 Kaia, nian, jubini, nunuk, jian, wanju, nian, Lisa Gibbons, nian, Perthak, ninini, nian, Nungau, Wankinni, Karagini. Hello, I am Lisa. I live and work on Wajak Nungau Buja, which is Perth, Western Australia. One of my research areas explores how social media makes space for personal and community memory making. My talk today is about finding and documenting the various types of community archives on Facebook. Before I tell you what I have been doing, there are a few key ideas to explain. I am not going to delve into community archives definitions. You are probably aware of them in this presentation. But I can talk about them if you have questions. Instead, I want to talk to you about this idea of community memory making. The concept of memory making can be placed into other ideas and practices such as record keeping, archiving and documentation. However, in my previous research into YouTube, I developed a definition of memory making as a participative, dynamic and co-created process between technologies, individuals, communities, organisations, institutions and corporations. It is similar also to how Canadian archival scholar Terry Cook, who writes about memory making, is saying by saying it is undertaken by varied diverse groups as part of creating, inventing, reinventing and reimagining identity over time. The concept of memory making is underpinned by a desire or drive to archive, which is described here as archivalisation, a term coined by Dutch archival scholar Eric Ketler during Fronterida. A key aspect of archivalisation is the drive and intention to preserve, to archive, to remember. The processes of memory making, therefore, are just as important as the outcomes. Importantly, archivalisation is also an activity of power, wielded by governments and memory institutions such as archives, libraries and museums. However, memory making also drives individuals and communities. At the heart of memory making as a process is the construction of narratives, which can be counter, parallel, multiple, subversive and marginal, a diversity of multiple memory perspectives. These ideas link to the notion of memory work, a term that is seemingly benign but or neutral in that it is what it says it is. But memory work is actually about power, who has it and why and how that constructs and can be used to deconstruct and reframe memory over time. Ann Stoller, anthropologist and historian, brought post-colonial theory to the archival discipline, which also brought the idea of memory work. Her research helps question what it means to give space to memory, whose memory, whose truth, whose history. Memory work is also a strong part of feminist and social justice discourse. It is important here for this research because it helps us understand that all kinds of people and organisations do memory work for lots of different reasons. And finding out those reasons, I would argue, is an archivist's work. So what is a community? This question is a little bit tricky and attempts have been made by many others before me to figure it out. So what I want to focus on, however, is how Facebook defines community and the implications of that. Facebook describes its groups, which is the primary focus of the initial research I'm talking about today, as a space to communicate about shared interests with certain people and a tool to build community. This definition highlights two key concerns that underpin Facebook's idea of community, sharing and grouping. Akron Brubaker, whose quote is up there on the slide, referred to Facebook as a technology that shapes how memory is performed. The notion of shaping memory through design and use of technology is an important theme of this research. With these ideas in mind, I conceptualise Facebook groups and other acts of memory making on social media as emergent archives. Emergent archives are outside spaces, emerging spaces that support the creation and recreation of identity and memory. So my initial project was to find Facebook groups dedicated to the purpose of remembering Western Australia and to examine what stories they told. So this is the research strategy. I developed five criteria to undertake the search on Facebook. The purple highlighted row shows the search terms that I used. I did do searches for remember and remembering, then archive and archives, but they brought up the same results. From this initial search, I found 27 groups that expressed community remembering and their identity in various ways. So from these groups, I identified various ways they expressed themselves as a collective. I won't go through all of these up on the screen in detail, but they are based on time, spatial, social, cultural and political identities. A really interesting thing I saw was that some groups clearly existed before Facebook and some only existed because of Facebook. I also collected information about the groups including who were the administrators, how many there were, when the groups were created and if changes were made. From this data, some really intriguing things appeared such as some groups did not have any administrators and were clearly abandoned. Some groups were repeated in that the same person had created about five of the groups with nearly identical titles as if they were trying to get it right. The key activities performed in the groups included sharing memories through stories and comments, sharing photos and or videos, and sharing information such as archival sources, documents, links and description. These activities are both enabled and limited by the Facebook platform. So what I found in the 27 groups generally aligned with Anne Gilliland's Community Archives research described in the VIA or Voice Identity Activism Framework from 2012. On the slide is the motivations for creating community archives that Gilliland identifies in her research. These motivations were evident in all the 27 groups I found as well. However, what is missing from Gilliland's work and what is vital to my research is the mediating role of technologies. Drawing from the findings it was quite clear and of course makes a logical sense that Facebook constructs the page in which people create their emergent archives. From a critical perspective, this observation raises several questions, some of which have been flagged