Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Newsgroups: soc.roots
Date:         Mon, 21 Dec 1992 13:47:44 -0800
Reply-To:     Frieda Davison <fdavison@SFSUVAX1.SFSU.EDU>
From:         Frieda Davison <fdavison@SFSUVAX1.SFSU.EDU>
Subject:      Library bashing??
Comments: To: roots-l@vm1.nodak.edu

Well, thought I would get into this fray since SEVERAL of the messages on
the net this morning were bashing libraries.  Instead of off the hand
bashing, how about asking some of us librarians online why things are the
way they are and if and how they could be changed.  Here are a few
(I promise "a few") clarifications.

All libraries are not and many cannot be (by boards of trustees, charter,
etc. regulations)interconnected and able to cooperate.  Academic libraries
exist (as every mission statement will tell you) for the primary clientele
which is usually defined as their students and faculty (some will include
staff, but many don't).  Public libraries typically exist for the clientele
of the "community", depending on how they define community.  Some have a
narrow definition (town, county, etc -- outsiders pay a use fee) and others
 have a very broad definition.  Most public and academic libraries
are usually funded in at least three ways (federal, state, and county or
city). Because they accept funding from all three, all three sets of
regulations must be adhered to -- an there are many.  For example, in the
state of California last year, some people came up with the brilliant idea
of putting a sales tax on magazines and newspapers.  Although they meant
the ones sold at newstands they totally forgot about libraries.  Thus, every
library in the state of California (public, academic, etc) all had to pay
8% in sales tax for every journal and newspaper bought.  This was in essence
an 8% budget CUT for us.  Although the last election rectified this FY 1992/
93 was severely impacted by this and it is highly unlikely that we will be
able to recoup that loss.

Regarding the "comments" about increases -- yes, for libraries, journals
increase their price anywhere from 8 to 25% EACH YEAR. And NO, libraries
do NOT get a break on pricing.  In fact, we pay more.  Publishers have
a policy called "tiered pricing".  They believe that for every library
subscription they receive they are being deprived of an "x" number of private
subscriptions.  SO they typically charge libraries more to subscribe than
the personal user. Sometimes as much as 3 times more.  Journals in the
sciences typically increase pricing more than other subject areas.  There
are some publishers (like Elsevier and Springer/Verlag) who are notorious
in the library world for this type of action and pricing.

What can you do about it?
* Stop bashing and ask your local librarian (public, academic, etc.) how you
can help.
* Join a Friends of the Library group.
* Volunteer time at the library -- find out what "those people behind
the scenes" really do.  Final exams ended last week here at our campus --
this week we anticipate the return of 20,000 books -- someone has to shelve
them.
* Write your Congresspersons.
* Write your local TV news casters and get them to do a library spot.
* Write your local newspaper editors.
* Attend town council (or equivalent) meetings voicing your concerns (but
make sure you have your facts straight first -- talk with the librarians --
NOT the people at the desks.  ASK for the Head Librarian, Chief Librarian,
University Librarian, Library Director, or "for who is in charge of the
library").


Do not for one minute believe that the people who work in the library are
any less frustrated with "the system" than you are.  We must live with it
hour to hour, day to day.  You "encounter" it.  Putting information on
computers and CD's is a great idea but many producers recognize that it is
a limited customer base and will have nothing to do with endeavors of this
type.  The end product is WONDERFUL, but it is VERY EXPENSIVE to get it
computerized.  I used to work for Columbia University and because it is SO
OLD and computers are so relatively young, we estimated that in 1989 we had
only about 20% of our materials accessible (findable, not readable) online.
It costs an average of $2 to $10 just to get one item accessible online.
That sounds cheap, but when you multiple it by 6 million items (like Columbia
owns) or Harvard or any of the big research libraries, there is never enough
money, staff or computer space to do it.  At Columbia we even had "hand
written" catalog cards in the public card catalog -- produced way before
the typewriter even.  Again, there are very few funding avenues for bringing
this type of information online.

Later (when I have cooled off!) I will try to get some information online
about some other questions that were on the net this morning.

Frieda Davison
Assistant University Librarian
San Francisco State University
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU