Library Journal Mobile
Log In  |  Register          Free Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to LJ Magazine
Email
Learn RSS

Tennant: Digital Libraries   



Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (3)


Neither Black Nor White, but Survival

November 3, 2009 I've long been a fan of the writing of Meredith Farkas, as is true of many of my colleagues. She is perceptive, nuanced,  and an excellent writer, which presents a triple threat against ignorance and obfuscation. Her latest post, "Shades of Gray", is no exception. I suppose this makes Meredith the anti-Annoyed-Librarian, to whom I will not link despite the fact that we share the same platform.

Meredith uses her usual level-headedness to view some of the recent controversies of libraryland, where some have attempted to paint some controversial issues as either black or white. They are neither. Go read it, I'll wait.

Let's be clear -- Libraries are in some very trying times. We are being assailed from many quarters -- whether it be our funding sources, or societal perceptions, or the fact that Google and Amazon are eating our lunch. The last thing we need is to be squabbling inside of our little backwater. And let's be clear -- a backwater it is.

For but one example, Amazon couldn't care less about MARC. What they care more about is ONIX -- a standard that many librarians have barely heard of, let alone know about in any real way. Meanwhile, it underlies the single largest online retailer of books. You'd think we'd both know and care (Not to say we don't completely, my own employer is doing quite a bit with ONIX, but how much do you know about it?).

So I ask you, is it the very moment when we are most in peril the right time to be having petty internal sqabbles? Is it the most opportune moment to assail those providing us with solutions as if they are after our own demise? Should we not try harder to work together to achieve goals we surely share? And the over-arching goal to which I think it must be apparent we all support is the survival of libraries. Without that, none of us has anything -- not a single thing at all.

So let me be brutally frank. We are in a fight for our very lives. It may not feel like that now, but it won't be long until we feel the heat of the fire that will make us consider leaping out of the frying pan. This is not the time to be picking fights with ourselves. This is the time to be figuring out a better place to land than the fire. The last thing we need is any wasted attention, or effort, or resources. We have nothing to squander, no opportunities to blindly disregard, and absolutely everything to lose. We must either figure out how to work together, or else be prepared to go down separately. And let me assure you, it will be cold comfort indeed to watch others go down before you simply to be the last to do so.

I am not arguing for settling for bad solutions -- we simply can't afford that, least of all now. All I'm asking is that we reduce the vitriol and increase the useful dialog. This is no simple finger-pointing, there is plenty of responsibility to go around. This is specifically what I suggest:
  • Start from a position of respect -- Pretty much everyone has a reason to be where they are in this debate. Allow some simple dignity to everyone in the discussion.
  • Check your facts -- It's very disturbing to me to see how many people will accept as fact whatever perspective someone cares to provide on an issue without bothering to check the source. Unfortunately, I've seen the press increasingly publish whatever anyone cares to say as if it were fact without doing the simplest fact-checking. Let's not be victims to this same mistake.
  • Shrink from overstating your case -- this is a point that I continue to violate, for which I am sorry. I likely even did it in this very post. And this is by no means to say that everyone does it. I've been very gratified to see some of the commenters on Meredith's post be very even-handed in their remarks. Thanks for that.
  • Consider the often hard-won reputatons of everyone in the debate -- For a simple example about which I am familiar -- I did not give up my integrity when I joined OCLC. I am just as likely to advise a library to choose a non-OCLC product as I am to advise them to select one from my employer. So be it. My integrity cannot be purchased -- or at least so cheaply. So despite the fact that I joined a "vendor" it doesn't negate the many, many years I spent in public academic libraries. There are others in current library debates who have similar pedigrees that should not be discounted. Let's give them their earned respect.
  • Understand that often the solution is a combination of options -- I can't begin to describe how many "solutions" of which I've been a part that have included both open source and proprietary solutions. The point is to reach your goal in the best possible way. And that will often include proprietary solutions. So be it. If you believe the only way is completely open source, then lord help you. I have a Mac, upon which I run the non-open-source "Snow Leopard", which enables me to run virtually any application I care to install (third-party applications provide full Microsoft Windows support). What's not to like about that?
In the end, I guess what I'm asking for is respect, forbearance, and a critical eye. So much is said on the Internet that cannot be documented, backed up, or defended. Take a moment to check out any allegations before commenting. Read things yourself. Give people whom you know the benefit of a doubt. Be generous. And most importantly, let's all focus on our own survival. I can't think of anything more important at this point --  can you?

Posted by Roy Tennant on November 3, 2009 | Comments (3)


Industries: News & Features
Email
Learn RSS

November 4, 2009
In response to: Neither Black Nor White, but Survival
Floyd commented:

Not linking to blogs that you mention is pretty petty in itself (respect?). Being unable to resist the temptation to call the vendor you work for a "vendor" is not a real good example of a critical eye. Focusing on our own survival is not usually the mark of integrity. More important would be what it is exactly that survives.




November 4, 2009
In response to: Neither Black Nor White, but Survival
Jeffrey Beall commented:

Why do you say "we" when you refer to people who work in libraries? You don't work in a library. When was the last time you were even in a library?

You say you didn't give up your integrity when you joined OCLC. However you did give up something. You stopped writing articles like "MARC must die" and "MARC exit strategies" chiefly because your new employer makes its profit (and pays your salary) from its sales of MARC records. So much for "integrity."




November 4, 2009
In response to: Neither Black Nor White, but Survival
Allen Mullen commented:

Bless you, Roy, You can see via the previous 2 comments what "we" are up against. Unfortunately, it reminds me of the political climate in the U.S.





POST A COMMENT
Display Name or Registered Users Login Here.
Please restrict submissions to less than 7,000 characters (including any HTML formatting).

Change Image
Before submitting this form, please type the characters displayed above.
Note the letters are NOT case sensitive.

Advertisement
Advertisements

©2009 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Use of this Web site is subject to its Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
Please visit these other Reed Business sites