Jim, thanks for your reflections, and here's something of interest.
Nate Hill of the San Jose Library and the PLA blog wrote of the three
Cs--collections, conversations and context--as functions of libraries.
I like that mix. If librarians go by Nate's priorities, I believe, as
a nonlibrarian, that the the truth will generally come out. As for
information literacy, that is a challenge to teach--all the more
reason not to lay off school librarians, the experts in these matters.
All this is far, far superior to a Ministry of Truth.
And now--about The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, mentioned
in your online book. I checked and didn't see any copies in the
collection of my local public library, here in Alexandria, Virginia,
even if it carried Mein Kampf. I'm Jewish but would not in the least
mind if Protocols were there. At the same time I'd prefer that it come
with a scholarly foreword putting the work in perspective as a
historical document--thereby following Nate's preference for context
(he was talking mainly about the geo kind, but the general concept
would apply here). The library itself addressed this issue by carrying
at least two books debunking Protocols--which is much better than
ignoring it completely, especially when, yes, it is on the Net (e.g.,
the version at http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion1.htm). An
intelligent approach. And far, far less obnoxious and more credible
than a Clinton-style Ministry of Truth (I get full bashing privileges,
incidentally--I'm a lifelong Democrat who voted for Bill and Al).
By the way, going by your writings, I very much appreciate your
interest in the appropriateness of material for various groups of
patrons. Beyond digital divide issues, this is one reason why I am
concerned about tossing publibs and academic libs into "one big tent"
for the purposes of a national digital library even though the two
systems could cooperate closely. While ultimately public librarians at
the local level may make the final choices, they do so within certain
frameworks, and I worry about academics and like-minded people trying
to impose their priorities and values on real and virtual communities
for which they are off-target. I can recall talk of "citizen
scholars." Yes, that's just the way to think when a patron needs
accurate job-related information or is dying of cancer.
David Rothman
Co-Founder, LibraryCity.org
703.370.6540
Nate's post:
http://plablog.org/2011/05/a-suggested-approach-for-the-digital-public-library-of-america.html
My thoughts on it:
http://librarycity.org/?p=1219
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:18 AM, James Weinheimer
<weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/22/2011 10:41 PM, David H. Rothman wrote:
> <snip>
>>
>> I agree with worries over censorship even if that isn't Bill Clinton's
>> intent. And, yes, both librarians and journalists are solutions. No
>> policing or corrections agency, though. I hate the idea.
>
> </snip>
>
> My own concern is that so few non-librarians have an understanding what library selection (collection development) really means today. A good overview of the U.S. theory of selection is Peggy Johnson's "Fundamentals of collection development and management." 2nd ed. ALA Editions, 2009, available on Google Books (this section for free in the preview!) http://books.google.com/books?id=BVQhMEKf3pUC&pg=PA13#v=onepage.
>
> Bill Clinton's idea is to provide the truth, whatever that means. As the above book describes, there has been a tension to provide "what the public wants" vs. "what is good for them." Part of this is the latter is the need for a librarian to provide "the truth," which is extremely difficult--not only trying to determine what "the truth" happens to be, but also trying to define "what is the public?" in a non-stereotypical way. So librarians have focused instead on trying to provide "balanced coverage" as much as possible, and no librarian would ever want to say that their collection contains "the truth". In this regard, you may be interested in reading a section of an online book I wrote, "What is a Library?" at http://aurlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/What+is+a+Library%3F
>
> In my experience however, these considerations of library selection may need to evolve into something different (somehow). It seems that it is slowly dawning upon people who use the resources on the Internet that they are being manipulated in all kinds of ways, not only through the resources themselves, but the Google-type searching and how it is all being manipulated in turn. As I have worked with people, especially younger students, they like one-stop shopping and want what I call a "Sam's Club for Truth" where they can go to this great big place and find truth on the shelves just for the taking. The library information literacy programs are seen as big pains and are relegated to other classes students don't want to take, and forgotten just as quickly as their basic algebra. In any case, people are not going to research the authors and corporate bodies in the books and articles they want to use. That's too much work; nobody has that much time to do it, and in any case, t!
hat was what the entire bibliographic structure was supposed to achieve in earlier days: the author's work was vetted using peer reviewers assigned by the publishers, the publishers were rated reliable or not, and libraries bought overwhelmingly from the reliable publishers through book jobbers, who did a lot of vetting themselves.
>
> For all kinds of reasons, this relationship is breaking down and nothing has replaced it, primarily (I think) because selection processes for resources on the web have not been monetized yet. I personally consider the Google/Yahoo etc. tools as a modernized "Books in Print", i.e. an essential tool of use mainly to bibliographers and librarians, never used alone but best used in conjunction with other tools. Google/Yahoo etc. misses a lot and hides much more, but nevertheless, they are the best we have. The newer tools such as Mendeley and specialized Web2.0 resources show great promise but are not coordinated yet. I have considered such coordination and management to be among the tasks of the future librarian.
>
> --
> James L. Weinheimer weinheimer.jim.l_at_gmail.com
> First Thus: http://catalogingmatters.blogspot.com/
> Cooperative Cataloging Rules: http://sites.google.com/site/opencatalogingrules/
Received on Mon May 23 2011 - 10:11:24 EDT