Don't Try this at Your Library
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Shush!
Grumpy Patrons: a Ongoing Lesson
Modern libraries
11:01 - 08 May 2008
SIR, - I am writing in response to the letter from Norman Hart (Herts Advertiser, April 24) concerning noise in the Maltings Library, St Albans. In responding to the changing needs and culture of the community we serve, we are aware that sometimes the library is noisy and this may not suit everyone. Ultimately however, the library is there to serve the community as a whole, which includes an increasingly diverse range of interests and needs, so part of our job is to try to strike a healthy balance between them.
On Tuesday mornings we have two lively and increasingly-popular Baby Rhyme Time sessions, followed by Storytime on Tuesday afternoons. These are provided to encourage children to establish the reading habit from an early age - and admittedly their enthusiasm can make these sessions rather noisy. Apart from these times, during the rest of our 65 hours of opening each week the children's area is for reading and toys are not provided. We are aware that some of our users prefer not to visit during these activities so our suggestion that Mr Hart avoid these times was meant to be helpful rather than "impertinent".
The issue of noise in the modern public library goes along with its changing environment, which is directly influenced by the needs of it's patrons. Libraries must compete with bookstores and cyber cafes for patrons.
The common complaint that I often hear is music (Ipods and Mp3 players) and cellphones. Next is inappropriate use of computers for watching videos or looking at pictures that are offensive to others. Another big problem is how to best deal with the homeless. The open policy is that anyone may come in and use the library so long as they do not disturb other patrons. And last, and most disturbing, patron sex in bathrooms.
Some of these are easy to solve. Most people will be embarrassed and put that phone down or turn their players off. Most people are reasonable.
The second set are those problems which cause direct and harmful environments. Patrons who look at adult videos or who have sex in public places are a threat to other patrons. This is especially dangerous for parents and their children. Direct steps must be taken and kept in check to prevent any incidents in which another child or adult patron may be harmed.
No librarian questions these. Most librarians must, however, be careful in how they deal with such issues. Libraries may easily become libel for injuries or harassment of patrons accused of such violations of the library policies. What some patrons forget is that patrons guilty of offenses have civil and legal rights too. That means the library could get taken to court.
Large libraries can often afford to have full time security who are specially trained in this. I don't know what library students are being taught these days in school, but when I was a student it was discussed, but we never learned what steps to take in handling circumstances.
When I read this article I shrugged. Some people have no idea of the complexities of these issues, and it is unfair of patrons to expect the typically under maned reference desk. The idea of complaining about a children's story time makes me laugh though. Come on, do everyone a favor and save it for a really big bitch.
Any thoughts?
http://www.hertsad.co.uk/content/herts/postbag/story.aspx?brand=HADOnline&category=Postbag&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=PostbagHAD&itemid=WEED08%20May%202008%2011%3A01%3A50%3A253
Modern libraries
11:01 - 08 May 2008
SIR, - I am writing in response to the letter from Norman Hart (Herts Advertiser, April 24) concerning noise in the Maltings Library, St Albans. In responding to the changing needs and culture of the community we serve, we are aware that sometimes the library is noisy and this may not suit everyone. Ultimately however, the library is there to serve the community as a whole, which includes an increasingly diverse range of interests and needs, so part of our job is to try to strike a healthy balance between them.
On Tuesday mornings we have two lively and increasingly-popular Baby Rhyme Time sessions, followed by Storytime on Tuesday afternoons. These are provided to encourage children to establish the reading habit from an early age - and admittedly their enthusiasm can make these sessions rather noisy. Apart from these times, during the rest of our 65 hours of opening each week the children's area is for reading and toys are not provided. We are aware that some of our users prefer not to visit during these activities so our suggestion that Mr Hart avoid these times was meant to be helpful rather than "impertinent".
The issue of noise in the modern public library goes along with its changing environment, which is directly influenced by the needs of it's patrons. Libraries must compete with bookstores and cyber cafes for patrons.
The common complaint that I often hear is music (Ipods and Mp3 players) and cellphones. Next is inappropriate use of computers for watching videos or looking at pictures that are offensive to others. Another big problem is how to best deal with the homeless. The open policy is that anyone may come in and use the library so long as they do not disturb other patrons. And last, and most disturbing, patron sex in bathrooms.
Some of these are easy to solve. Most people will be embarrassed and put that phone down or turn their players off. Most people are reasonable.
