempting to place libraryrecords online for easier discovery through search engines. (77)Information organization should support the continued development ofBibframe (a Library of Congress project) to ensure consistentdescription standards and access.

3. Consortia and libraries should encourage or demand that vendorsand digital humanities projects adhere to approved access standards toreduce system entropy and enable optimal discoverability of resources. Aconsortium of this nature could work with vendors and digital humanitiesgroups to select appropriate standards for their resources. Forobstinate vendors, the consortia could serve as a watchdog group,informing libraries of vendors that hinder access by using divergent orproprietary standards, educating librarians on which products providethe most user friendly and compatible services. Such pressure mayinfluence vendors to adopt unified standards, at the risk of losingbusiness to vendors that are compatible with the network connection.

Preservation Entropy

Although JSTOR is attempting to establish an endowment to preserveresources, (78) they are one of the few content providers working withlibraries to create sustainable preservation practices. Among countlesssmaller organizations that seek stabilized access and preservation,initiatives for promoting and implementing sustainable practices must bedriven by nationally-recognized, influential organizations.

1. A consortium should be created to focus upon proper preservationof materials and develop a sustainable preservation network. A sharedvision may have the following goals (including but limited to):

2. Partnering with existing, successful interdisciplinary models(e.g. sciences) to develop a large repository for humanitiesmaterials--reducing the number consortia and organizations as suggestedearlier, therefore having access to greater levels of funding. A large,hybridized humanities database could be developed borrowing existinginfrastructure from current humanities, social sciences, and sciencesdatabases. For instance, advice could be sought from developers ofinfrastructure in such models as:

* PubMed:indexing, abstracts, and full-text articles

* Digital Public Library of America:texts, videos, and sounds

* OAIster:Open access resource union catalog

* Perseus Project:artefacts and text digitization--long termoperation--1995 to present), and

* Europeana:art, artefacts, books, and sounds

From these models, it may be possible for a large consortium tofund the creation of a product comprising the best aspects of theseresources. As a secondary choice, it may be more efficient to choose amodel (e.g. Europeana or the Digital Public Library of America), andpartner with such a group (if a shared vision can be established) toenhance the resource to accommodate desired outcomes.

3. Adhering to preservation standards--Libraries, informationorganizations, and vendors need to adhere to the use of professionallyaccepted preservation processes and format standards. Consortia orlibraries should favor the use of "approved" preservationnetworks, such as LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico, (79) etc. It is believedthat favoring such practices will convince vendors to select thesestandard preservation models and discontinue the use of locally-hosted(potentially unreliable) or divergent standards, thus reducing entropyin the system.

4. Libraries with a print equivalent of an e-book should retain theprint copy if WorldCat holdings show fewer than 100 copies world wide.Specifically for image heavy monographs, which are often subjected toimage use licenses (typically five years of use), this would aidlong-term access and preservation. The preservation of electronic onlybooks will need to be investigated further, possibly by the legislativeconsortia to secure preservation rights and access without violation ofcopyright law.

5. For digital humanities sites (and perhaps for the large,hybridized site suggested earlier), a preservation consortium shouldinvest in few preservation services, and rely upon mirrored sites toensure preservation and ease of access (e.g. The Perseus Project ishosted by Tufts University, with mirrored sites at the University ofChicago and Max Planck Society).

If the above recommended practices are disregarded, it is highlyprobable that access and preservation will fail to keep pace withinformation production. The increased entropy generated through spatialcapacity and budgetary constraints, and access entropy is a glaringoversight with the potential for severe repercussions within thepreservation process.

Discussion--Failure to Address Solutions: Consequences

Data Loss

The relative stability of physical materials afforded the securityto experiment with digital resources, and stretch our capacity forinformation production, collection, and access with minimal risk. In theabsence of a stable, time-tested digital equivalent, the expansion oftechnology into new formats and access models runs the risk of increasedentropy and accelerated format obsolescence.

If institutions collect an array of new technology before they areready to preserve in a proactive manner, loss of files and the integrityof the work may be compromised. This may prove highly costly and labourintensive to retrieve or restrict at a later date. (80)

There exists an underlying worry among humanities scholars thatformat instability will result in the loss of the scholarly and culturalrecord. (81) This fear is not unwarranted, given the historicaldestruction of libraries and the decay of ancient materials occurringover time, (82) even in the twentieth century. (83) Many classical worksexist in name only through the Naturalis Historia and the DeArchitectura, or as partial records unearthed in fragmented tablets inancient libraries. In the modern era, it is estimated by the Library ofCongress that seventy-five percent of silent films have been lost. (84)At the macrolevel, many websites have disappeared (or nearlydisappeared) entirely from the cultural record. Such reasons include (1)Neglect, (2) Technical issues, (3) Financial instability, (4) Naturaldisasters, (5) Political pressure, and (6) Web wars of acquisition anddiscontinuation. (85) Examples include:

The Voice of the Shuttle (VoS), hosted by UC Santa Barbara: Once acomprehensive index of scholarly humanities websites, it now containslinks to many web pages that are no longer updated. Broken links,oftenreferred to as "link rot," (86) are prevalent, highlightingwebsites that have disappeared (87) or have changed domain names,decreasing the findability of resources.