previously by researchers in other disciplines. From the perspective of the community, the technology or platform offers a network and space for recording and shaping memory over time through the tools available. What this means is that the technology co-constructs the space for memory making. Without it, some groups and all the documented memory within the network would not exist. As we all know, everything that is captured, shared and stored is part of a network of data documented and managed by Facebook for the purpose of its own sustainability and profit. Facebook is in control. However, control is also embedded in how Facebook groups are formed and controlled by the users themselves. It is the creator or founder or administrator of a group who controls the process of framing. They choose the Facebook group in the first place. They choose what is documented and who can join and who can be part of the shared identity. Even if there are multiple administrators, these groups are still created by a single profile and are more extensions of individual or personal memory making than shared memory. Where individuals can reach out across the platform to engage with other individuals, groups and pages in particular are isolated with the goal of drawing in members rather than extending relationships and memory, which makes group memory a bit more fragmented. Although it is possible to link one group to another with which Facebook conceptualises as a recommendation function, it is not possible to merge groups you can only link them. This fragments memories while at the same time extends the context of identity. Memories are also fragmented by the abandonment of groups. Added to this, it is not possible to download a group archive as you can an individual profile. An administrator can archive a group, but it has a different meaning. Finally, groups behind a registration process and searchable really only via the mysterious Facebook platform. What this means is that seeking out groups is determined by my experience of Facebook, generated and controlled by the Facebook algorithms. I had always had group suggestions on the side, which made me wonder why they didn't appear in the results. What this meant was that I had no clue as to whether or not I really found all the groups relevant to the search as I conducted. Ultimately, this raises several questions about power, discoverability and control and how this is part of the system design. So from the findings of this project, there is a sense that something is being preserved or an expectation of preservation. However, these groups are not really archives in the sense that they have a realistic life or ability to be preserved beyond the immediate present, but they never really go away as is the case of abandoned groups. A lifespan does loom though, but it is specifically tied to the platform and the company. This makes me interested to know more about how is time understood by people creating community archives on Facebook. Facebook affords a space for community memory making, but this research, along with others before me, highlights the funneling or channeling of the lived experience of Facebook. We don't really control our virtual space and we don't quite know how Facebook does. How does this impact on what is being perceived as remembering by the people who create these groups? What is important to know about it as context for understanding what kind of community archive it is? So the research I've been talking about today was published this year and it's really a pilot project. I've already started to work on extending it by looking at pages, not just groups. I've begun building a database of these emergent community archives and I've also added a term, reflect, to the search terms. However, I don't trust Facebook to give me all the information available. So I'm trying to design a way to ask people to send me links to the community archives on Facebook, what they perceive as community archives. I also want to figure out how best to develop this database so it's searchable and meaningful for anyone who wants to use it. Next, as I mentioned earlier, the VIA framework talks of motivations and my research is currently missing the voice of the people who create and are active in these spaces. So another next step is interviews, which I should be able to conduct mid next year. And finally, I'm interested in what the diversity of community memory making on Facebook is, who cares about it and how it shows evidence of memory making. What will people share with me about what they think community archives and memory making is? I suspect more than what I've been finding. On the screen here, on the right-hand side, is two pages, a group and a page that I found through my searches. On the left-hand side is a group I'm particularly interested in and it has not as yet appeared in the search results. But it is about documenting and documenting a particular kind of social context. And I wonder if it will appear in the searches or will be submitted. There's a good story about that page if you're not familiar with it and you can ask me about it. So this is, if you're unfamiliar with it, Paul Butler's Facebook friend visualization from 2010. It's a Facebook engineering visualization they created. This is an updated version. I think it's around 2017. They didn't give me a date, unfortunately. So why care about this kind of research? In my research, I propose that social media technologies play a mediating role for the creation, management and dissemination of memory and identity. Placing social media as a mediator lets me consider what kind of mediator it is. What does the technology system do and how does it impact on people particularly in relation to creating, sharing and placing value on memory making and its outputs. And so if we understand how individuals value memory work and how it connects to communities and shared values, we can build a contextual picture of how people who use these technologies value them. This is related to what Summa Chemish calls evidence of me and what Nesmouth and Bastion refer to as societal provenance. To find out what constitutes evidence of culture. This can help decide what personal record keeping practices and outcomes are evidence of us and