Archives for posts with tag: Public Libraries

It’s Friday, and if you’re wondering what as a good librarian you should be doing, @pcsweeney has a suggestion: party.  Here’s why:

One of the first things that JP said to me about the profession of librarianship and the whole party hard theory was to the effect of needing to celebrate our profession more instead of mourning it. This really hit home for me at the time it was said because I was just reading about layoffs, libraries closing, hours lost, budgets cut, etc… I really feel like there are quite a few people who are quietly mourning the loss of this profession. But there’s no reason that we need to go out quietly. If we do really wind up going out, we should go out loud, kicking, screaming, and celebrating everything that libraries have done for the people of this country for the last 236 years. Really, our fellow librarians have accomplished a whole lot when you sit back and think about it! So now let’s celebrate it![full post]

I get where this is coming from, but should we all stamp around with pints shouting the Anthem for the Already Defeated? Not just yet, though it is a good song.  I really believe the librarian profession has and always will be a process of evolution. There are new job titles, new technologies, but the spirit is always there.

Sweeney gets this and wants to use partying as a tool. Partying facilitates social collaboration; it builds networks and creates roads for innovation. (Depending on consumption levels, some can be more innovative than others. Yet, as Hemmingway says, “Always do sober what you said you’d do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.” Or why you shouldn’t!)

Informal outreach like Sweeney suggests (maybe not always with beers involved) can create a different sort of outcome than you get from more formal approaches like surveys and or interacting with patrons in library.

This is especially important for public libraries (but not just public libraries), where community and social integration can mean as much for improving services as for survival.

The Librarian Party Agenda: honour the past, live the present, celebrate the future. Something to consider.

Cheers!

This was my second choice for a post pic... amazing, right? Fun times!

The anti-DRM site Defective by Design has declared Wednesday  May 4, 2011 as the third annual International Day Against DRM.

The Day Against DRM is an opportunity to unite a wide range of projects, public interest organizations, web sites and individuals in an effort to raise public awareness to the danger of technology that requires users to give-up control of their computers or that restricts access to digital data and media. This year, we’ll be helping individuals and groups work together to create local actions in their communities — actions will range from protesting an unfriendly hardware vendor to handing out informative fliers at local public libraries!

DefectiveByDesign.org wants to help you plan or get involved in local actions and then broadcast your stories globally. If you are interested in taking part in this year’s Day Against DRM:

It’s definitely something worth participating in, or at least looking into.

Defective by Design’s crew and libraries have shared the struggle before. As DbD says in that post,

Readers, librarians, and authors need to make their voices heard. DRM leaves readers and librarians helpless and divided. If we do not ban DRM from our libraries and our lives then we can and should expect publishers such as Harper Collins to strangle libraries so as to gain as much of a profit as possible.

We need to watch out for each other and make sure that people are not getting suckered into notions of “fair” DRM.

There’s no better way to do this than through collective action:  sign up, read up, and/or act up.

In February, the Globe and Mail ran an article proclaiming the pending demise of eBook piracy. The nails in the coffin were eBook lending sites like Lendle. It took just over a month from that article for Amazon.com to put the breaks on that.

Now, Amazon’s lending restrictions on Lendle basically make lending eBooks an activity for speed readers who prefer random, unpopular books. I suppose in light of those events, eBook piracy will live a little longer. Especially if borrowing eBooks and eAudiobooks  legitimately continues to be unfriendly to users.

My personal experience with OverDrive (the unchallenged content software for eBook excited libraries) via the Ottawa Public Library hasn’t made me (and a lot of other people) optimistic . To download to an audiobook, it required so much hoop jumping and the installation of  software that I gave up. eBooks work a little easier, but it’s still not a smooth process.

Out of curiosity, I found the same audiobook on a popular torrent site in about 30 seconds. It had enough people actively sharing the file that it could have probably downloaded in a few hours. After which, were I so inclined, I’d have unlimited use of the audio files for as long as I wanted and on any platform I wanted.

I imagine the process on a Kindle or Kobo or whatever must be strikingly easier than using OverDrive. Publishers have a clear interest in making lending more difficult for libraries or collaboration minded groups of  individuals. The Globe article had a fairly telling quote on that matter:

Not all publishers are assured [about eBook lending sites, including libraries/OverDrive], including Macmillan U.S., whose president Brian Napack recently defended his company’s go-slow policy at a conference in New York. “The fear is I get one library card and never have to buy a book again,” he said.

If you want to make money, sharing (legal or otherwise) is the worst possible business model. So of course publishers want a few roadblocks.

But, those roadblocks essentially treat would-be borrowers as would-be pirates.  The outcome for users being one of three things, paying for the eBook, putting up with  second class free service/access at dwindling levels of quality, or pursuing less “legitimate” means of access. (I guess you could use a mix of these three.)