My History is American History: (88) A website developed in 1999,funded by PSINet, Genealogy.com, the NEH, and Bill Clinton's WhiteHouse Millennium Council, My History is American History aimed topromote personal history among a popular audience." After thedot-com bubble burst (and a lack of NEH monetary support), invaluablepersonal interviews with American icons and historians were permanentlylost. Only a handful of interviews and webpages can be accessed by theWayback Machine. (89)

The BBC Domesday Project: The Domesday Book, a medieval documentrecording landholdings, income, and professions in England was digitizedonto two laserdiscs in 1986, costing [pounds sterling]2.5 million. By2002, the laserdiscs were nearly unusable due to their obsolete format.(90) After extensive work and cost to recover the data, it was finallyplaced online in 2011.

Geocities: A vibrant community of approximately 38 million personalwebsites was discontinued by Yahoo! after 15 years of operation. Whilethe Internet Archive (91) Wayback Machine and OoCities.org (92) havebeen able to preserve some content, much of the GeoCities community hasbeen lost, especially non-indexed pages and websites with lower webtraffic. A significant amount of cultural information about the 1990shas vanished as a result of ceased operation.

Library.nu: Formerly Gigapedia, the P2P website Library.nucontained between 400,000 and a million digital books for free, withmaterials spanning across sciences, social sciences, and the humanitiesdisciplines. It was eventually shutdown in 2012 due to claims ofcopyright infringement. (93) While the battle continues betweencopyright holders and advocates of the free dissemination ofinformation, valuable information aggregated in this central hubdisappeared from the Internet (or was dispersed, decreasingdiscoverability).

Project Bamboo, a $1.4 million-dollar grant from the Andrew W.Mellon Foundation, was established to create a stablecyberinfrastructure for the digital humanities. (94) Including 600participants at 115 institutions, the members consisted of humanitiesresearchers, computer science researchers, information scientists,librarians, and campus technologists. (95) Lack of shared vision, staffturnover, and discontinued funding caused the project to disband in2012.

Failure to learn from these examples presents opportunities for thelist to grow, as more websites will follow suit. Sustainable access,preservation, formats, and funding are imperative to reduce the chanceof further loss of resources and data.

Format Instability and Data Recovery

While format obsolescence is recognized among informationprofessionals, (96) it is suggested by some scholars that data loss willnot occur on a scale as large as previously feared. Collective effortsbetween programmers and the network connection have produced open sourcetechnology to recover digitally obsolete formats; however a caveatexists in this assertion--recovery can only be completed if the bytesare available for retrieval. (97) In a typically leased informationenvironment, this presents major barriers for restoration.

Realistically, the argument for reclamation is partiallyreductionist, specifically to the context of humanities, due tointrinsic flaws plaguing information production and preservation ofthese disciplines. Copyrighted proprietary software can restrict formatmigration of digital materials, (98) preventing select titles from beingreformatted for long-term preservation, (99) especially amongtemporarily leased electronic images. (100) This limitation extends tovulnerable physical formats, such as video cassette tapes and audiocassettes, which cannot be reformatted for mass distribution (butpotentially only at the local access level). (101) The less-profitablevalue of humanities materials leaves content less likely to bereformatted by commercial information vendors who own the reproductionrights, and are subject to decay and permanent loss from the culturalrecord. (102)

Open source software like OpenOffice and virtual machines distortproprietary textual and image formatting, font type, and color schemes.(103) The need for original, contextual manifestation (104) or ahigh-quality surrogate hinders proper preservation and long-term accessfor humanities materials. (105) Entropy is therefore, not only addedthrough distortion of formatting and context, but the practice ofcontent omission for the sake of convenience, copyright restrictions,and speed of preservation.

It is estimated that data storage technology and reformattingefforts should be conducted every five years to reduce the chance ofobsolescence. However, the cost of maintenance and platform migration iscomplicated, (106) and the rendering of exact reformatted copies isexponentially expensive. (107) Recovering information from obsoletemedia, as well as reviving abandoned digital projects can be a laboriousand time-consuming effort, (108) often involving numerous technologiesand collaborative partnerships to extract, reformat data, and check forviruses. (109) This cost may be higher than what the network connectioncan afford. Networked digital humanities centers, Internet projects,institutional repositories, and small-scale publishers do not possessthe funding for continued operational expenses in this capacity (110) orare making slow progress in implanting preservation strategies. (111)These factors place humanities data at risk for obsolescence and loss.

In some cases, personal archiving is required. Tools such asHTTrack, (112) Internet Archive Way-back Machine Save Page Now, andArchive-IT (113) allow for personal or institutional archiving ofwebsites, but these bytes are only recoverable if the source ofinformation ("inadvertent archivists") (114) and/or projectcan be determined. In other instances, organizations such as the Churchof Scientology have prevented preservation or indexing of websitescritical of their ideologies. Under threat of litigation for dubiousclaims of violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the InternetArchive removed preserved pages of Xenu.net, (115)and Google removedXenu.net from its search engine index (116) Although Google laterrestored the site after protest by the online community, (117) Othersuch requests can be viewed at Chillingeffects.org (now Lumen), (118)which documents current efforts to remove content from the Internet.Evidenced by the above projects, censored content, and broken links, ifa sustainable model for access and preservation cannot be developed,only a skeletal record will exist of surface content that once was, andis likely no longer available.

Loss of Cultural Memory

Presently, it is empirically evident that the limitations oftechnology cannot handle the entropy of the network. Initial signs ofnetwork connection deterioration are already observable:

* Resource displacement and information escalation due tolimitations in storage space and budgetary constraints.

* Collection gaps and network connection caused by increasinginflation rates and limited library budgets.

* Incompatibility affecting the network through divergent accessstandards, proprietary technologies, format change, and copyrightrestrictions (access entropy).

* Preservation disconnection among multiple organizations.

* Poor preservation standards and practices of omitting information(incomplete copies) and failure to render formats matching the originalcontext (context distortion).