what is collective memory. And finally this research asks who holds power, what kind of power and where and when has it held. One of my research students talks about a YouTube channel where women read out their diaries for all to hear. That is about harnessing their own power of production and dissemination. But as you know power appears to be in the hands of the individual or the community but is really controlled by corporations. In the case of Facebook they actively curate, experiment and sometimes even disrupt with an individual's experience of the site. So finally Terry Cook advocated for professional archivists to learn more about why people document themselves in the ways they do by exploring community archives. The goal is to help professionals and institutions to understand what it means to document society from multiple perspectives. And my goal is to examine the unique network to nature of the technologies and people who are already doing the documenting. Thank you. So last night I was chatting with my son over dinner and I said I've got a big day tomorrow. And he said, oh what are you doing dad? And I said I've got to go and talk to a lot of people in a really big room. And he said, oh that sounds scary. So thanks for the vote of confidence from my son for that. So as mentioned in the introduction I left the sector about nine months ago. I handed in my NDF membership pass and I walked away. Promptly forgetting everything and then Jess came to me and paraphrasing her words. You did some stuff about Facebook at the cricket museum. Do you want to come and speak on a panel? And foolishly I said yes, which meant that I got to dive back into what we did in terms of Facebook and social media at the cricket museum. So I got access back to our Facebook account and I started digging back through the messages. And they were all sort of, hi, I like the New Zealand cricket team. Hi, how can I play for the New Zealand cricket team? And I realised that there was a point where I got into a spiral of responding to everybody which was about 20 messages long of sorry we can't help you. Yes, but I really want to play for the New Zealand cricket team. Sorry, but we're a museum. So I learned to listen around that. But it got me thinking about the kind of responses that I used to get from people when I said I worked at the cricket museum. And the first one was usually New Zealand's got a cricket museum. And sort of thanks to Facebook and social media I think a lot more people know that now. And the other response that I got was okay, cricket, it's a real love it or hate it kind of thing. So a lot of my focus was on telling stories that weren't just about cricket. And I thought the best way that I could actually talk about what we did in terms of Facebook was to tell a story. So the story starts in 1900 and this is really the only cricket element of it. The Melbourne Cricket Club came over from Australia. They were touring around New Zealand and they played a game in Wanganui against a combined Taranaki and Wanganui team. It was a big deal for the time for New Zealand. Cricket was our number one sport. Rugby was still just a piddling little pastime that cricketers did in winter. So having the Melbourne Cricket Club come and play was massive. And in the combined team there were five brothers, the cave brothers. So they had some really good New Zealand names. Hen Lennon Ken. They played in the game and Wilfred and Arthur umpire. Henry's story is interesting in that his son Harry went on to captain New Zealand to play Test Cricket. And then Lennon Caves got a slightly different story. So it's Lennon's story that I want to share but I sort of have to jump ahead a little bit to 2013. And I walk in the door at the Cricket Museum, very traditional museum. And one of the first things I do is decide that we should be on social media. So sign up to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram. And the Dom post took notice largely because I had a friend working there and I thought he might have been nicer to me. And in the Capital Day section there's a little comment that says, you know that Facebook's taking over the world if even the New Zealand Cricket Museum's on it. But I surged on and it's interesting hearing Lisa talk about communities because I think that was a large part of our success, was that there were existing communities of engaged cricket fans out there so we could start talking to them. And it meant at times that we got massive engagement levels. You know in summer talking about records being broken and those kind of things we would see engagement levels that would be better than what we could see in large museums with sort of dedicated social media team. So that felt really good but for me it wasn't about the numbers. It was more about a really high level of engagement, continuing conversations, being able to talk to people, being able to connect. So as part of that and part of that connection to a story that's not just about cricket, in 2014 we started planning an exhibition around cricketers in World War I. On a foreign field was the exhibition and it was an outdoor exhibition at the Basin Reserve which told the stories of 11 cricketers who'd gone off to war. One of those cricketers was Leonard Cave and this was sort of the first time that I'd found out about Leonard and I found out about his exploits playing the Melbourne Cricket Club where he took six wickets and nearly led his team to a win and I knew that we had a lot of stuff of Harry Cave, the son of his brother who ended up playing cricket for New Zealand and that was really the only connection that we had. So as well as having this outdoor exhibition at the Basin Reserve we told some of these stories online. So we told the story of how Leonard Cave left the family farm that he worked with his brother, joined the New Zealand Field Artillery and went to war. In 1916 he was injured at the Some. 100 years later we're sharing his story and I get a message from an anonymous private collector and he's a bit cagey in this message. He says, I shouldn't be telling you this. Collectors don't like telling museums these things but Leonard Cave's war medals are for sale in Australia and I was pretty excited about that. This is great but the thing that led to