[Genealib] Ethics of digitizing embarrassing material

[Susan Scouras]

I agree whole-heartedly with James Jeffrey.  Anything that has broader
historical value is important to all of society, not just the
individuals involved.  I found the fact that the author of the KKK book
left out the list of names rather disconcerting.  The names and
histories of the real people involved are what legitimizes his research
and makes it more meaningful.  

The only works we have withheld from public view for a specified period
of time at either the author's request or our own judgement(usually
until after the author's death or for 50 years from date of acquisition)
are family histories or manuscripts that reveal intimate details of the
lives of living individuals.  These are not commercially published or
self-published, and have not been offered on the open market, so to
speak. We are uncomfortable doing so--I can only think of 4 examples out
of our thousands of manuscripts and family history documents--and we
have usually tried to get the donor to excise such material or to
re-donate at a later date, but many are afraid their families will
destroy or neglect their work after their deaths, want their stories
told eventually, and want us to take possession now.  Some material is
potentially downright libelous in statements made about fellow
professionals or institutions (doctors, lawyers, hospitals, family
businesses,etc.), while others are sadly revealing of family feuds,
dysfunctional family relationships, and addictions and illnesses within
the family that would be very hurtful to some of the people discussed.
If these were published works, whether as books, periodical or newspaper
articles, or posted on Web sites, we would not withhold them.  In my
opinion, once Pandora's box has been opened, trying to stuff things back
in and slam down the lid amounts to censorship.

Susan Scouras
Librarian
WV Archives and History Library
The Cultural Center
1900 Kanawha Blvd. East
Charleston, WV  25305-0300
(304) 558-0230, Ext. 742