These conditions are headed in the direction of:

* The decay or collapse of preservation organizations fromdisconnection, proprietary systems, and unsustainable funding sources.

* Disintegration of the network connection, in as much thatinformation partners and libraries are only able to contribute at aminimal level, or not at all.

* Loss of access to preserved content and format obsolescence (e.g.Voice of the Shuttle, My History is America's History, The DomesdayBook, GeoCities, etc.).

* Information loss and destruction of cultural memory.

If not acted upon, entropy will generate pockets of informationloss as occurred in the past, but on a potentially larger scale. Thestability of format logically predicts that the order of loss will be asfollows:

1. Vulnerable physical media: video cassette tapes, audiocassettes, slides, film, photographs, floppy disks, LP's, etc.(119)

2. Proprietary or neglected electronic resources composed ofobsolete formats.

3. Unsustainable digital humanities and website content.

4. Non-marketable commercial content in private storage.

5. Profitable commercial content in private storage.

6. Resources stored in non-profit preservation systems.

7. Print materials, microform, and Special Collections printmaterials.

As the information environment destabilizes through unsustainablemethods, the increasing rate of resource displacement, informationescalation, and access and preservation unsustainability is leadingtoward a state of entropy that cannot be overcome... when this occurs,the deterioration of the network connection, and inevitably the losscultural memory is an increasingly probable situation.

Conclusion

While it is fully comprehended that such an examination of thenetwork connection cannot serve as a panacea for all issues presented,it is hoped that this theoretical paper can function as an avenue ofrethinking our present practices, and initiating conversations toengender more sustainable practices among information organizations. Asone individual cannot explicate upon every condition concerninghumanities access and preservation, participation is vital. Scholars arefreely encouraged to debate the content presented. Whereas some analysesand solutions may prove tenable, others may elicit the need for furtherexploration--collective expertise of the library and informationsciences field is requested to untangle the twists and knots in thenetwork connection.

It is suggested that many of the pitfalls plaguing previouslyfailed models include poor infrastructure, ambiguous vision or outcomes,project manager turnover, and unsustainable funding. Such problems mustbe addressed to successfully integrate digital humanities within thenetwork connection. Sustainable practices are crucial for the continuedproduction, access, and preservation of humanities resources.

In its present state, entropy is rising beyond a manageablethreshold in the network connection. Multiple variables operating inparallel (resources, access models, standards, and preservation),existing in various degrees of compatibility, are leaving resourcesvulnerable to decay and loss. In the network system, individual librarybudgets cuts cannot afford to perpetuate and subsidize this model ofcapricious access and preserved content.

It is recommended that libraries and information organizations canreduce entropy on the local and consortia level. Local initiatives, suchas refusing non-disclosure agreements, supporting open access mandates,and pressuring vendors to adopt compatible access standards and indexsharing can proliferate into larger programs. Demonstrated victories atthe local level can serve as persuasive rationale for the creation ofconsortia to defend library interests at-large.

It is proposed that the development of three consortia: (1)legislative, (2) access, and (3) preservation. In lieu of investing inexorbitant labor costs to address problems at the institutional level,through the minimal financial backing of many participants, efficaciousand cost-effective consortia could be developed, as highly influentialorganizations to defend library interests. Such consortia could alsoconsolidate current organizations and standardize access models toreduce entropy of the network connection. The consortia shouldstrategically focus on the following initiatives to produce the mostbenefit for libraries and information organizations.

While it is possible that data can be recovered, it is onlyrecoverable if it can be located. Omitted content in the scanningprocess, non-indexed data, and ephemeral digital humanities and webprojects are highly susceptible to data loss. In the event data can berecovered, it may not be accessible in a context that is relevant toscholarly interpretation. Therefore, it is also necessary to practicebetter methods of preservation, to render exact copies (to the best ofour ability) of objects and texts to maintain contextual integrity andprevent format distortion.

In the network connection model, rapidly increasing entropy andunsustainable preservation raises an alarm that demands immediateattention. As it was so famously stated by Paul Courant, with regard towriting, "If we can't retrieve what you have learned, you haveviolated your scholarly oath." (120) As information professionals,if we cannot provide access, organization, and preservation ofinformation, we have violated our professional oath. It is within thiscontext that information professionals must address this oversight, andfind ways to collaborate and develop sustainable processes forproduction, access, and preservation. If we fail to ignore our duty, theloss of cultural memory in the humanities is a grave possibility.

As a final thought, this article makes an appeal to fellowprofessionals and information organizations to address the crisis athand. As the humanities gives us the "opportunity to feel a senseof connection to those who have come before us, as well as to ourcontemporaries," (121) let us be certain that we are making thebest possible effort to sustainably and contextually offer thisopportunity for future generations. The extent in which we respond willdetermine how much or how little that data loss will be.

(i) Haeusser, Babette et al. "ILM Library: InformationLifecycle Management Best Practices Guide," IBM, accessed January30, 2017, http://www.redbooks.ibm.com/redbooks/pdfs/sg247251.pdf

(ii) Dempsey, Lorcan, Constance Malpas, and Brian Lavoie."Collection Directions: Some Reflections on the Future of LibraryCollections and Collecting." portal: Libraries and the Academy 14,no. 3 (2014): 1-42.

(iii) "Minrva," Minrva. Accessed November 03, 2016.http://minrvaproject.org/; "ShelvAR: The Augmented Reality Tool forShelf-reading and Inventory Management in Libraries." Shelvar.com.Last modified 2013. http://www.shelvar.com/.

