“Trusting Archivists” Review

• Dingwall, Glenn. "Trusting Archivists: The Role of Archival Ethics Codes in Establishing Public Faith," American Archivist 67 (2004): 11-30.

This article examines the reasons that archives professionals should have a code of ethics to which they subscribe. Dingwall argues that on the continuum between occupations that are and are not professions, archivists fall somewhere in the middle. This leads him to ask why archivists should subscribe to a code of ethics. His main contention is that archivists should subscribe to a professional code to foster a trust of archivists by the public. Archivists have complex professional relationships with their various constituencies. Archivists must balance their commitments to both records creators and patrons, and serve as a mediator between the two. They must also answer to their employers.

Dingwall surveys the various differences in the codes of several professional archives organizations. He notes that all of them are deontologically based yet include teleological elements. He argues that archivists need to be active in comparing and revising ethical codes to include more teleological language. He believes that such actions will increase the public's trust and understanding of the archival profession. Archivists should be aware of these codes and use them in carrying out their work. Likewise, they should educate others about archival ethics.

“In Secret Kept, In Silence Sealed,” Review

• Hodson, Sara. "In Secret Kept, In Silence Sealed: Privacy in the Papers of Authors and Celebrities," American Archivist 67 (2004): 194-211.

Keeping the private papers of living individuals can often be a difficult task because much of the content of their correspondence may be extremely private and sensitive. When keeping these types of papers, archivists run the risk of compromising the individual's privacy rights through allowing patrons to intrude into the person's private affairs or expose embarrassing facts about the person. However, the situation does not necessarily go away at the creator's death. Other individuals are often mentioned in private papers, or there are letters in the collection that they have written. In this article, Hodson recounts the difficulties that attend archivists who are trying to balance privacy rights and access for the papers that belonged to various types of celebrities.

Hodson notes four reasons why handling these types of papers are more difficult than handling traditional historical collections. First, they are by nature high profile, because their creators were high profile. Second, because they are private papers, they deal with individuals instead of events. Third, copyright issues often come to the fore when dealing with these papers. Fourth, because of the nature of competition for these types of unique papers, archivists are forced to try to obtain the papers while the creators are still living. Hodson notes that there are no good answers for how to deal with the situations. She recommends being familiar with privacy issues and setting guidelines within which an archives can try, as much as possible, to protect a creator's privacy. I just wish Howard Gottlieb had given us the answer before he passed away.

Ethics and the Archival Profession Book Review

• Benedict, Karen, editor. Ethics and the Archival Profession: Introduction and Case Studies, Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 2003.

The Society of American Archivists's Ethics and the Archival Profession is a an explanation of the 1992 revision of their "Code of Ethics for Archivists." The 2005 revision of this document is available from the SAA website. The code governs the ethical conduct of archivists, and the SAA's original code was the first ethical code developed for archivists. Karen Benedict strives, in this work, to make a firm distinction between ethical and professional principles. Ethical principals are the moral obligations incumbent upon a practicioner of a profession. Issues of professional conduct are generally issues regarding how an archivist relates to patrons, other archives, and his or her institution of employment. Benedict notes that both the 1980 and 1992 versions of the code include items that deal with the ethical and the professional. In my opinion, the 2005 revision of the code appears to be more narrowly focused upon the ethical obligations of the profession.

Benedict outlines several practical areas that ethics affects within institutions. She notes that the code recommends that institutions avoid competition. This recommendation raises several questions pertaining to how archivists practically do this. Another area of practical concern is donor relations. This is of concern because relating to donors often touches upon legal issues (right to privacy, taxes, intellectual property) and ethical issues (access, confidentiality, and authenticity.) Other practical areas for ethics include professional benchmarks regarding issues such as staffing and budget. These issues determine how well archives can preserve collections.

Benedict also points out that there are distinctions between laws and ethics. Occasionally, these two come into conflict. Archivists may be required by law to do what is professionally unethical. Likewise, in striving to be ethical, they may be required to break the law. Benedict recommends that in such circumstances, archivists much act in accord with conscience with full understanding of the potential consequences for their actions. The main areas of legality that archivists generally have to reckon with are issues of privacy rights and property rights. Privacy rights can affect restiricting materials or selecting collections. Property rights can affect areas such as theft. Archivists should be aware of the laws that govern these areas and should assure their donors that they are aware of the legal obligations in these areas.

The remainder of Benedict's work provides a variety of helpful case studies that touch upon every area of the 1992 revision of the code. Benedict provides several helpful appendices, one of which includes the 1992 revision of the "Code of Ethics for Archivists." Although many of the sections of the code have now changed, the issues addressed in this book are of enduring value. Although many of the case studies no longer apply to the newly released code, they still serve as helpful guides to appropriate professional conduct for archivists.