Authenticity

A canon, from the Greek for model, is a body of principles, rules, standards, or norms that is, at least to some degree, regarded as normative by a society, a discipline, or professionals in the area of endeavor to which it applies. This 'body' may be more or less coherent and it may include rules that are implicitly embedded in practices as well as explicitly expressed in formal standards and guides. Furthermore, the term canon is typically reserved for conventions that are respected on an ongoing basis, though they may undergo some modifications or interpretations over time. On the topic of records authenticity, one confronts different canons, depending on the context in which the authenticity is addressed. Beginning with a basic, empirical consideration of what an authentic record is, this article explores the canons on authenticity in jurisprudence, diplomatics and archival science, and considers both how they have evolved and how they need to evolve to be meaningful and effective for digital records. The issue of effectiveness is addressed from both an intellectual and practical perspective. Are there clear and adequate principles, standards or norms for ensuring and verifying the authenticity of digital records and preserving it overtime so that it can be proven and attested to throughout their life? If there are, can they be implemented in diverse digital environments? Candidates that could form the basis of a cannon for digital record authenticity are considered and both their promise and shortcomings identified. The final section of this article addresses the empirical question of whether there is a current canon for records authenticity that is generally accepted and applied by records and archival professionals. A survey designed to test whether the results of major research initiatives on the means of establishing and protecting authenticity have become part of the canon for the practice and beliefs of records and archival professionals reveals a significant disconnect.