my mind was the Winnie the Pooh stories I've been reading my kids. Winnie the Pooh was a bear of very little brain and we were a museum of very little money. But Winnie the Pooh underestimated himself and he still had some pretty amazing adventures. So we went on a little bit of an adventure too and we ended up buying Leonard Cave's medals. So that was an amazing get for us. It added to his story, it was a really tangible piece of it, something that we could put on display. I think I cried when I got them. It's like, holy crap, this is amazing. Cos all we'd ever had was a photo in somebody else's collection. That was all we'd have of Leonard Cave. So we put up a post saying, hey, we've got these medals, this is great. And then in 2017 a teenage boy tags his dad in the post on Facebook and says, hey, dad, they're talking about him at the Cooker Museum. And his dad replies and says, it's so funny. Yesterday I was reading his letters from the front and so I had to sit down again. Obviously I'm getting quite attached to this story. So these letters are from 1917, they're written in Belgium, Leonard's own handwriting. Typical of letters from the front, you can tell how bloody awful it is for this guy but he's trying not to convey all of that to the people back at home. And so we get in touch with the family and we get copies of these letters from the front line and we put them online. We share the story again. And so this is 2017. We're continuing to tell these little bits and pieces of Leonard's story as they come in. We go back to 1917 in Belgium and there's an air raid and a Lancastrian called James Frederick Wood is killed. And James' family living in the UK today didn't actually know where James' grave was until they read our story and our posts about Leonard Cave. Leonard Cave was killed in the same air raid that James Frederick Wood was killed. So there was this amazing thing that happened where we suddenly had this new story emerging and I was in a discussion with now, Leonard Cave's family, James Wood's family and we were building up this story of them all together. What happened in 2017 on the 100th anniversary of the death of these two men is that the Wood family went to their grave. They read a poem, they played the last post and they placed a note from the Crooked Museum on the grave. So 100 years after going to war we shared Leonard's story and it got a bit bigger. 100 years after his death we shared his story and it got a little bit bigger. If I think about this story without Facebook, Leonard Cave was a name and a score sheet, a photo in somebody else's collection that we could link to a significant New Zealand cricketer who was represented in our collection. With Facebook, Leonard Cave's story is one of the most meaningful stories I've told. My wife, particularly from having six years working at the Crooked Museum, despises cricket. She loves this story, told it to her, we both shared a tear and for me it was just a great example of the power of social media and the approach that we took which was that every visitor on social media is a visitor. It was really easy for us in terms of visitors to the museum. We were small, people who came in were obviously highly engaged in the content of our exhibits so we spent a lot of time with them. We would have one-on-one conversations with these people. We would find out things, find stories well on Facebook. For me this is a great example of that where people were open to commenting on our posts, to tagging each other in, to sharing and then we made sure that we were part of that conversation as well and it helped our collection grow through objects, copies of objects and we got this ultimate connection all the way back to Leonard Cave. It's a final resting place in Belgium. That's it from me. Thank you to everybody for sticking around to hear about Facebook for an hour. I thank you to Jamie and Lisa for agreeing to my weird do you want to be on a panel about Facebook which seems a bit strange and I hope that it's starting to kind of emerge as to why we wanted to talk about Facebook which is that it's both this really important tool to use and that people are on Facebook but as some of the keynotes have alluded to and that Lisa alluded to there's a lot of interesting questions about power and ownership within Facebook which is why I've been quite interested about what Facebook means for archives and libraries and especially for collecting. I'm going to talk a little bit today about a project that we're running which is very much an experiment with our ATL 100 centennial program of work which is the Facebook archives project. For a number of years the ATL digital collections team has been thinking about digital collecting and preservation activities and among those we've been looking at obsolete media and how we can make those accessible for our users and researchers for their time but we've also spent some time thinking about what's happening in contemporary and current digital life and the use of digital formats digital applications, digital platforms and how what we're doing what we're collecting and preserving in contemporary life if we're doing enough if we're doing the right things and how that is going to affect future research. So one of the things a while ago that our web archivist did was look at websites that we had been collecting over time and noticing and being able to document the shift to so much of those websites were now all just Facebook pages they were no longer websites and so the tools and the workflows and the processes that we had in place didn't work to be able to capture this material which was now on Facebook. So but because there are these Facebook social media platforms collecting and preserving them is a bit more challenging partly because we didn't have the tools but also because it's not just technical but there's also some legal some social and some cultural questions about what we're doing when we're collecting from third party platforms but and I think this is a really big but is we knew Facebook was important we knew it played a role I think in Jamie and Lisa have both really made clear about the kind of the role that Facebook plays there's more than 2 billion people using Facebook and roughly 65% of the population in