If an Archive Falls in a Forest, Does it Make a Sound?

There's a chilling possible conclusion to be reached from "Digital Archives That Disappear," which explains how Google News purchased PaperofRecord.com, a news collection that was particularly prized by historians for its coverage of Mexican history. Today's Inside Higher Ed writes that the American Historical Association raised the alarm in "'Paper of Record' Disappears, Leaving Historians in the Lurch." The Google forum of angry former users also includes many amateur genealogists who are joining their professional brethren in expressing irritation over what they consider the company's insufficient explanation of the abrupt yanking of access to content they had been researching:

We're currently working on the most effective way to search and browse this valuable content. We're doing our best to find a solution to include as much of the acquired content as possible.

While a lot of this content has been made available through Archive search, we're still refining processes to include incompatible newspaper images in our index. We're also working with certain publishers to acquire the rights to display their content. All of this takes time, and we appreciate your patience. We're constantly making improvements to ensure the best user experience.

Often when I describe my argument about digital libraries in the eighth chapter of the Virtualpolitik book, I'm surprised to hear people's incredulity when considering the possibility that I raise that a private corporation might not be the best conservator for digital copies of materials in the public domain. No academic likes to sound like a proponent of conspiracy theories, so stories like this can be useful to encourage caution about Google's digital acquisitions.

As the New York Times explains in "Google’s Plan for Out-of-Print Books Is Challenged," researchers are also expressing concern this month about Google's acquisition of access rights to orphaned works.

(Thanks to Siva Vaidhyanathan for the links!)