(1) "Library Borrowing Menu - Special Collections." BigTen Academic Alliance. Accessed June 06, 2018.https://www.btaa.org/li-brary/reciprocal-borrowing/special-collections

(2) "Access to OAIster." The OAIster Database. Lastaccessed July 10, 2018. https://www.oclc.org/en/oaister.html.

(3) Tevaniemi, J., J. Poutanen, and R. Lahdemaki. "Library asa Partner in Co-Designing Learning Spaces: A Case Study at the TampereUniversity of Technology, Finland." New Review of AcademicLibrarianship 21, no.3 (2015): 273-280; Bond, Sarah E. "TheDisappearance of Books Threatens to Erode Fine Arts Libraries."Hyperallergic. Last modified March 21, 2018.https://hyperaller-gic.com/433583/fine-arts-libraries-books-disap-pearing/.

(4) Courant, Paul N. and Matthew "Buzzy" Nielsen."On the Cost of Keeping a Book." Council on Library andInformation Resources 6 (2010): 81-105.

(5) Ruschoff, Carlen. "Library Collections and Library Users:Trading Spaces." Technicalities 32, no. 5 (2012): 1-8.

(6) Schroeder, Eunice, Janet Martorana, and Chris Granatino."Building Faculty Support for Remote Storage: A Survey ofCollection Behaviors and Preferences." Collection Management 38,no. 4 (2013): 1-22; Zahneis, Megan. "UVa Library's Plan to CutStacks by Half Sparks Faculty Concerns." The Chronicle of HigherEducation. Last modified June 07, 2018.https://www.chroni-cle.com/article/UVa-Library-s-Plan-to-Cut/243610.

(7) Ruschoff, "Library Collections."

(8) Bond, "The Disappearance of Books."

(9) Bond, Sarah E. "After Uproar, University of Texas DecidesNot to Relocate Its Fine Arts Library." Hyperallergic. Lastmodified April 10, 2018.https://hyperallergic.com/437093/ut-aus-tin-fine-arts-library-saved/;Kravinsky, Nina. "Proposal to Move Books Off UW Campus SparksConcern." Wort News Department. Last modified March 13, 2018.https://www.wortfm.org/proposal-to-move-books-off-uw-campus-sparks-concern/.

(10) McLaren, Mary. "Current Library Collection StorageModels." Kentucky Libraries 68, no. 1 (2004): 15-20.

(11) "Mary Idema Pew Library Collections." Grand ValleyState University Libraries. Accessed July 05, 2018.https://www.gvsu.edu/library/mary-idema-pew-library-21.htm.

(12) "The Library Annex." KU Libraries. Accessed April07, 2018. https://lib.ku.edu/library-an-nex; Turvey-Welch, M.R., andRoberta Johnson. "Repurposing and Renovating Space for High-DensityStorage: Kansas State University Libraries' Answer to AdditionalCollections Space." Collection Management 42, no 2 (2017): 109-119.

(13) Tabacuru, Simona, and Carmelita Pickett. "Damned if youdo, Damned if you don't: Texas A&M University Libraries'Collection Assessment for Off-site Storage." Collection Building32, no.3 (2013): 111-115.

(14) Schroeder, Martorana, and Granatino, "Building FacultySupport."

(15) "CRL's Agenda for Shared Print, 2017-2026."Center for Research Libraries. Last modified December 28, 2016,https://www.crl.edu/blogs/crls-agenda-shared-print-2017-2026.

(16) Halpanen, Mia et al. "Reducing Library Space Can Promotethe Shift from Storage of Print-Collections towards a Learning-Centrewithout Limiting the Access to Information." Library Management 36,no.8/9 (2015): 685-689.

(17) Schonfeld, Roger. "Stop the Presses: Is the MonographHeaded Toward an E-Only Future?" ITHAKA (2013). Last Accessed June23, 2017. http://www.sr.ithaka.org/publica-tions/stop-the-presses-is-the-monograph-headed-toward-an-e-only-future/.

(18) Rabina, Debbie, and Lisa Peet. "Meeting a Composite ofUser Needs Amidst Change and Controversy: The Case of the New YorkPublic Library." Reference & User Services Quarterly 54, no. 2(2014): 52-59; Bond, "The Disappearance of Books."

(19) "Annual Report October 2013 | October 2014."International Publishers Association. 2014.http://www.internationalpublishers.org/im-ages/reports/2014/IPA-annual-report-2014.pdf; "Traditional Book Print Production Dipped Slightlyin 2013." Bowker.com. Last modified August 05, 2014.http://media.bowker.com/docu-ments/bowker-isbn_output_2002_2013.pdf.

(20) Jacobson, Ralph. "2.5 Quintillion Bytes of Data CreatedEvery Day. How Does CPG & Retail Manage It?" Last modifiedApril 24, 2013. https://www.ibm.com/blogs/insights-on-busi-ness/consumer-products/2-5-quintillion-bytes-of-data-created-every-day-how-does-cpg-retail-manage-it/.