Aotearoa there's 3.1 million users so we know that Facebook's used to connect people with their friends and their family to share information but like as Lisa was saying Facebook has become a memory site both for community archives also for personal memories for people to think about who they are and the things that are important that they want to share with their friends and their family and I think Facebook is itself very aware of that right so you always get the sort of what happened on this day your most commented story from last year this was your favorite picture on this day 5 years ago here's what you were doing so Facebook knows that all that content that they have in there is an important memories of our lives and so that's part of what intrigued me this idea that Facebook could be an individuals personal digital archive so to what extent was Facebook this digital archive was this just something I was kind of playing with was it a theoretical idea or was there some sort of evidence of that and I think how we answer that question on any given day has an impact on what we collect so we started thinking okay let's maybe collect Facebook but we also know that Facebook and all of the really the social media platforms they're not neutral utilities or platforms that are just storing our digital lives we know that as Aliza mentioned they have the power to shape our perspectives our thoughts, our understanding of the world the Christchurch mosque terror attacks shown us that Facebook can be used to broadcast and spread hate so it's not just an easy thing to go out and decide we want to collect Facebook so these were kind of some of the things that we were thinking about but I was also thinking all that stuff is showing us that the landscape around our social media is constantly changing and if we don't try and think about what we're collecting now because it is owned on Facebook the material is if we rely on Facebook to manage it we don't have any kind of we don't know how long it's going to last we don't know in what format it's going to last but that content is there and there are currently mechanisms to download and get that content yourself if it belongs to you so part of the reason for the project was we wanted to begin collecting and understanding Facebook just as digital objects as collection items but we also wanted to give people some information about how they could actually download a copy of their material and care for it as their own personal digital archive so they could have all those material that's inside Facebook outside Facebook that there are options to do that and whether or not the end result was the collections ended up with the National Library at least people were getting a bit more information hopefully we could put that information out there that there are some options to take a little bit of control of the content that's inside Facebook so the actual Facebook Archives project was launched a couple months ago now in September I believe and again I think it was just us kind of wanting to know is your Facebook an archive of you and what does that mean is it our manuscripts, our diaries our correspondence, our photo albums ephemera is it just the 21st century idea or because as Lisa was talking about it's mediated through the Facebook platform that technology is it something entirely new and what is that going to tell us about how people in the future are going to understand digital contemporary life and how we managed and stored and collected our own ideas about ourselves so we came up with this idea to just invite people to donate their Facebook archives to us and see what happens so basically what we came up with was this project where you could essentially donate your Facebook archive and three easy steps and hopefully we tried to make it as easy as possible it's actually a bit more complicated we're asking users to do quite a bit but hopefully we've given them steps along the way and one of the things that we really wanted to do was make sure that people had a sense of confidence and trust in us of what we were going to do with their Facebook data because it is a lot of people's personal information their friends information so we gave people essentially three options for access to the material over time they could make it available right now but just in the reading room so we wouldn't put it online and make it available anywhere it would just be for researchers in the reading room they could restrict it for 25 years so nobody can have access to it for 25 years and then it will be available to researchers and our third and most restrictive option was restricted for 100 years which kind of was to tie in with the ATL 100 so what will the Alexander Turnbull Library research in 100 years look like well we'll be able to open these Facebook accounts from 100 years ago so that was kind of the thoughts behind that and what we wanted to do as part of this was really go through and give people the step-by-step options and let them kind of think about what was actually in their Facebook accounts and how they could get a copy whether or not again we wanted to get copies for the library but even if just to kind of get a little bit of sense of how to manage that digital content so one of the things we did and when I say we I mean my colleagues Louis Jones and Flora Feltham is they made this video that is linked from our website and we also put on YouTube that actually takes you through the steps and it's all captioned so you can just kind of follow along and it shows you how to go to Facebook how to download your content what kind of options there are what to choose what those files look like when they come down in the interest of time I won't play that video right now but it is playing on the National Library's at lunch if you want to come and have a look at the video or talk to me about the project I'll be there and one of the really kind of interesting things and I'll just show this briefly is when you do download your Facebook you get all of these options and so the other thing about that kind of giving the user as much control over what they were giving to us is you can go through and decide yep I want to give you my comments but I'm not going to give you the ads that Facebook was targeting