After reading Alex's post (and a few others) I am surprised to see that
some basic tenets of information economics are being ignored.
Alex wrote:
>Again, a friendly reminder that your users are ... *everyone*. So yes,
they >probably belong in the library.
Sorry, but this is just not true. I'm not arguing for elitism here.
I'm NOT saying that we shouldn't make our interfaces easier, more
intuitive, etc., because only "smart" people initiated into the,
admittedly sometimes bizarre, rites of searching "belong" in the
library.
What I AM saying is that each library has a specific mission and
customer base, for its interface needs to be tailored. At least in the
US, libraries are supported mostly by taxpayer dollars, whether in the
form of direct subsidies and/or tax-exemption of non-profit
organizations. They are funded either serve a specific clientele a la
museum, medical or university library (try getting into one without a
college ID, or some form of advance credentialing) or like a public
library, (although it may allow anyone to walk in) will issue a card
only to residents of the jurisdiction that supports it.
This (obviously) should be reflected in both the collections and the
interface. Doctors don't need a kid-friendly interface to search
Medline and kids (for the most part) aren't interested in new medical
terms.
This is, no doubt, also reflected in Google searches, whether we can see
it or not. Google is responsible to share holders and advertisers. I
hope my doctor isn't relying solely on WebMD, because that came up at
the top of his/her Google search! That is not to say that Google is the
evil empire, but, like everyone else's, their priorities follow a money
trail.
JJ
**Views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent those of
the Queens Library.**
Jane Jacobs
Asst. Coord., Catalog Division
Queens Borough Public Library
89-11 Merrick Blvd.
Jamaica, NY 11432
tel.: (718) 990-0804
e-mail: Jane.W.Jacobs_at_queenslibrary.org
FAX. (718) 990-8566
Received on Wed Mar 18 2009 - 08:10:33 EDT