(21) Bosch, Stephen, and Kittie Henderson. "The Winds ofChange | Periodicals Price Survey 2013," Library Journal. Lastmodified April 25, 2013.http://lj.libraryjour-nal.com/2013/04/publishing/the-winds-of-change-periodicals-price-survey-2013/#_; "Consumer Price Index Data from 1913to 2016." Usinflationcalculator.com. Last modified September 2016.http://www.usinflationcalcula-tor.com/inflation/consumer-price-index-and-annual-percent-changes-from-1913-to-2008/; Medina, Margaret."Doing Less with Less in Monograph Acquisitions." Against theGrain February 2014 (2014): 38-39; Mokia, Rosemary. "A Tale ofThree Libraries: The Impact of Budget Cuts on the University ofLouisiana System Libraries." Louisiana Libraries Spring 2010(2010): 7-16; Dixon, Jennifer. "UMass Boston Cuts SqueezeResources." Library Journal. Accessed February 01, 2017.http://lj.libraryjour-nal.com/2017/01/academic-libraries/umass-boston-library-cuts-squeeze-resources/#_; Geffert, Bryn. "A Librarian'sDefense of Despair." The Chronicle of Higher Education. Lastmodified March 06, 2015.https://www.chroni-cle.com/blogs/conversation/2015/03/06/in-defense-of-librarians-despair/.

(22) Chrzastowski, Tina E., and Lynn N. Wiley. "E-book Use andValue in the Humanities: Scholars' Practices andExpectations." Library Resources and Technical Services 59, no. 4(2015): 172-186.

(23) Medina. "Doing Less with Less."

(24) Trail, Mary Ann. "Evolving with the Faculty to FaceLibrary Budget Cuts." The Serials Librarian 65 (2013): 213-220.

(25) England, Mark, and Rick Anderson. "Patron-DrivenAcquisition of Journal Articles using ReadCube at the University ofUtah." Insights 26, no. 6 (2013).http://insights.uksg.org/arti-cles/10.1629/2048-7754.77/galley/84/down-load/.

(26) England, Mark, and P. Jones. "Diversification of AccessPathways and the Role of Demand-Driven Acquisition: A Case Study at theUniversity of Utah." The Serials Librarian 66, no. 1/4 (2014):96-105.

(27) "Big Deal Cancellation Tracking." SPARC. Lastaccessed July 10, 2018.https://spar-copen.org/our-work/big-deal-cancellation-tracking/.

(28) Dempsey, Malpas, and Lavoie. "CollectionDirections."

(29) Kachaluba, Sarah Buck, Jessica Evans Brady, and JessicaCritten. "Developing Humanities Collections in the Digital Age:Exploring Humanities Faculty Engagement with Electronic and PrintResources" College and Research Libraries January 2014 (2014):91-108; Rimmer, Jon, et al. "An Examination of the Physical and theDigital Qualities of Humanities Research." Information Processingand Management 44 (2008): 1374-1392.

(30) Williams, Peter, et al. "The Role and Future of theMonograph in Arts and Humanities Research." Aslib Proceedings: NewInformation Perspectives 61, no. 1 (2009): 67-82.

(31) Matthews, Brian. "Millions of Sources: The Disruption ofHistory and the Humanities?" The Chronicle of Higher Education.January 12, 2015. http://www.chronicle.com/blognet-work/theubiquitouslibrarian/2015/01/12/mil-lions-of-sources-the-disruption-of-history-and-the-humanities/; Williams, Peter, et al. "The Role and Future of theMonograph."; Knievel, Jennifer E., and Charlene Kellsey."Citation Analysis for Collection Development: A Comparative Studyof Eight Humanities Fields." The Library Quarterly 75, no. 2(2005): 142-168.

(32) Anderson, Kristine, et al., "Liberal Arts Books onDemand: A Decade of Patron-Driven Collection Development, Part 1."Collection Management 34, no. 3/4 (2010): 125-140; Kellsey, Charlene,and Jennifer Knievel. "Overlap Between Humanities Faculty Citationsand Library Monograph Collections 2005-2009." University LibrariesFaculty & Staff Contributions 45 (2012): 569-583.https://scholar.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcon-tent.cgi?article=1046&context=libr_facpapers.

(33) Kachaluba, Brady, and Critten. "Developing HumanitiesCollections."; Martin, Kim, and Anabel Quan-Haase. "AreE-Books Replacing Print Books? Tradition, Serendipity, and Opportunityin the Adoption and Use of E-Books for Historical Research andTeaching." Journal of the American Society for Information Scienceand Technology 64, no. 5 (2013): 1016 -1028; Delgadillo, Roberto, andB.P. Lynch. "Future Historians: Their Quest for Information."College and Research Libraries 60, no. 3 (1999): 245-259; Dahl, Candice."PDA and the Humanities: Assessing the Fit through an Examinationof the Literature on Humanists and E-resources." The ElectronicLibrary 31, no. 6 (2012): 745-752.

(34) McGill, Lawrence. "The State of Scholarly Publishing inthe History of Art and Architecture." OpenStax CNX. AccessedNovember 03, 2016, http://cnx.org/contents/[emailprotected]; (34) Whalen, Maureen. "What's Wrong with ThisPicture? An Examination of Art Historians' Attitudes AboutElectronic Publishing Opportunities and the Consequences of TheirContinuing Love Affair with Print." Art Documentation 28, no. 2(2009): 13-22; McCann, Steve, and Tammy Ravas. "Impact of ImageQuality in Online Art History Journals: A User Study." ArtDocumentation 29, no. 1 (2010): 41-48.

(35) McGill. "The State of Scholarly Publishing in the Historyof Art and Architecture."

(36) McCann and Ravas. "Impact of Image Quality.";Robinson, Adam. "University of Kansas Print and Electronic JournalComparison Study." Art Documentation 29, no. 1 (2010): 37-40.

(37) Chrzastowski and Wiley. "E-book Use and Value in theHumanities."

(38) Georgas, Helen. "The Case of the Disappearing E-Book:Subscription Packages and Academic Libraries." College &Research Libraries 77, no. 11 (2015): 883-898.

(39) "Terms and Conditions of Use." JSTOR. Accessed June28, 2018. https://about.jstor.org/terms/.

