ebooks need technology to be used. that technology must also be afforded. we can say that today ereaders are cheap, but not cheap enough for most of the world population or the growing number of poor people in america.
second, i think this discussion has focused only on public libraries. they are just one type of libraries that gather a specific group of users (although its public) generated by the type of books it keeps. there are also university, research, special etc. - libraries that have specific groups of users and offer books that are not available in digital format (yet - but i think this wont change for a long time). this does add to the argument that change ought to happen, but the trends in the field show that librarians have and need to adapt to the new online environment⌠its not about the extinction of a field but of an interdisciplinary merge that result in a set of competencies adequate for a librarian to function in this new enviroment⌠but yes i think we are in some kind of era of transition⌠but its to soon to say anything about libraries losing its purpose⌠maybe the problem is how we use them or dont use themâŚ
about the digital vs. papper preservation⌠what do experiences do we have in losing important digitally born books and data? in papper enviroment losing a book (common or rare) is like losing a piece of culture, losing something that contributed to the history of ideas (how ever little or big its impact), losing something that created meaningful experiences (like learning, leisure, happiness) for just one or lots of humans⌠are digital environments up to the task of preserving this planets culture, history of ideas, its experience? saying managing collections is not an useful endeavor is saying that the data organization establishments have embraced the digital to the fullest. remember wikileaks and the data it published? what were they mostly? they were scans of pappers. what does that mean? diplomacy still might be papper based. governing a country also. not to oversimplify i just want to say that these are all areas where librarians and libraries still have their (important) place.
sorry for grammar and spelling⌠im from a small country in europe⌠its not my native tounge
and on topic⌠authors should stand up for libraries⌠but⌠who are authors? does the word Author hold the same meaning it held a few decades ago? how many authors have lived from their work before, and how many live from it now? have libraries become a place that breeds generations that will approve of piracy and free access to art, information, knowledge? how much of that is in the interest of a author?
Iâm not surprised the people who donât use the public library donât see any reason to continue to support it. What about all the people who do use it? It is one of the common good things our taxes pay for, along with clean water and other benefits of civilization.
ââŚis one of the common good things our taxes pay for, along with clean waterâ
Weâd probably die without clean water - if small town libraries didnât exist, patrons would find another source for magazines, wireless and dog-eared copies of âFifty Shades of Greyâ - if there was a real need for them, Starbucks or Wal-Mart could sponsor their own local libraries
Public programs attract lots of people and seem to have a positive relationship with circulation rates and reference questions (2011 CO study) (Library Research Service)
I couldnât have said it any better than fireshadow. Did you not listen to Cory? Libraries are non-profit, non-partisan centers of their communities. Theyâre often the only public space left where readers arenât getting barraged by ads. Further, many libraries are not only preserving books, theyâre collecting, preserving and giving access to digital content as well. Have you been to the Library of Congressâ American memory project? The Internet Archive (which is a library!)? The Digital Public Library of America? Countless Public and Academic library sites? Hereâs just some of the digital collections curated by the library at which I work. AND we have a few books and other material.
One little point with which Iâd add is the idea of purchasing vs donating ebooks. I firmly believe that readers should be able to donate ebooks to libraries in the same way they do with physical books. Many libraries rely on donations. Format doesnât matter. First sale doctrine does.
[quote=âcarlosdanger, post:27, topic:6410, full:trueâ]
[I]f small town libraries didnât exist, patrons would find another source for magazines, wireless and dog-eared copies of âFifty Shades of Greyâ - if there was a real need for themâŚ[/quote]
So what youâre saying is that if libraries didnât exist people would create them. Should it really be necessary to reinvent the wheel, though?
No offense, but you are kind of talking out of your ass. Public Libraries typically (especially the smaller local ones) donât preserve paper books. They are always weeding their collections (often selling older books that they donât need anymore) in order to get new books.
Academic libraries are usually designed for preservation and storage of paper books but thatâs not really relevant to this conversation.
And while we may not die without libraries, what are the consequences of a large poor, uneducated population on voting patterns and our overall quality of life? Are you advocating doing away with public education as well? If not, libraries serve much the same role but for the entire population, not just certain age groups.