The second set are those problems which cause direct and harmful environments. Patrons who look at adult videos or who have sex in public places are a threat to other patrons. This is especially dangerous for parents and their children. Direct steps must be taken and kept in check to prevent any incidents in which another child or adult patron may be harmed.
No librarian questions these. Most librarians must, however, be careful in how they deal with such issues. Libraries may easily become libel for injuries or harassment of patrons accused of such violations of the library policies. What some patrons forget is that patrons guilty of offenses have civil and legal rights too. That means the library could get taken to court.
Large libraries can often afford to have full time security who are specially trained in this. I don't know what library students are being taught these days in school, but when I was a student it was discussed, but we never learned what steps to take in handling circumstances.
When I read this article I shrugged. Some people have no idea of the complexities of these issues, and it is unfair of patrons to expect the typically under maned reference desk. The idea of complaining about a children's story time makes me laugh though. Come on, do everyone a favor and save it for a really big bitch.
Any thoughts?
http://www.hertsad.co.uk/content/herts/postbag/story.aspx?brand=HADOnline&category=Postbag&tBrand=HertsCambsOnline&tCategory=PostbagHAD&itemid=WEED08%20May%202008%2011%3A01%3A50%3A253
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Cary Your Books for You
Digital Options
InfoTech: OCLC Offering Long-Term Digital Archive Storage
Josh Hadro -- Library Journal, 4/30/2008 9:42:00 AM
Provides offsite managed storage of digital archive “master files” and the services necessary to keep libraries’ data safe in original state.
Program is fully managed and remotely hosted backup for original digital content.
Files can be uploaded directly into the storage servers via Connexion.
Digital archives may solve the problem of scarcity and delicacy inherent with many physical archives, but that doesn’t mean that lasting preservation isn’t a major concern. OCLC last week announced a new version of its Digital Archive service for the “long-term storage of libraries’ digital collections,” providing offsite managed storage of digital archive “master files” and the relevant services necessary to keep libraries’ data safe in its original state.
Unlike other backup and storage options, such as the open source and membership-funded LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe), OCLC’s program is a fully managed and remotely hosted backup for original digital content. The OCLC Digital Archive includes monthly reports that verify file integrity. Hoping to fit into the existing workflow of many digital archives, the service enables files to be uploaded directly into the storage servers via Connexion, the popular OCLC cataloging interface integrated with WorldCat, as well as through CONTENTdm’s digital collections management software for libraries.
The story didn't state the costs of such back up storage.
Any thoughts?
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6556213.html
InfoTech: OCLC Offering Long-Term Digital Archive Storage
Josh Hadro -- Library Journal, 4/30/2008 9:42:00 AM
Provides offsite managed storage of digital archive “master files” and the services necessary to keep libraries’ data safe in original state.
Program is fully managed and remotely hosted backup for original digital content.
Files can be uploaded directly into the storage servers via Connexion.
Digital archives may solve the problem of scarcity and delicacy inherent with many physical archives, but that doesn’t mean that lasting preservation isn’t a major concern. OCLC last week announced a new version of its Digital Archive service for the “long-term storage of libraries’ digital collections,” providing offsite managed storage of digital archive “master files” and the relevant services necessary to keep libraries’ data safe in its original state.
Unlike other backup and storage options, such as the open source and membership-funded LOCKSS (Lots of Copies Keeps Stuff Safe), OCLC’s program is a fully managed and remotely hosted backup for original digital content. The OCLC Digital Archive includes monthly reports that verify file integrity. Hoping to fit into the existing workflow of many digital archives, the service enables files to be uploaded directly into the storage servers via Connexion, the popular OCLC cataloging interface integrated with WorldCat, as well as through CONTENTdm’s digital collections management software for libraries.
The story didn't state the costs of such back up storage.
Any thoughts?
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6556213.html
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
A Fistful of Pisses Me Off!
More Media Please?
LEELA
Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?
FRY
Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And
in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and
milk cartons and t-shirts and written in the sky. But not in
dreams. No siree!
--Futurama: A Fishful of Dreams
I found this editorial on the tech side and thought it might be worth noting. It has the realistic ring of today's market with Google perched on the hills of Mount Parnassus and blowing all other search engine hopefuls out of the playing field. But ever the cynic, I wonder if it is good news for the people.
