Alexander Johannesen wrote:
> About half-way through in the Q&A there's a question about its role
> with libraries, and Wolfram answers that they've got about 90% of all
> reference library enquiries covered. The only thing they don't really
> do (and don't want to do) is details about people.
He's advertising his product, so naturally he is going to say that reference librarians are semi-obsolete. Of course, that is the sort of question that a reference librarian should answer. I wonder more precisely what he means by 90% of all reference library enquiries?
For example, one of the most often asked questions is "Where is the bathroom?" In my own experience, I get the most questions concerning systems: "How do I get onto JSTOR?" For these and for "ready-reference" questions such as, "How tall is the Eiffel Tower?" and "What is the capital of Syria?" it might do fine, but Google can do that pretty well, too. You never really needed a reference librarian for those sorts of questions.
It's only when people have exhausted every avenue they can think of that they come to ask a reference question, and they are more-or-less desperate. That's when they tend to listen more and you can really help them at that point. After that, these same people have no problem at all coming back and asking you more questions.
Research demonstrates over and over that people believe they are very good or expert in searching information. As a consequence, asking that first real, reference question seems to be equivalent to admitting intellectual failure and it can be quite an obstacle for many.
What I'm saying is that people have a lot more problems than they let on when trying to find information. This is another discussion though.
Jim Weinheimer
Received on Mon May 04 2009 - 04:43:49 EDT