UNESCO STAFF SEE WORLD DIGITAL LIBRARY AS EXPANSION OF

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 PARIS 005461 SIPDIS FROM USMISSION TO UNESCO PARIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: UNESCO AINF APER BBSR SCUL AINT EINT TINT KPAO SUBJECT: UNESCO STAFF SEE WORLD DIGITAL LIBRARY AS EXPANSION OF AMERICAN CULTURAL HEGEMONY ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: John Van Oudenaren, Senior Advisor for the Library of Congress (LOC) World Digital Library Initiative (WDL), held an informational meeting with working level UNESCO staff and two separate meetings on June 20 and 21 with staff from the UNESCO Director-General's (DG) office. Elizabeth Longworth, the Chef de Cabinet to the Director General, addressed UNESCO's general expectations of the LOC, the European view of the WDL and plans for a December Experts Meeting. Van Oudenaren also met with the Director General's Advisor for the United States, Hillary Wiesner and Advisor for Communication and Information Issues, Krista Pikkat, who had general questions. All of the interlocutors from the DG's office, while generally supportive of the project, held misperceptions about its nature. While DG staff emphasized how the WDL fit in with UNESCO's role on the post World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) scene, they seemed more cautious on a UNESCO role in the WDL itself than in previous meetings. END SUMMARY. -------------- SECRETARIAT STILL UNCLEAR ON WDL: SIPDIS -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Van Oudenaren repeatedly stated to UNESCO staff that the WDL is different from the European Digital Library (EDL). (NOTE: The EDL is a mass digitization project, which was designed as a publicly funded project in response to Google Print whereas the WDL is a project to put rare and remote items on the web. END NOTE.) In earlier meetings with Axel Plathe, Deputy for the Information Society Division of the Communication and Information Sector and Abdelaziz Abid, Deputy Director of the Divsions' Universal Access and Preservation Section, both stated that they thought the WDL was a mass digitalization project. They also mistakenly thought it would be a portal. Longworth, the DG's new top advisor and previous Director of the Information Society Division of the UNESCO Communication and Information Sector, shared this view. ¶3. (SBU) Van Oudenaren stated that Librarian of Congress James Billington wants the WDL to be more than a portal; he wants it to be its own product, which would focus on unique and rare items and draw from the LOC experience with the bi-lateral Global Gateway projects and the LOC's own American Memory website. Longworth said the DG had asked if a feasibility study could be done before UNESCO got more involved with the WDL. She stated that if the U.S. did its homework on the project and could describe what it was and what it was not, then the DG could be supportive. ¶4. (SBU) Longworth and Plathe identified Aziz as UNESCO's WDL focal point. (NOTE: Aziz stated in later meetings that he plans to retire next summer and hopefully become the national librarian of his native Tunisia. END NOTE.) Aziz asked van Oudenaren to participate in a joint session with UNESCO on the World Digital Library in order to build momentum at the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) meeting in Seoul in August 2006, and suggested a large public launch in June 2007. -------------- LONGWORTH STRESSES EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE: -------------- ¶5. (SBU) Longworth noted that the Europeans might be more inclined to join the WDL if there were a UNESCO label on it. She repeatedly mentioned European reservations with the WDL project, stated that the involvement of Google was a problem for many, and added that Jean-Nokl Jeanneney, President of the Bibliothhque Nationale de France, leader of the European Digital Library project, and author of the book "Google and the Myth of Universal Knowledge" had a "specific constituency" that he needed to address. Longworth urged the LOC to explain the WDL and its connection to Google in order to build their support for the initiative. (COMMENT: Jeanneney's new book argues that Google's digitization of books from partner libraries and its heavy reliance on works in English are deliberate acts of selection which will extend the dominance of American culture abroad. Jeanneney wrote that an archive that ignores great European literature in this way - and whose development is commercially driven - cannot provide the foundation for a universal library. END COMMENT.) Van Oudenaren stated that he had met with Jeanneney while in Paris and would invite him to the UNESCO Experts Meeting in December, though he stated that he expected that Jeanneney would hesitate to attend. (COMMENT: Mission wonders whether Longworth's cautious mood is driven by certain member state pressure. END COMMENT.) -------------- DECEMBER MEETING AGENDA: -------------- ¶6. (SBU) The discussion then turned to the WDL Stakeholder's Meeting (known in UNESCO speak as an "expert's meeting") that will be held at UNESCO headquarters from November 31 to December 1, 2006. Longworth suggested casting the meeting as grist for a feasibility study, and using the meeting to find out what stakeholders want. Van Oudenaren noted that the draft agenda included discussions on Architecture (including