(40) McGill. "The State of Scholarly Publishing in the Historyof Art and Architecture."; Ballon, Hilary, and Mariet Westermann."Art History and Its Publications in the Electronic Age."CLIR,(2006): Accessed July 10, 2018.https://architec-ture.mit.edu/sites/architec-ture.mit.edu/files/attach-ments/news/7_Westermann%20Bal-lon%20Art%20History%20Publications.pdf.

(41) McGill. "The State of Scholarly Publishing in the Historyof Art and Architecture."; Whalen. "What's Wrong withThis Picture?"; Borgman. "The Digital Future is Now: A Call toAction for the Humanities." DHQ: Digital Humanities Quarterly 3,no. 4 (2009). Accessed June 18, 2017.http://www.digitalhumani-ties.org/dhq/vol/3/4/000077/000077.html.

(42) Ballon and Westermann. "Art History and Its Publicationsin the Electronic Age."; McCann and Ravas. "Impact of ImageQuality."; Kachaluba, Brady, and Critten, "DevelopingHumanities Collections." ; Whalen. "What's Wrong withThis Picture?"; Brown, Victoria, and Catherine Worrall. "Artin the Digital Age: A Comparative Study of the Adoption of ElectronicVisual Resources in the UK, Ireland and North America." ArtLibraries Journal 37, no. 3 (2012): 20-27.

(43) Schreibman, Susan. "Digital Humanities: Centres andPeripheries." Historical Social Research 37, no. 3 (2012): 46-58.

(44) Chrzastowski and Wiley. "E-book Use and Value in theHumanities."; Collins, Ellen, and Michael Jubb. "How DoResearchers in the Humanities Use Information Resources?" LibraryQuarterly 21, no. 2 (2012): 176--187; Helgren, Jamie E. "Paper orElectronic? Futurists have been Pushing One Option or the Other forYears--but do We Have to Choose?" American Libraries Magazine. Lastmodified November 30, 2010.https://americanlibrariesmaga-zine.org/2010/11/30/booking-to-the-future/.

(45) van Arnhem, Jolanda-Pieta J. "Augmented Reality forDiscovery and Instruction." Journal of Web Librarianship 8, no. 2(2014): 214-230.

(46) Hahn, Jim, Ben Ryckman, and Maria Lux. "Topic Space:Prototyping a Mobile Augmented Reality System." code{4}lib 30(2015): 1-18.

(47) Ha Lee, Jin, Keating, Stephen, and Travis Windleharth."Challenges in Preserving Augmented Reality Games: A Case Study ofIngress and Pokemon GO." iPress, Kyoto, Japan, September 25-29,2017.

(48) Zak, Elizabeth. "Do You Believe in Magic? Exploring theConceptualization of Augmented Reality and its Implication for the Userin the Field of Library and Information Science." InformationTechnology and Libraries (2014): 23-50.

(49) Hahn, Ryckman, and Lux. "Topic Space."

(50) "List of Metadata Standards." Digital CurationCenter. Accessed April 07, 2018.http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/metadata-standards/list?page=1.

(51) "ShelvAR: The Augmented Reality Tool for Shelf-readingand Inventory Management in Libraries."

(52) "Searching EBSCO Indexes." ExLibris KnowledgeCenter. Last modified February 15, 2018.https://knowledge.exlibris-group.com/Primo/Content_Corner/Prod-uct_Documentation/PC_Index_Configura-tion_Guide/040Additional_Configura-tions_for_Primo/050Searching_EBSCO_Indexes.

(53) "Configuring the EBSCO Plug-In." ExLibris KnowledgeCenter. Accessed August 22, 2018.https://knowledge.exlibris-group.com/Primo/Product_Documenta-tion/060Back_Office_Guide/110Addi-tional_Primo_Features/Configuring_the_EB-SCO_Plug-In.

(54) Lucker, Amy. "Deal with the Devil: A Participatory Modelfor Off-Site Storage Collection." Art Documentation: Journal of theArt Libraries Society of North America 31 (2012): 286-292.

(55) Hamaker, Charles. "EBooks on Fire: ControversiesSurrounding Ebooks in Libraries." Information Today. Last modifiedDecember 2011. http://www.infoto-day.com/searcher/dec11/Hamaker.shtml

(56) Georgas, "The Case of the Disappearing E-Book."

(57) Hamaker, "EBooks on Fire."

(58) Georgas, "The Case of the Disappearing E-Book."

(59) Dombrowski, Quinn. "What Ever Happened to ProjectBamboo?" Literary and Linguistic Computing (2014): 1-14.

(60) "Nondisclosure Clauses." Cornell University Library.Accessed July 07, 2018.https://www.li-brary.cornell.edu/about/policies/nondisclosure

(61) Darnton, Robert. "The Library: Three Jeremiads," NewYork Review of Books 57, no. 20 (2010).http://www.nybooks.com/articles/ar-chives/2010/dec/23/library-three-jeremiads/

(62) "Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in theSciences and the Humanities." Open Access Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.Accessed November 03, 2016.https://openac-cess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration.

(63) "Welcome to ROARMAP." The Registry of Open AccessRepository Mandates and Policies. Last Accessed July 10, 2018.http://roar-map.eprints.org/.

(64) Morrison, Robbie. "Scholars Seek Open Access in AcademicJournal Deal." Wiki Tribune. Last modified 2018.https://www.wikitrib-une.com/story/2018/01/08/europe/ger-many/german-scholars-seek-open-access-in-ac-ademic-papers-deal/33444/; "aboutDEAL." Projekt Deal. Last accessed July 10, 2018.https://www.projekt-deal.de/about-deal/.