at me or you can have all the places I checked in but I don't want you to have my search history that's too personal so part of it is kind of showing people one the data that is in your Facebook archive and which information you might want to save for your own personal archive which information you think might be useful to people into the future and this final slide is just another plug for another resource that we have to give people some information about this project is a little zine that was not actually created by the library but was created by some colleagues in the US which gives you the like really easy basic step-by-step options for how to download your social media so Facebook, Twitter I think it also does Snapchat and Instagram and again I've got these little zines and there's a pile of them at the National Library so if you want to copy and I think these are great because it gives you the four few steps it rates how easy it is in terms of both the users and to be able to use the data that's in those accounts so a lot of what the reason I want to talk about it here is just to see what everybody else thinks about collecting Facebook but also if this is something in terms of either you would like to collect at your own institution social media or you want to run literacy projects about how to look after your own digital kind of footprint your own digital personal archive there are some cool tools that the library is definitely happy to share with other institutions that are interested in this kind of work and that is the end of my section of the presentation Wow thank you so much to three speakers I think this is obviously a huge topic that a lot of the glam sector is wrestling with so it's great to hear three perspectives definitely a tricky topic there's a lot to unpack from all of that so I'm sure we have lots of questions we've got a couple of the box marks there's one there another one at the back so who wants to start us off I just wanted to know is Facebook are you in contact with Facebook about these things are they helping or are you doing it all for the National Library we're not in contact with Facebook at all we're basically going on the that Facebook and through sort of the data freedoms that Facebook says and law says that the content that you put into Facebook belongs to you and that you can download it so we're just using that although Lisa did send me something about Facebook research earlier today that they'll fund research so maybe we'll look into getting them to pay for some research Kyra thank you for that that was really interesting and I don't quite know how to ask this question but I'll just try Lisa you put up that typology of different community archives and that got me thinking about it actually got me thinking about the verbs so something totally different it got me thinking about the verbs that people use when they talk about what we do in these environments online and then it got me thinking that I feel like I woke up one day and the word share had totally changed its meaning from when I was growing up and like to share something when I was a child was to give something up be it a physical thing you share a piece of cake it's an altruistic act or to share a story rather than to tell a story to sort of share a story you let a person in and when I see and I do see some of that and in the examples that you are giving there was an altruistic element especially in the Cricket Museum example and also in the ATL example where there is some altruism behind the sharing but so often sharing is actually self promotion now and it's kind of the it's like sharing has been flipped around on its head and it's not an act of sharing and I guess I was just wondering if you could comment on the verbs and whether we are using the right verbs to talk about what we do because it feels like we have just accepted the verbs that the platform holders have imposed on us for their own purposes and we talk about sharing but is it share what are we doing when we share Thank you that's a great question and as I was preparing the talk I was looking for the memes and there is this huge array of Facebook group admin memes about admins having the power of God and they are the ones that are in control and I was very aware even before that about this construction of what sharing means because it is and the whole research is about how the platform constructs how we have understood what something is and certainly Facebook groups are really about drawing people in and having control over them in some capacity and the topic but not necessarily I don't understand where sharing exists in that so similar kinds of experience about what sharing means and it's certainly an aspect of the research that has revealed itself but it's not something that I necessarily have gone down that path yet but it is something that's very useful to contextualise within the idea of what power means and how the words are being constructed and that mediation process In the spirit that you started that question with I'm not quite sure what I'm going to ask here but I'm going to go on anyway I'm not quite sure what I'm answering here I thinking through it then our approach might have been reclaiming the word sharing and doing so with authenticity and it goes back to that kind of thing I was talking about where I know that I could say Kane Williamson's just broken Martin Crow's record and everybody's going to go even though they all know it they all like it because they're fans they're engaged members of the community and they want to be seen to be engaging with that but I didn't ever look at that I didn't ever consider that as sharing it was more the stories that that might have been a little bit of a sucker punch like I might have put up something about Kane Williamson but I'd follow it up with something about Leonard Cave because I wanted to share that story I wanted to find somewhere for it to sit and again it comes back to that idea that I wasn't sharing that in the hope that we would get a thousand likes on it I was sharing it in the hope that it might resonate with one person or that we might create a connection that somebody might share something back with us so I feel like that authenticity that I had behind the philosophy of sharing