Archivists have many different jobs to do, and most of us do them well. From choosing the right items for deaccessioning to helping set up an exhibit at the local public library, archivists have proven to be some of the brightest people in the world. They have a unique talent for management, knowledge and charisma that is rarely seen in most corporate levels. As such, archivists should be appropriately praised and appreciated for their work. On the other hand, they have a specific place in our society. That place may mean different things to different people, but we've never seen a former archivist become President of the United States. Therefore, archivists tend to be fully committed to their area of ​​expertise and place of business so as to make their work more involved than other professions. Being a good archivist means knowing how to best preserve, display and cultivate interest in a collection. This requires some short-term work and a long-term career. The previous paragraph does not mean that there is one right answer to the Schallenberg or Jenkinson debate. Each of those men's beliefs has its merit. In fact, they echo some of the same values. Their positions are not that different, considering that it is a semi-restricted professional field. To reiterate, Jenkinson believes that an archivist chooses which documents are sufficient to describe “what happened.” Note that the documents are "unbiased". Archives were created by “natural accumulation”. This helps documents maintain authenticity and impartiality. Schallenberg believes that archivists have a more central role in the documents they curate. He believes that documents handled by an archivist contain some…half of paper. In my opinion, it is not the job of archivists to judge whether social justice exists while working. The archivist has a job to do regardless of the overall theme or mission. Writing an article highlighting the fact that there is social justice in this field is quite irresponsible. For Jimerson, disagreeing with someone's use of archives presupposes why they use them. Ideally, document destruction is atrocious, but Jimerson tries to make a political point about it and that's beside the point. The existence of an archive is not just about social justice, whatever the parent organization. Works Cited Jimerson, Randall C. “Archives for All: Professional Responsibility and Social Justice.” The American Archivist 70 (2007): 252-281. Tschan, Reto. “A Comparison of Jenkinson and Schallenberg on Valuation.” The American archivist 65 (2002): 176-195.