(65) "FASTR: Fair Access to Science & TechnologyResearch." SPARC." Accessed May 25, 2018.https://sparcopen.org/our-work/fastr/

(66) Cook, Matt. "Virtual Serendipity: Preserving EmbodiedBrowsing Activity in the 21st Century Research Library." TheJournal of Academic Librarianship, 44 (2018): 145-149.

(67) Minrva. "Minrva." University of Illinois atUrbana-Champaign. Accessed November 08, 2016.https://minrvaproject.org/.

(68) Hahn, Ryckman, and Lux. "Topic Space.

(69) Sewell, Bethany B. "A Bookless Library, Part I:Relocating Print Materials to Off-Site Storage." Journal of AccessService 10, no. 1 (2013): 43- 50.

(70) American Council of Learned Societies. American Council ofLearned Societies Occasional Paper No.37: Information Technology inHumanities Scholarship: Achievements, Prospects, and Challenges--TheUnited States Focus 1997. New York: ACLS, 1997; (70) Masis, Bruce."Using Virtual and Augmented Reality in the Library."

New Library World. 116, no. 11/12 (2015): 796-799;"Minrva." Minrva.

(71) van Arnhem, "Augmented Reality for Discovery andInstruction."

(72) Hahn, Ryckman, and Lux. "Topic Space."

(73) Ha, Keating, and Windleharth. "Challenges in PreservingAugmented Reality Games."

(74) Zak, Elizabeth. "Do You Believe in Magic? Exploring theConceptualization of Augmented Reality and its Implication for the Userin the Field of Library and Information Science." InformationTechnology and Libraries (2014): 23--50.

(75) Hahn, Ryckman, and Lux. "Topic Space."

(76) "Bibliographic Framework Initiative." Library ofCongress. Accessed November 03, 2016. https://www.loc.gov/bibframe/.

(77) Levine-Clark and Machovec, "Managing the CollaborativeCollection."

(78) "Terms and Conditions of Use." JSTOR.

(79) "Why Portico." Portico. Accessed July 07, 2018.https://www.portico.org/why-portico/.

(80) de Vos, Jesse, Verbruggen, Erwin, and Johan Ooman. Preservingthe Emerging: Virtual Reality and 360-Degree Video, an InternshipResearch Report. Netherlands: Netherland Institute for Sound and Vision,2017. Accessed March 16, 2018.http://publications.beeldenge-luid.nl/pub/584/NISV_final_Candice-Kren-mer.pdf.

(81) Kachaluba, Brady, and Critten. "Developing HumanitiesCollections." ; Rojeski. "User Perceptions of Ebooks VersusPrint Books for Class Reserves in an Academic Library." ReferenceServices Review 40, no. 2 (2011): 228-241; Leggett, Elzabeth."Digital Storage and Archiving in Today's Libraries."Kentucky Libraries 76, no. 3: 30-35; Berti, Monica and Virgilio Costa.2009. "The Ancient Library at Alexandria: A Model for ClassicalScholarship in the Age of Million Book Libraries." In OrbisTerrarum: Essays in Scholarship and Technology: International Symposiumof the Scaife Digital Library, Lexington, Kentucky, March 13, 2009,1-26. Washington, D.C.: Council on Libraries and Information Resources.

(82) Polastron, Lucien X. Books on Fire: The Destruction ofLibraries Throughout History. Rochester: Inner Traditions, 2007; Bertiand Costa. "The Ancient Library of Alexandria."

(83) "Lost Memories--Libraries and Archives Destroyed in theTwentieth Century." UNESCO. Last modified 2002.http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communica-tion-and-information/resources/publications-and-communication-materials/publica-tions/full-list/lost-memory-libraries-and-ar-chives-destroyed-in-the-twentieth-century/

(84) Pierce, David. "The Survival of American Silent Films:1912-1929." Library of Congress. 2013.https://www.loc.gov/pro-grams/static/national-film-preservation-board/documents/pub158.final_ver-sion_sept_2013.pdf.

(85) Barone, Francine, Zeitlyn, David, and Viktor Mayer-Schonb."Learning from Failure: The Case of the Disappearing Websi."First Monday 20, no. 5 (2015). Accessed June 23, 2018.http://firstmonday.org/arti-cle/view/5852/4456

(86) Ibid.

(87) Earhart, Amy. "Loss: Our Disappearing DigitalLegacy," The Diverse History of Digital Humanities (blog),September 07, 2015, http://dhhistory.blogspot.com/2015/09/loss-our-disappearing-digital-legacy.html.

(88) Cohen, Daniel J., and Roy Rosenweig. "Preserving DigitalHistory: What We Can Do Today to Help Tomorrow's Historians."Digital History: A Guide to Gathering, Preserving, and Presenting thePast on the Web. Accessed July 06, 2018,http://chnm.gmu.edu/digitalhistory/pre-serving/.

(89) Ibid.

(90) McKie, Robin, and Vanessa Thorpe. "Digital Domesday Booklasts 15 years not 1000." The Guardian. March 03, 2002.https://www.theguard-ian.com/uk/2002/mar/03/research.elearning.

(91) "GeoCities Special Collection 2009: Saving a HistoricalRecord of GeoCities." Internet Archive. Accessed July 07, 2018,https://ar-chive.org/web/geocities.php.

(92) "GeoCities Neighborhoods." Oocitities.org. AccessedJuly 07, 2018, https://www.oocities.org/.