maybe was reclaiming the word a little bit but I can definitely see where you're coming from in general I just had one thought while Jamie was talking so some of you may be aware that one of the original panellists, the reason I dragged Jamie in at the last minute Opeta Alefeo was going to be our third panellist and I had heard him speak a couple years ago about the work that the Fiji National Archives did using the archives and using Facebook to basically share truly share the collections and it was really powerful and it really was for me quite thought provoking because I quite cynical about Facebook thinking you know like we're all been sucked into Facebook and we all know it's bad and we can't get out that's kind of at a certain level how I feel about Facebook but hearing Opeta talk about it he was like and I think it goes somewhat to what was said in the whose knowledge yesterday is that for a lot of Fijians in the Outer Islands the phone is the only internet they have Facebook is where everybody communicates archives are only activated when people use them and see them and understand themselves and how they connect back to the archives and it's our job to get the archives to where people are and I'm using Facebook because it's the best tool I have and I was like great I totally you know and so that's kind of where I'm I constantly am going back and forth and seeing both sides of it like Facebook has lots of issues but at the same time everybody is there and how can we use it ethically I guess try to be ethical about how we're sharing and using Facebook Christian over here Oh sorry did you hear Yes I feel a ridiculous sense of victory in that I suppose my question is what's next Facebook for a lot of young people is already seen as an old technology and they're using things like Tik Tok or probably a billion apps that I don't even know about and we use Facebook in a lot of the conversations we necessarily have because it is so widespread but that's not necessarily going to stay that way there's already people that have set up some whole another network and I guess my thought is how do we cope with the fact that things change and they change really rapidly and when we come up with some standard of how we cope with this technology how are we going to pivot that knowledge into something that might look really different I think I mean that's both what is the most challenging thing about sort of thinking about digital collections and the digital in our glam sector and the hardest thing but the most interesting thing is we do have to both be looking backwards and looking forwards at the same time and thinking about it I don't have any answers I think you know we're always looking at Susanna in the audience we're always like a few steps behind in our technology and what we can do and what we can see that's already happening out in front of us so we when we know we can't get everything and it's not really our job to collect everything but it is our job to kind of pay attention so I don't know I tried to figure out what Tik Tok was the other day I may be too old I don't know I think from the kind of museums as a user of these things as an engagement tool perspective my story like a lot of that sharing and engagement did happen through Facebook but it was also based upon telling these stories on our website using Twitter finding an angle to use pictures along the way on Instagram so it's one tool among many and it's very clear which audiences we were hitting on different levels so you know kind of getting having a teenager tag their dad in a post happens on Facebook the teenager who's still an old enough teenager to be using Facebook with a dad who's right in the perfect warehouse for being a Facebook user but yeah it's kind of that approach that you have to have where all these tools have different audiences different benefits different ways of telling stories so choose the ones that work for you and that includes keeping an eye on what's coming up what might be coming out again it comes back to authenticity as well being able to use something authentically not just because it's there and all the kids are on it we did try at one point because the cricket museum was a Pokemon Go gym we did try and push that angle and it just failed miserably didn't work at all so you've got to know what you're doing in that respect Thank you I think that's a really great question and from my perspective I had a few things sort of going on in my brain thinking about you know why I care about Facebook really especially when Jess said you know 25 years 25 years restricted access and then 100 years and I thought who's going to be able to access that and what is that going to look like but for my research the initial design of it was to not create a database of these community archives but to actually find out why people are doing this stuff and what are we missing in you know glam institutions or why do we need to even have glam institutions collect this kind of stuff what is it that's going on what's driving it a couple of things about that I haven't got to that stage yet partly because funding and I needed to do some other kinds of stuff to get there first and sort of wrangle a few ideas I've done other kinds of things too like I had a bit of an investigation a couple of years ago into how community archives might be crafted through hashtags and looking through Instagram in relation to that that kind of blew my mind so much I had to put it aside that was too much for me and then I sort of ventured on to Snapchat to think about similar kinds of contexts the thing about sort of building this idea of why people are doing what their requirements are what's driving them what does it mean to have this kind of documentation people doing this stuff is that actually the glam sector in Australia has been trying to do this address these issues with their own technologies there is something called collections Victoria which was created by museums Victoria Australia that museums Australia in Victoria but it's only for not-for-profit organisations and I've worked with it when I was a consultant before being an academic and it was one item at a time it was museum kind of structure around it it was really challenging they also had this amazing