Is it an American super size me philosophy that drives the market? Is more always better? I wonder about that. As recent studies have demonstrated, not only are Google patrons getting less quality information, they are not learning how to search and distinguish the good from the bad and the ugly.
I Google myself, but come from a time when papers were written with outlines and index cards, and it was "Shh!" in the library. I know that time has come and passed out of memory, but I think it is librarians that will save their bacon.
In the editorial the notion is to focus on making Yahoo what it once was:
So how does Yahoo move forward? It needs to rebrand itself an Internet media company, quit chasing Google on Web search, and get damn good at selling brand advertising to Madison Avenue once again. And it has to get it done before Google figures out how to turn the creative ad process over to robots. Does technology play a role in that future? Of course. But the emphasis should be on technology that makes ad sales possible, not ad sales that make the technology possible.
The idea of more corporate sponsorship of the Internet and its searching options sends a chill up my spine. That means the options go where the money is. That is not a democratic conception. It is capitalist mojo of a generation who seem to not understand the marketing of almost every aspect of their lives. But the emphasis should be on technology that makes ad sales possible, not ad sales that make the technology possible. This is a very vague and odd statement. It may suggest an agreement where add revenues profit the interest of a company, but I doubt it comes away so favorably for the average person on line. Case in point, the popularity of You Tube for a long time was that it was a space that was unfettered by commercial bull shit. Now almost two years after Googles purchase of it there are ads everywhere. It has taken away that little corner of ours and turned it over to the snake oil salesmen and hawkers of Madison Avenue. We don't need more ads. We need less!
This isn't going to help anyone other than stock holders of Yahoo. It only makes Googles cold icy grip on Virtual searchers tighter. I was relieved that Microsoft resisted the royal commands of Mr. Gates and have held out for their own. I don't think its too late to ever change things. Much good can come from mistakes if one chooses to pause and learn from them. As a librarian I would be depressed to think my collection is restricted to one or two books. The options for powerful and competitive search engines should be no different. I want there to be a crowded market. I want patrons to have options, so they can choose, and choose wisely.
Any thoughts?
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9936734-7.html?tag=nefd.lede
LEELA
Didn't you have ads in the 20th century?
FRY
Well, sure, but not in our dreams. Only on TV and radio. And
in magazines and movies and at ball games and on buses and
milk cartons and t-shirts and written in the sky. But not in
dreams. No siree!
--Futurama: A Fishful of Dreams
I found this editorial on the tech side and thought it might be worth noting. It has the realistic ring of today's market with Google perched on the hills of Mount Parnassus and blowing all other search engine hopefuls out of the playing field. But ever the cynic, I wonder if it is good news for the people.
Is it an American super size me philosophy that drives the market? Is more always better? I wonder about that. As recent studies have demonstrated, not only are Google patrons getting less quality information, they are not learning how to search and distinguish the good from the bad and the ugly.
I Google myself, but come from a time when papers were written with outlines and index cards, and it was "Shh!" in the library. I know that time has come and passed out of memory, but I think it is librarians that will save their bacon.
In the editorial the notion is to focus on making Yahoo what it once was:
So how does Yahoo move forward? It needs to rebrand itself an Internet media company, quit chasing Google on Web search, and get damn good at selling brand advertising to Madison Avenue once again. And it has to get it done before Google figures out how to turn the creative ad process over to robots. Does technology play a role in that future? Of course. But the emphasis should be on technology that makes ad sales possible, not ad sales that make the technology possible.
The idea of more corporate sponsorship of the Internet and its searching options sends a chill up my spine. That means the options go where the money is. That is not a democratic conception. It is capitalist mojo of a generation who seem to not understand the marketing of almost every aspect of their lives. But the emphasis should be on technology that makes ad sales possible, not ad sales that make the technology possible. This is a very vague and odd statement. It may suggest an agreement where add revenues profit the interest of a company, but I doubt it comes away so favorably for the average person on line. Case in point, the popularity of You Tube for a long time was that it was a space that was unfettered by commercial bull shit. Now almost two years after Googles purchase of it there are ads everywhere. It has taken away that little corner of ours and turned it over to the snake oil salesmen and hawkers of Madison Avenue. We don't need more ads. We need less!