If past experience with the music industry has shown anything, it’s that increasingly draconian attitudes do not translate into sales. It seems to me, that those who pay for eBook access were going to pay anyways. Everyone else? Well, there are three choices.

by Kaetlyn Wilcox (pic links to her blog)

The Library Journal recently posted a run-down of how libraries have responded to Harper Collins’ eBook policy. Here’s one example:

The Kansas State Library decided this month to suspend adding any HarperCollins ebooks to the statewide consortium platform, which services 330 public libraries in the state.

“We are not trying to punish HarperCollins,” Jo Buder, the state librarian, told LJ. “We are just trying to figure out a way to provide these titles without damaging customer service. What do we do for a person who is 27th in line and has a hold? What does it mean to catalogers? It’s just all very bad customer service decisions,” she said.

Buder is now heading a task force that has been formed by the Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA) that is debating a response to HarperCollins. The task force teleconferenced on March 9 with representatives from Georgia, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Alaska, Colorado, Ohio, Texas, and Tennessee participating.

“We decided that we really want to approach publishers [directly], HarperCollins in particular, because we want to understand the issues more,” Buder said. “The interest is really so high.”[read the full article]

It’s always impressive to see so many libraries taking a concerted stand.

Looking down the road, what will a solution look like? An article in the Atlantic puzzles on this, and points to the approach taken by the NYPL and OverDrive:

Potash, whose Cleveland-based company has thrived in the often contentious atmosphere of dynamic change, believes that the solution is to recognize that even the demand for most bestsellers eventually settles down, and the number of e-books that libraries would have to re-purchase will turn out to be relatively small in the broader scheme of activity. OverDrive’s largest customer, the New York Public Library, is floating an intriguing concept: a form of metering. Once purchased, a book would be available for an extended period, and thereafter a small charge would accrue for further loans. For example, the New York system now has 125 copies of Stieg Larsson’s The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, but in three years it may only need a handful, and the revenue impact of pay-per-use could turn out to be small. Moreover, “dog-eared printed books” as one senior librarian explained to me, have always been replaced, and e-books significantly reduce the time, trouble, and expense of returning books back onto shelves.[read the full article]

The pay-per-use model has cropped up in other ideas for a compromised solution. Like a variable rate mortgage, it’s entirely possible that a pay-per-use model could save money in the long run. It could also end up costing more. It’s difficult to say, and it’ll be important to watch how libraries that adopt the model fair.

Pay-per-use may not be the most ideal solution. But in some form, it might be the best deal libraries will get, since publishers have the content, our users want access, and libraries who don’t have it will be left by the wayside.

If some libraries feel over a barrel, it’s because they are.

Have you heard the news?

Recently, Wired magazine declared the death of the web:

You wake up and check your email on your bedside iPad — that’s one app. During breakfast you browse Facebook, Twitter, and The New York Times — three more apps. On the way to the office, you listen to a podcast on your smartphone. Another app. At work, you scroll through RSS feeds in a reader and have Skype and IM conversations. More apps. At the end of the day, you come home, make dinner while listening to Pandora, play some games on Xbox Live, and watch a movie on Netflix’s streaming service.

You’ve spent the day on the Internet — but not on the Web. And you are not alone.

This is not a trivial distinction. Over the past few years, one of the most important shifts in the digital world has been the move from the wide-open Web to semiclosed platforms that use the Internet for transport but not the browser for display. It’s driven primarily by the rise of the iPhone model of mobile computing, and it’s a world Google can’t crawl, one where HTML doesn’t rule. And it’s the world that consumers are increasingly choosing, not because they’re rejecting the idea of the Web but because these dedicated platforms often just work better or fit better into their lives (the screen comes to them, they don’t have to go to the screen). The fact that it’s easier for companies to make money on these platforms only cements the trend. Producers and consumers agree: The Web is not the culmination of the digital revolution.[full article]

Or in Clue-speak:  it was the User in the Internet with the App.

Declaring things dead doesn’t have the same bombast it used to, and it’s not entirely new news. Web 2.0 has been pushing it’s way into the Internet-user’s life for a few years now, and Wired is talking about the logical extension of that trend.

But, the article makes an important distinction between “browsing” and “getting.” This has to do with the rise apps-based user expectations and an achieved critical mass of online-content. I think browsing was useful in the past because there was no guarantee anything you wanted was out there. Now, Internet-savvy users are  surprised when something is NOT online. So, it’s not about finding, it’s about retrieving.

Libraries should play close attention to this, not because we’re not in the information/content retrieving business. This is what a good library does well, after all.

The issue at stake is competition.

The barriers to entry in the library’s field of online content delivery (eBooks, reference information, audio books, etc.) have been knocked down or scaled by competition that doesn’t share the same value system, operations cost, or even expectations of open access.