multilingualism),Selection, Governance, and Financing. He stated that he hoped to establish working groups on these and other issues. Longworth said UNESCO could help with multilingualism and using search engines across languages. She noted that the multilingual aspect of the site would tie into the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) Action Line C8 (Cultural and Linguistic Diversity on the Internet),one of the 6 WSIS action lines where UNESCO is identified as a potential facilitator. -------------- MEETING OTHER STAFF FROM THE DG'S OFFICE: -------------- ¶7. (SBU) In a separate meeting, Van Oudenaren also saw DG staff members Hillary Wiesner and Krista Pikkat. Van Oudenaren began by outlining steps that could be taken to link UNESCO to the project. These included the LOC participating in a panel discussion at the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) meeting in Seoul in August 2006 and the experts meeting in December 2006 at UNESCO Hq. Van Oudenaren stated that the December meeting could include Global Gateway librarians that the LOC has worked with, along with librarians from the developing world. He added that participants would exchange ideas and then develop working groups. Van Oudenaren said it would be possible later for the LOC and UNESCO to talk about a launch once there are 3 or 4 concrete examples of what the WDL could become. He noted that Billington wanted concrete results that could later be shown to Google's Sergey Brin, in the hope of obtaining further funding. ¶8. (SBU) Van Oudenaren stated that multilingualism will be a significant aspect of the WDL, and that the project should not be seen as an English-language dominated project. Van Oudenaren said the LOC understood the importance of multilingualism, and would work with the National Science Foundation (NSF) and Google on this component of the WDL. The NSF, in particular, has a grant program for developing internet technology and a scientific interest in promoting how to handle languages on the web. -------------- LOC'S PROGRESS WITH THE WDL: -------------- ¶9. (SBU) In response to Wiesner's question about how the WDL was progressing, Van Oudenaren said that there were 4 bilateral projects currently in play with 3 to 4 people working on them, and the LOC needed to get them working together. The LOC's Chief Information officer and her 3 top lieutenants were engaged in the project, he added. He said there were three main technical aspects that the LOC was working on: digitization standards, web presentation, and archives. There was also a digitization team to find and install preservation and scanning equipment in developing countries such as Egypt and Indonesia. In developing countries, van Oudenaren noted the importance of training local staff and addressing preservation and scanning challenges such as heat and sand. -------------- LEGAL AGREEMENTS: -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Van Oudenaren also added that negotiating agreements with various countries could be very cumbersome, and said a simplified standardized agreement would be helpful. Wiesner suggested UNESCO could help formulate a legal template and added that UNESCO may already have a contract that it used for the Memory of the World program that might be used. -------------- REACHING BEYOND NATIONAL LIBRARIES: -------------- ¶11. (SBU) Because in today's world one can search anything by Google, Van Oudenaren stressed that for the WDL to be relevant, it needs to put rare and remote materials on the web and create access. To do this, the LOC would work not only with national libraries, but also with other institutions such as municipal libraries. Wiesner asked if the WDL would work with private collections, and van Oudenaren stated that they had digitized private holdings on Timbuktu, but would prefer to access items that the public would have an opportunity, in principle, to see. -------------- POSSIBLE WDL SMALL GRANTS: -------------- ¶12. (SBU) There is a lot of interest in the WDL, Van Oudenaren noted, but the LOC only has enough money to work with a few countries right now. For this reason, the LOC would like to start a small grant program of grants consisting of $20-30,000. Van Oudenaren noted that this would be a way for people to feel involved with the project while creating content and asked if UNESCO could provide advice on how to set up a grant program for developing countries. Wiesner and Pikkat asked if LOC would set up country-level selection panels for the grant program. Van Oudenaren stated that he did not want to set up a system where countries had to choose one item for the WDL in the model of UNESCO's Memory of the World program. -------------- COMMENT: -------------- ¶13. (SBU) While UNESCO interlocutors were enthusiastic about the WDL, the meetings exposed misunderstandings on their part about the nature of the WDL and a corresponding need to share more information on the nature and scale of the subject. To that end, Mission has made available the full text of Van Oudenaren's working-level presentation to UNESCO staff. Washington may want to assess how much of an obstacle some UNESCO member states' attitude is towards Google and U.S.-initiated global cultural ventures. It may also want to continue building bi-lateral support with a wide variety of UNESCO member states before entering the politically charged and highly bureaucratic UNESCO ring. KOSS