This isn't going to help anyone other than stock holders of Yahoo. It only makes Googles cold icy grip on Virtual searchers tighter. I was relieved that Microsoft resisted the royal commands of Mr. Gates and have held out for their own. I don't think its too late to ever change things. Much good can come from mistakes if one chooses to pause and learn from them. As a librarian I would be depressed to think my collection is restricted to one or two books. The options for powerful and competitive search engines should be no different. I want there to be a crowded market. I want patrons to have options, so they can choose, and choose wisely.
Any thoughts?
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9936734-7.html?tag=nefd.lede
Monday, May 5, 2008
Tah-Da!
New ALA President
Camila Alire Elected 2009–10 ALA President
Lynn Blumenstein & Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 5/2/2008
Winner has background in academic libraries Stripling, Stoffle, Kunzel lead race for Council
Larger turnout, thanks to electronic voting.
In an election marked by a growing number of participants, Camila Alire (l.), dean emeritus of the libraries of both the University of New Mexico and Colorado State University, won election as 2009–10 American Library Association (ALA) president with 8,956 votes, or 55.8% of the total. J. Linda Williams, coordinator of library media services for Anne Arundel County public schools in Annapolis, MD, got.7102 votes. Alire will become president-elect at the American Library Association annual conference next month, and will take the top spot the following year. In an interview in LJ in April, Alire stressed advocacy training for librarians "back home," among other things she supports.
Well lets see how this goes. Advocacy training aside (a good idea) what are some of her other top priorities? How about job shortage? How about facing the new president and promoting more tax allocation for funding public libraries. How about reversing some of the damage that Bush inflicted on American libraries?
I know I am leaving a lot out.
Any thoughts?
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6557081.html?desc=topstory
Camila Alire Elected 2009–10 ALA President
Lynn Blumenstein & Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 5/2/2008
Winner has background in academic libraries Stripling, Stoffle, Kunzel lead race for Council
Larger turnout, thanks to electronic voting.
In an election marked by a growing number of participants, Camila Alire (l.), dean emeritus of the libraries of both the University of New Mexico and Colorado State University, won election as 2009–10 American Library Association (ALA) president with 8,956 votes, or 55.8% of the total. J. Linda Williams, coordinator of library media services for Anne Arundel County public schools in Annapolis, MD, got.7102 votes. Alire will become president-elect at the American Library Association annual conference next month, and will take the top spot the following year. In an interview in LJ in April, Alire stressed advocacy training for librarians "back home," among other things she supports.
Well lets see how this goes. Advocacy training aside (a good idea) what are some of her other top priorities? How about job shortage? How about facing the new president and promoting more tax allocation for funding public libraries. How about reversing some of the damage that Bush inflicted on American libraries?
I know I am leaving a lot out.
Any thoughts?
http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6557081.html?desc=topstory
Sunday, May 4, 2008
DOA
Yahoo and Microsoft End Negotiations
Microsoft officially pulled its offer for Yahoo on Saturday, confirming an earlier report by CNET News.com.
In a letter to Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang, Microsoft chief Steve Ballmer confirmed that Microsoft was willing to offer $33 a share, but that Yahoo was holding out for at least $37 a share, or $5 billion more than Microsoft was prepared to spend. In the letter, Ballmer also says he is ruling out a direct offer to shareholders.
"This approach would necessarily involve a protracted proxy contest and eventually an exchange offer," Ballmer said. "Our discussions with you have led us to conclude that, in the interim, you would take steps that would make Yahoo undesirable as an acquisition for Microsoft."
Not a big surprise. This was dead on arrival.
Any thoughts?
http://www.news.com/8301-13860_3-9935100-56.html?tag=nefd.lede
Microsoft officially pulled its offer for Yahoo on Saturday, confirming an earlier report by CNET News.com.
In a letter to Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang, Microsoft chief Steve Ballmer confirmed that Microsoft was willing to offer $33 a share, but that Yahoo was holding out for at least $37 a share, or $5 billion more than Microsoft was prepared to spend. In the letter, Ballmer also says he is ruling out a direct offer to shareholders.
"This approach would necessarily involve a protracted proxy contest and eventually an exchange offer," Ballmer said. "Our discussions with you have led us to conclude that, in the interim, you would take steps that would make Yahoo undesirable as an acquisition for Microsoft."
Not a big surprise. This was dead on arrival.
Any thoughts?
http://www.news.com/8301-13860_3-9935100-56.html?tag=nefd.lede
Friday, May 2, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