Again, this is not new news, just more pressure on libraries to innovate.

Looking for a counter-point? Try What’s Wrong With ‘X Is Dead’, from the Atlantic

Reference Tshirt

I had some extra time last week, so I’ve been able to finally roll this out.

Fans of this site and of my Library Minimalism series can get in on the action.

You see, Drop the Reference Bomb’s merch store is now live!

Right now, there are posters, mugs, t-shirts, and totes that feature the best from my Library Minimalism prints. More items and prints will be added as inspiration and time allows, but I think I’m off to a good start.

Circulation Mug

Why Zazzle?

Because it’s customizable!

Don’t like the colour, fit, type of shirt? Want a stainless steel travel mug instead of a ceramic one? There are lots of options to choose from. I’ll start you off, but the final choice is up to you!

There are lots of library themed stuff out there, but I guarantee there’s not much like this! Plus, big spenders ($50 or more and not just at my store) from the US can get free shipping. I’ll also keep everyone posted about sales as they happen.

Cheers!

The Harper Colllins/OverDrive debate continues, and I want to pull from a couple blog posts that caught my attention. As the discussion continues to evolve more detailed notions about the problem are cropping up.

First, from The Brewin Librarian. He’s done some math to estimate what the HC style licence agreement means for his local library system.

Once I subtracted the CDs and DVDs from the circ numbers he gave me, I found 7566 items in our collection that had circulated 27 or more times. Just for kicks and giggles, I also identified that 942 items had circulated 53 times or more (we would have had to buy them twice).Jason ends up with a number of $12.99 average for an item, and although I agree with one of the comments on the post that $25 is probably a more accurate number, for argument’s sake I’ll use 12.99.

If we were to have to replace these materials under a 26 use policy, this would cost our library system $110,518.92. A number Logan tells me is very close to our total adult nonfiction budget for 2011.

That’s why public libraries are concerned. To give you an idea of how large of an impact this is– our collections budget was $1,135,664 in 2009, according to the statistics from Colorado’s Library Research Service. Throughout the state of Colorado for 2009, materials budgets ranged from $4,577,200 for the Denver Public Library system to a mere $232 for one small rural library. (Yes, you read that number right– TWO HUNDRED THIRTY TWO).[full post]

I like this. It’s good to put this discussion into a context of potential real costs for public libraries.

Matthew also hints at a larger issue.  I’m going to wager that a rural library with a budget that small has effectively been shut out of non-public domain ebooks. Besides the issue over licencing eBooks, real economic and geographic exclusion already exists and will likely be exasperated.

What are some alternatives? Some librarians are hatching manifestos to take control of the eBook market. From Steve Lawson’s blog See Also…:

The result is a plan for libraries to buy, lend, and preserve ebooks which looks like this:

  • Libraries will purchase e books from publishers or other sources. Libraries will not license ebooks.
  • Licenses are not necessary. The entire process will be based on copyright. The publishers’ control over the ebook ends the moment it is sold to the library…
  • Most libraries will employ a third party to be responsible for both access to and preservation of ebooks. Some libraries–probably very large public libraries or research libraries–may prefer to go it alone rather than contracting with such a service…
  • Most libraries will choose to add DRM to ebooks in the form of copy protection in order to satisfy publishers’ desires not to see unauthorized copies proliferate. Copy protection that is acceptable to libraries will be largely invisible, platform-independent, and will serve only to prevent the creation of additional complete unauthorized copies.
  • Copy protection must not interfere with readers’ rights to fair use.
  • Copy protection will never be applied by the publisher, but by the library, or by a third party hosting the ebooks under contract from the library…[full post]

These are all great points, but I’m not sure they’re wholly feasible. This sort of sweeping change will be hard and expensive to implement, and you will see the publishers throwing up roadblocks at every turn.

Since we’re on the issue of costs: how will public libraries pay for all this? What about standards across library systems? Who controls those standards? Oh, to be a private contractor with the know-how if libraries turn their back on the publishers to embrace schemes like this. Cha-ching.

In the end, if libraries are going to get a good deal out of all this, it will be important to identify a strong bargaining position with some leverage to it. I’m not sure Lawson’s quite got the right one, but the ideas will continue to evolve.

An interesting dispatch from a UK Librarian (Lauren of Walk You Home) about showing the value of Public Libraries to the hack/slash budget crowd.

She puts together a decent list, and then goes on to add:

This isn’t airy-fairy-bunkum or crazy-lefty-ideology (sorry, Mayor Davies) – this is about the fundamentals of society. Libraries are cultural, educational and civic hubs. They always have been, and they always should be. Information and information needs are changing, but information’s not going away, and nor are people! What isn’t clear, though, is how we can prove this to the bean-counters of the world (because sadly, they’re not going away either).

