So many things to comment on! I am a librarian (MLIS) but I don’t work in a library. On the other hand, I’ve worked with hundreds of public libraries as a materials handling consultant. Here’s my take on this thread:
-
About weeding algorithms. There are lots of reports that librarians can run that will generate lists of books to be considered for weeding. Dusty Shelves List is basically the one being discussed and it refers to an item that hasn’t circulated in some period of time (set by the librarian running the report). These books are always reviewed by a librarian before being confirmed for discard.
-
Last Copy. Librarians pay close attention to the “last copy” of a title and won’t get rid of it unless they are sure it can be gotten from somewhere else (downloaded for free from Project Gutenberg, borrowed from a partner library or interlibrary loaned from afar) or if it is really outdated and not “earning his position on the shelf.”
-
Public libraries versus Academic Libraries versus Archives. Public libraries (as many have noted) are not about retaining the knowledge of humankind, they are about providing entertainment, current news and reference material. They are very limited in what they can afford to keep on the shelves so have to work very hard to keep their collections rotating out the old stuff (or just unpopular stuff) to make room for the new stuff. They can’t keep all those Catcher in the Rye copies when they have a waitlist of 150 people for the latest Patterson novel. However, they would sure be happy to get you a Catcher in the Rye or direct you to the Internet Archive where you can download a copy in multiple formats (https://archive.org/details/CatcherInTheRye).
-
About tossing out good DVDs. Most public libraries toss out DVDs after some number of circulations just because they start causing problems during playback and that ends up being extremely frustrating for patrons who go home, make their popcorn, and are ready to enjoy a good movie but can’t. A high circulating DVD will “usually” be replaced when taken out of the collection unless they can’t afford it.
-
Automated storage and retrieval systems. Academic libraries use big storage warehouses to keep low circulating items or “last copies” and they can usually be ordered online and delivered to their patrons within a day or two. These systems cost millions of dollars to build and maintain but they allow many more books to be archived. Public libraries cannot afford such a thing although NYPL is building one (first one for public libraries). This will allow them to keep more of the kinds of books we’ve been discussing while leaving room for the popular titles that are more actively circulating in their 150 branches (or something like that).
-
Resource sharing and Interlibrary loan. Many libraries partner with other libraries and have “reciprocal borrowing” relationships that allow everyone’s stuff to be freely shared with everyone else. You can find it in the catalog and request it and it comes to your library, even if it actually belongs to another library. This is the happening more and more (thankfully). But sometimes, the deals these libraries make are that they’ll share everything except, say, the popular DVDs. They do that to ensure the money they spend on those pricey DVDs goes to their patrons. Perhaps their library board or city council is ornery because they don’t want them lending their stuff to other libraries (without recognizing the benefit of the totality of a resource sharing arrangement to provide a 10-20x larger collection for their patrons to choose titles from). Interlibrary loan (ILL) is when you have no such relationship but you can still ask another library for a title. Pretty much all libraries will request anything you really want for you, you just have to ask. And ILL takes longer since it involves a bunch of paperwork.
-
LGBTQ issues and books on the shelf. As a lesbian, I very much appreciate that libraries keep things on the shelves for a questioning LGBTQ person to find as I did when I was younger (thank you for Patience and Sarah). I agree that this is critical and provides more privacy than a Google search can. And besides, with the Google algorithms, there’s a good chance they are going to find out that Gays are Evil or some such horrible thing and not be guided to authoritative resources that they would otherwise find courtesy of a professional librarian. Also, many libraries are forced to employ Internet content filters which are not well managed (IMHO) so they might not be able to find ANYTHING that would help them if the content filters were blocking that category of content (which some unfortunately do but the folks in the library aren’t always paying as much attention as I wish they were to this issue).
I think that’s it. I hope you don’t mind my sharing my experience! I’m hoping you will find it interesting to hear more about the actual workings of public libraries (beyond what your particular library might be doing).