personal version of it called collectish which suddenly disappeared I actually promoted it to a client a family heritage like family history person for their family archives and then suddenly collectish disappeared and I really hoped they didn't put anything up on there there's another one coming up in western Australia called probably west Australia collections that's supposed to be a similar kind of thing also run generated and driven by museums and I'm not sure exactly what it's for or who's going to be using it or why and so my question is people are doing this already they're doing it already what lessons aren't being learned do we actually so my thing about this is maybe we connect to these spaces and if the spaces disappear they do but we've got a connection there's linkages those relationships and that's kind of how I'm trying to design this database but I don't know where it's going and I don't know necessarily what the answer is and there's so many different things but understanding that drive to remember or to preserve or to archive and why people do it is that kind of underpins everything that I'm trying to do Good question Alright we'll see how this goes Thank you So my my question I'm not sure if it is a question which is the rising inflection but it's mostly around communities and engagement and how that promotiony kind of thing works like how do we know that we're not just talking inside an echo chamber but is the echo chamber sort of what we want as well i.e. Cricket Museum type things I mean you want Cricket fans but you also maybe want the people who don't even know you exist How do you not be in an echo chamber but also support the people who want to be in the echo chamber with you is a weird way to phrase that question Yep so the echo chamber was that really engage a portion of fans who just want the stats and things and we knew that we could cater to that and then the audience that we wanted outside of it were those who would care about a story like Leonard Cave and again it came down to different channels for different elements of stories so Facebook was good for something like Leonard Cave Twitter was the place to go to to just push out stats when it comes on people are following the hashtag for the game whatever they soaked it up but the other thing is partnerships and community events so looking at what the rest of the world is talking about and what they're doing and what they're caring about and thinking about how you might have a story that fits into that so that was the approach obviously we took with kind of the World War One centenary kind of thing it's obviously a community event that's going on we've got some stories of people that otherwise wouldn't be told so let's tell them and try and fit into that included I gave presentations about some of the players that we featured in that to groups that had no interest in cricket whatsoever so there was an opportunity for us to reach out there somebody just started at my current workplace a couple of weeks ago and I was talking about my previous job and they said I've got no interest in cricket which obviously heard from a lot of people but I knew the cricket museum existed in the last few years and I think that was part of the outreach was we talked more about the Basin Reserve as a Wellington community venue not just a site for cricket any opportunity that I had to find those links or to engage with a different audience we did stuff with Mahuki here Wellington ICT grad school we tried to get out there and tell those different angles of the stories in as many places as possible I think it's just about being proactive and again knowing your core audience so knowing where your echo chamber is but knowing where you might want to pierce some holes in it yeah cool thank you yeah sort of relates to the ATL project as well like how are you pushing outside of people who already know about it yeah no it's a really good question and I think it's a question that in the certainly in the national library it's a discussion that we've been having a lot like how do we know that we're doing a good job what does a good job look like and how do we meet the needs of people that we haven't in the past who are those people so I don't have any great answers unfortunately yet but I was thinking just while you were saying it like one what Lisa was saying the research that people are doing into who cares about memory how do they do that I think that's really an important part of the process and I think the other important part of the process is probably sort of what Deb was talking about in her keynote are you working with people who aren't like you who give you another perspective in another view and know different people and different networks that's probably really important I think it's really important to what to being effective cool thank you one last kind of note on that from my perspective is that it's very clear to me and my research assistant who happened to be based in the US up until recently that Facebook curates our experience I have tried to create four different profiles that are not my personal profile so I could do this research or four of being shut down by Facebook I can't I literally can't do it without being my personal profile and I just don't trust that they're giving me all the information so I actually am being forced to go outside and once I've developed the mechanisms for capturing I'm going to put out Facebook ads I don't trust those either but I'm going to have to have a research website and sort of one of the things that's really exciting is who is going to respond and how are they going to respond and what are they going to share with me how am I going to decide what's happening with that data in relation to you know I was thinking today after that both keynotes is it actually up to me to decide whether or not it's a community archive if someone's given it to me I don't think so so I want to get what they know and see what happens I'm really excited about it as well That sounds awesome A fantastic discussion unfortunately we've run out of time I don't want to hold you up for lunch too much longer so we have lunch until 1.30 and then we're back into stream sessions but would you join me again in thanking our fantastic speakers