If you want some real answers about newspaper
preservation, the last place you should look for guidance is in the work of a
hack fiction writer like Baker. Check out the work that's been done by
the United States Newspaper Program. If you are good at research and
check out Baker's "extensive" bibliography, you will find yourself wondering
why he left out significant information simply because what others said did
not support his crackpot argument. Baker is in microfilm denial and
seems to think that one page that will not break when folded somehow magically
represents millions of pages of newspapers and books that broke when
handled. Double Fooled is not a work of scholarship to be relied
on. He's probably got you believing every reel of microfilm is a
deteriorating compilation of mistakes. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
An interesting critique of Baker's book, "Double
Fold..." (and his ideas) can be viewed at:
Some subscribers may know more about the group
involved?
Steven C.
Barr