An awful lot of qualitative data has been pouring into the Voices for the Library inbox for several months now. We’ve been presenting it in different ways – stories, guest blog posts, a Mashup challenge, a Wordle about “what libraries mean to you“…

We’ve even had some offers of support from academic departments keen to do something with all the information we’ve been gathering. Hopefully there’ll be time at some point soon to take them up on the offer![full post]

Academic collaborations along these line are already taking place in the US, and some have produced results. Studies like these have to be helpful. Though it would imply there was an actual reasonable rational discussion taking place on the matter.  And, I’m not sure that real information is making it through the ideological clatter.

Still, a new set of portable metrics would be useful. I wonder why someone hasn’t sat down and put together a kit that public libraries can use to generate the sort of economic “straight talking” statistics and dollar amounts that carry water in policy/budget discussions.

There is momentum in that direction. Lauren’s going to what looks like a pretty interesting event on the subject.

…in a couple of weeks I will be taking part in a workshop entitled Measuring the Value of Public Libraries: The fallacy of footfall and issues as measures of the value of public  libraries. I’m really looking forward to it, and I hope that it will be a step away from the simplistic and inaccurate measurement of footfall (the number of people who walk through the doors, and occasionally the people who click on the council’s ‘library’ website) and issue statistics (book/cd/dvd lending), and towards more effective systems of measurement.

I’m jealous and would love to know what kinds of metrics they get into.


A great, educational video via PrivitizationBeast.org, a web-based rallying cry to stop corporate takeovers of libraries.

Here’s a snippet from a recent blog post:

Last year, Santa Clarita’s City Council rammed through a vote to privatize their library system with very little community input. Community members were understandably outraged, and attended several public hearings requesting more community involvement in the decision-making process. Instead of listening to residents, the City Council created a “Citizen’s Advisory Committee” to review Santa Clarita’s library system and its needs and make recommendations for moving forward with LSSI. The committee had no decision-making power, and was widely criticized as a thinly veiled attempt to silence critics.

Oh, but it gets better. The City Council invited LSSI executive Ron Dubberly to chairor, technically, ‘facilitate’ this committee. In other words, the committee created to advise on the city’s relationship with a private company is being controlled by that same private company. Dubberly has been President of LSSI’s Public Library Management Operations since 2008.[full post]

That’s madness and a little perturbing. Privatisation is not the best idea. There is no guarantee that privatising something will save costs. For example, last year the Ottawa city garbage workers were able to take away the trash at a cost lower than the lowest private-sector bid.

But, I don’t know if I totally agree with the slippery slope they lay out in the video. Used bookstores and cafés are not so onerous. In the case of cafés, there is an opportunity to build a locally focused business with a strong ethical aspects, such as a commitment  fair trade coffee, compostable cups, etc. Also, no one really is against paying for photocopies, a long standing revenue stream used to offset the cost of the photocopying service. Read the rest of this entry »

Moonbeam on a Cat's Ear

The 1987 winner: Moonbeam on a Cat's Ear

The future of libraries vs.  eBooks is a crazy, growing debate right now. It’s got me fired up (I’m working on more posts on that subject…).  While I suss that out,  here’s some news about a present-day happening in library land.

I’m on the CLA illustrator award committee and the 2011 shortlist has been officially announced.

Here they are:

Book of Big Brothers/ Illustrated by Luc Melanson (Groundwood Books)
Counting On Snow /Illustrated by Maxwell Newhouse (Tundra Books)
Fishing With Gubby / Illustrated by Kim La Fave (Harbour Publishing)
The Good Garden /Illustrated by Sylvie Daigneault (Kids Can Press)
I Know Here /Illustrated by Matt James (Groundwood Books)
Owls See Clearly At Night: A Michif Alphabet /Illustrated by Julie Flett (Simply Read Books)
Making the Moose Out of Life /Illustrated by Nicholas Oldhand (Kids Can Press)
Roslyn Rutabaga and the Biggest Hole on Earth! / Illustrated by Marie-Louise Gay (Groundwood Books)
Singing Away the Dark /Illustrated by Julie Morstad (Simply Read Books)
Spork/ Illustrated by Isabelle Arsenault ( Kids Can Press)

All of these books are amazing in their own way.  We boiled the long list down to this ten via conference call. It was probably one of the more interesting conversations I’ve had in a while. How often does anyone get to stick up and argue for something (with a little congenial  passion)  like this?

It doesn’t hurt that the calibre of the top ten, let alone the top twenty-eight books, is so amazing.

The next step is to decide the winner! To help me out, I’ve recruited some librarians who work with kids to go through the books with me. I’m really looking forward to these chats, since a) I love books and b) I love illustrations, illustrators, and the worlds they share with us. Opportunities like this make me glad I landed in the bibliothécaire profession.

Like anything on the list? Let me know in any way that pleases you.