Discussing and addressing the issues of saving our history from digital midden heaps!
Records Management Policies and Social Networking
June 25, 2009 at 4:35 pm #74756
Looking for examples, ideas, discussion about integrating social networking policies with records management policies.
I tend to think that social networking generates records in the same way a conference or a water cooler chat creates records, but I don’t have visibility into the creative application of these technologies.
Can a blog post *be* the *official* notice of a decision?
June 25, 2009 at 5:46 pm #74766
June 25, 2009 at 5:58 pm #74764
Excellent resource. I had totally forgotten about this. Too many apples and not enough baskets!
October 7, 2009 at 4:02 pm #74762
Susan J LeeParticipant
I attended a panel discussion yesterday on Social Media in government sponsored by the Women in Defense organization. These folks were all involved in public affairs arenas. When the question of whether there was any consideration of records management on social media, most of the presenters said they did not have any current policy on that. One presenter said the general impression is that things posted to social media venues was considered temporary. She cited the instance of a blog posted by a congressman that was pulled down immediately when statements he made were not considered appropriate. Depending on the use, some social media can be attributable. NGA apparently does have some attribution policy on their Intellipedia sites. The presenters also said they use social media for informal announcements and to gain interest. They still use the conventional media routes for formal announcements. With social media, it’s all about immediacy and relevance. At what point do postings qualify as records? I think the definition of ‘temporary record’ may need to be looked at.
October 7, 2009 at 5:30 pm #74760
Good points all. I think most of the socnet stuff is water cooler talk. But, when you are dealing with lawyers…
It’s not just the temporal aspect of something, but also it intent.
I may focus on an aspect of a topic to engage you, but focus on another aspect to engage someone else. Or I may be playing devil’s advocate when I assert something. The people “in on it” know the context and intent. Someone 10 minutes later won’t. So, how does that kind of thing play out in history? Court? Do we care that Thomas Jefferson and Albert Gallatin had a running joke about Alexander Hamilton’s sex life? (I don’t know if they did…but they could have…)
May 5, 2010 at 3:52 pm #74758
As with all ‘records’ in a Federal context, it’s content NOT form of media or or method of communication that determines it’s “recordness”. Same is true with the temporary/transitory record comment- it can’t be deemed as such simply because it was in a blog post, sent via Twitter, posted on Facebook, etc.
The transitory record for e-mail guidance only allows it (an e-mail that meets the definition of a record, but only has a limited value and short retention period) to remain in the native application for the 180 day period- that means it doesn’t need to be transferred to a formal recordkeeping system. The same is not stated as being true for social networking apps- the guidance doesn’t apply to ALL electronic communication systems.
In fact, there is also language in 36CFR stating that instant messaging systems are NOT TO BE USED for anything meeting the definition of a record unless it can be captured. This is why I can’t understand the concept of the Federal Agencies allowing the use of Facebook, Twitter and other similar applications in a business setting without clearly providing guidance as to what they should and more importantly should NOT be used for.
Blogs are different- they are hosted by third parties, but you can copy/extract the content and save it as a text file (or GASP!) print it and save it as paper.
Even the NARA guidance cited by another post states there may be a need to capture the content and a risk assessment should be performed to determine how the records management aspects are achieved. It’s also interesting when the guidance speaks of blogs and wikis, it’s talking about INTERNALLY controlled content managed inside an Agency’s firewall- NOT public blogs that you are unable to control the content on or that is stored elsewhere.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.