Actually small libraries in areas without a separate strong local history organization are probably the only ones preserving that kind of stuff. Yes we do weed popular materials to make room for new popular materials and rely on larger organizations like the Library of Congress to pick what is important to preserve, but for rare local history materials most of us keep that and are working hard to digitize it before it falls apart.
Ah, I hadnât even thought of Special Collection type materials. I assumed the original poster was talking about preserving popular novels and the like.
I live in Kentucky and the local library definitely keeps old records and materials. Not as much as the University, but still, they do work with that. And there are a lot of people who use those materials to do genealogical research. But thatâs pretty stupid, right? That stuff is obviously all online, right all you library haters out there who think that everything in the world is available through Google?
âAnd let me tell you, my visits show that the libraries serve an overwhelmingly white and upper-middle class group.â
And let me tell you, unless youâve been to every library in every region of the United States, that depends where you live. The patrons of my local library are extremely diverse, and I doubt its the only one.
âWhy should we pay for these buildings and staff when we have Kindles, Nooks, iPads and more?â
Because not everyone does. I have none of those things. I canât afford them. But I guess I donât count, right? Since Iâm âa poorâ and all.
âLow-priced ebooks are better for people with lots of fancy electronic gadgets and/or meâ
Fixed that for you.
Libraries are there to serve the needs of all economic classes, not just upper and middle. Elitism is ugly.
I used to try to trolley librarian friends around the âmonopoly rentâ angle: my efforts at being humorous came off, to them and to me, as shallow and silly (and angry, ewww) as your much more earnest efforts read here. Add your quite classist, quasi-racist, faux-Marxist ideologies (libraries as the opiate of the upperâmiddle classes, really, thanks for that luscious, saucy canard), and youâve got a real winner with this post.
And thanks for providing me with a rare opportunity to suggest that you actually read what youâve cited, to wit:
The result concerning the less-advantaged, lowincome population is especially worth noting. It stresses the importance of continuous efforts to ensure that
the needs of this population are well-served.
Not much in the study about the proles learning to read in the sweat of their brow whilst pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps because HARD WORK, is there?
Unless the government gives out iPhones, not everyone has an e-reader. And what about the people who just plain love paper books? We pay taxes too, you know.
I must admit that they serve a narrow crowd that can usually afford
to buy their own books.
I vehemently, vehemently disagree with that assessment. I, for one, read far too much to be able to afford everything I want to read. I argue that libraries are invaluable resource for bibliophiles.
I was speaking about your comments. I will forbear from offering my judgment as to your person. So no ad hominem there.
Dunno, I had a sense it was the extremely forced and narrow interpretation that the joke puts on librarians that was objectionable. I think generally anyone working with the public (at least in my anecdotal experience) has a well-developed sense of the inadequacies of their work, and how these can border on existing oppressions: librarian-as-savior tends to be a myth more enjoyed by non-librarians, just as teacher-as-hero, etc. To the degree that rentseeking and monopolies are a useful lens to talk about libraries (they arenât), they also preclude talking about the well-substantiated, documented good things that libraries also do.
Not sure about Jane Austenâs relevance: if the issue is simply funding libraries, then Iâd imagine that the taxes levied on the poor, poor taxpayer (lol) will go to buy lots of other things in addition to Austen. Some very interesting race-class optics on your part, though. Are the working poor to be denied access to Austen because of what now? Presumably minorities, the working poor, etc. could read Austen or whatever elsewhere, lacking those âfree afternoonsâ? Whatâs your information on the demographics of Austenâs readership, other than racialist-classist conjecture?
Iâm really the last person to rail against for having a romantic attachment to libraries: I buy most of my books. I do this because itâs my privilege to do so, and because I like owning books. I am aware, however, both anecdotally and statistically, that libraries are things that serve a lot of different constituencies, for a lot of different reasons: I call that civic and pragmatic. Romantic is your misleading term.
Nice pivot, though, from pretending to not attack minorities and the poor (âitâs about JANE AUSTENâ), to pretending to want to âserve this population.â You just keep right on spinning spinning spinning, itâs fun.