(93) Kelty, Christopher. "The Disappearing VirtualLibrary." ALJAZEERA. Last modified March 01, 2012.https://www.aljazeera.com/in-depth/opin-ion/2012/02/2012227143813304790.html

(94) Dombrowski, Quinn. "What Ever Happened to ProjectBamboo?" Literary and Linguistic Computing (2014): 1-14.

(95) Ibid.

(96) Simpson, Duncan. "Risk of Digital Data and the Reasons itOccurs: Case Studies and Analysis." Digital Preservation Coalition.Accessed July 03, 2018.https://www.dpconline.org/docs/miscellane-ous/members/117-risk-of-loss-of-digital-data/file.

(97) Rosenthal, David S.H. "Format Obsolescence: Assessing theThreat and the Defenses." Library Hi Tech 28, no. 2 (2010):195-2010; Bengtson, Jason. "Preparing for the Age of the DigitalPalimpsest," Library Hi Tech, 30, no.3 (2012): 513-522.

(98) Schofield, Jack. "Digital Dark Age Looms. "TheGuardian. Last modified January 09, 2003; Rosenthal. "FormatObsolescence."; Li and Branch. "Institutional Repositories adDigital Preservation."; O'Donnell. Daniel P."Disciplinary Impact and Technological obsolescence in DigitalMedieval Studies." In A Companion to Digital Literary Studies,edited by Ray Siemens and Susan Schreibman. Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.

(99) Caplan, Priscilla. "The Florida Digital Archive andDAITSS: A Working Preservation Repository Based on FormatMigration," International Journal on Digital Libraries, 6 (2007):305-311.

(100) McGill. "The State of Scholarly Publishing in theHistory of Art and Architecture."; Ballon and Westermann. "ArtHistory and Its Publications in the Electronic Age."; Rosenthal,David S.H. et al. "Transparent Format Migration of Preserved WebContent," D-Lib Magazine, 11, no.1 (2005).

(101) Marc Perry. "Judge Dismissed Lawsuit Against UCLA OverUse of Streaming Video," Chronicle of Higher Education. Lastmodified October 04, 2011.http://www.chroni-cle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/judge-dismisses-lawsuit-against-ucla-over-use-of-streaming-video/33513.

(102) Georgas, "The Case of the Disappearing E-Book."

(103) Rosenthal. "Format Obsolescence."; Bengtson."Preparing for the Age."

(104) Soussloff, Catherine, et al. "The Aesthetics ofPublishing: The Art Book as Object from Print to Digital." VisualResources: An International Journal of Documentation 24, no. 1 (2008):39--58.

(105) Marche, Stephen. "Literature is not Data: AgainstDigital Humanities." Los Angeles Review of Books. Last modifiedOctober 28, 2012. https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/literature-is-not-data-against-digital-humanities/#!

(106) Schofield. "Digital Dark Age Looms."; Simpson,"Risk of Loss of Digital Data."

(107) Rosenthal. "Format Obsolescence."

(108) Goldman, Ben. "The Tail Wagging the Dog: Challenges ofWorking with Obsolete Computer Media." Electronic Currents (2014).

(109) Durno, John. Code{4}lib 34; Dietrich, Dianne, Jennifer Doty,Jen Green, and Nicole Scholtz. Code{4}lib 5; "Vision." DigitalPreservation Network. Accessed April 08, 2018. https://dpn.org/about;"How DDP Works." Meta Archive. Accessed April 08, 2018.https://metaarchive.org/how-ddp-works/.

(110) "IPUMS and Crypties from around the World," Againstthe Grain, 27, no.4 (2015): 18-22.

(111) Li, Yuan, and Meghan Branch. "Institutional Repositoriesad Digital Preservation: Assessing Current Practices at ResearchLibraries." D-Lib Magazine 17, no. 5/6 (2011): 1-13; Edmond."Collaboration and Infrastructure."

(112) "Locally Archived Websites," UCLA DigitalHumanities. Accessed January 31, 2017.http://www.cdh.ucla.edu/news-events/archiv-ing-websites/.

(113) "Archive-IT." Internet Archive. Accessed July 07,2018. https://archive-it.org/.

(114) Barone, Zeitlyn, and Mayer-Schonb, "Learning fromFailure."

(115) "Net Archive Silences Scientology Critic." Cnet.Last Modified September 25, 2002.https://www.cnet.com/news/net-archive-si-lences-scientology-critic/;"Xenu.net." Internet Archive. Last Accessed July 10, 2018.https://web.archive.org/web/*/xenu.net.

(116) "Google Removes DMCA Offenders; anti-Scientology Sitesthe Latest." Geek.com. Last Modified March 22, 2002.https://www.geek.com/news/google-re-moves-dmca-offenders-anti-scientology-sites-the-latest-549602/.

(117) Marti, Don. "Google Begins Making DMCA TakedownsPublic." LINUX Journal. Last Modified April 12, 2002.https://www.linuxjour-nal.com/article/5997.

(119) Knapton, Sarah. "Print out Digital Photos or Risk LosingThem, Google Boss Warns." The Telegraph. Last modified February 13,2015. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci-ence/science-news/11410506/Print-out-digital-photos-or-risk-losing-them-Google-boss-warns.html

(120) Courant, Paul. "Scholarship and AcademicLibraries." First Monday 11, no. 8 (2006).

(121) "What are the Humanities?" Stanford HumanitiesCenter. Accessed June 01, 2018.http://shc.stanford.edu/what-are-the-humani-ties.

Casey Hoeve ([emailprotected])

Associate Professor and Content Development Librarian for the Arts,Architecture, & the Humanities, Kansas State University