When I first read this article and the idea for a blog post started forming, my instinct was to write something exploring the limitations of our profile as recordkeepers.

'We’ve been talking about these issues for years. There’s lots of good work going on. Why is this presented as ‘new’? Why doesn’t the author know about what we’re doing? What does that say about the status or the visibility of our profession?’

The thing is, it’s too easy to write that. It doesn’t help.

We should welcome this article and others like it. Not because it's saying something new. Not because it's raising questions that we haven't considered. We should welcome it because it's raising those questions in Wired. In a mainstream publication. Not just in a space where we're talking to ourselves.

Comment