Previous Entry | Next Entry

Shocked into posting

  • Apr. 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 PM
candle
So, I've just learned something via a major medical libraries listserv that I can hardly believe it's so insane.

The POPLINE database (tagline: "Your connection to the world's reproductive health literature") has made all abortion-related terms stopwords.

(Pause while the library-and-database-savvy folks gasp.)

So, stopwords are words like the, to, a, of -- unimportant words that are unlikely to help bring up subjects of interest in your database. They don't get cut out of the database, just if you search on them they don't bring anything up (perhaps one day I will write a book called "A To For The An" or something, and no one will ever be able to find it, not that it sounds like a very good book anyhow). As of a few days ago, if you search for "abortion" in the POPLINE database, you get no results. The articles are still there, but you won't be able to find them (well, you can with the Advanced Search, but that's not the point).

Turning "abortion" into a stopword in a reproductive health database is just beyond beyond to me. The database is, of course, funded by USAID, the agency that would be happy to help out your developing country so long as you pretend like abortion doesn't exist.

I wouldn't have thought that the current US government was still able to shock me with its insanely bad ideas, but here I am, shocked.

More on the topic over here.

Comments

( Leave a comment )
[info]anglaisepaon wrote:
Apr. 3rd, 2008 05:58 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that pop-up on the MEDLIB listserv this morning. Am completely appalled.
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 3rd, 2008 06:03 pm (UTC)
Seriously, I just can't even think what the thought process is there, or how much political pressure the POPLINE people must be under if this is the solution they come up with.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]anglaisepaon wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 03:32 am (UTC)
As of this evening, the story has been picked-up by Wired. I would imagine it will hit the mainstream media pretty soon.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 5th, 2008 01:21 am (UTC)
Looks like the Johns Hopkins SPH people have put a stop to it. What a mess.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]slemslempike wrote:
Apr. 3rd, 2008 07:43 pm (UTC)
Good god. That's appalling.
| Reply | Thread
(Anonymous) wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 12:00 am (UTC)
I just cannot understand how the people in charge of the database can think this is even remotely appropriate.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 12:01 am (UTC)
Um, that was me.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]starfishchick wrote:
Apr. 3rd, 2008 07:46 pm (UTC)
But. But.

They can't DO that!!
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 12:04 am (UTC)
I know, seriously! The only explanations are that either they're under huge amounts of pressure from their funders or they're terrible hacks with no sense of professional responsibility. Either way, ugh.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]glitterboy1 wrote:
Apr. 3rd, 2008 09:01 pm (UTC)
WHAT?! That's just...insane.

And look, they haven't even made a good job of it. Ok, 'abortion' gets you nowhere, but 'termination' gets you 8314 records. (I wonder how many 'abortion' used to get you?)
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 12:06 am (UTC)
They do recommend a workaround using the umbrella term "unwanted pregnancies" but it's just a mess all around. You can still find the records, they've just made it hard. Which is a GREAT IDEA, obviously.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]zoje_george wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 12:43 am (UTC)
Oh, my god.

I feel a rant coming on.
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 5th, 2008 01:27 am (UTC)
Fortunately it's been fixed, but it is just such a creepy example of the strongarming Bush administration. Plus I'm just professionally disappointed in the people running the database.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 11th, 2008 12:05 am (UTC)
Yes, it's reassuring. But still, what were they thinking? Who are the people who run this database?
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]ainsley wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 01:29 am (UTC)
WTF. That's all manner of idiocy.
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 5th, 2008 01:27 am (UTC)
Did they think people would notice? Did they think it wouldn't be a big deal? Crazy.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
[info]eanja wrote:
Apr. 4th, 2008 02:17 am (UTC)
Like I needed one more reason to be appalled at the way current politicking and favoritism works... I am completely appalled.
| Reply | Thread
[info]kylegirl wrote:
Apr. 5th, 2008 01:32 am (UTC)
There was a great episode of This American Life on recently about the Bush government's "lawyering style" of government -- The Audacity of Government. It was good, and also scary. As one of the people on the show pointed out, it's going to be really important how the next president acts -- that will determine whether the way he's pushed the boundaries sticks or if it gets pulled back.
| Reply | Parent | Thread
( Leave a comment )