This is an early release of the editorial that will appear in the Sept. 15, 2011 issue of Library Journal.
THERE WAS JOY IN SOME QUARTERS OF LIBRARYLAND in late August when LJ’s Annoyed Librarian (AL) blog went down for a day and then briefly several more times in the next few days owing to a technical glitch. The jubilation came from another group of annoyed librarians, those riled by AL’s post “The Last Perk of Librarianship” (8/22/11), prompted by a job ad for a nontenured librarian at the University of Alabama (U of A) sent to AL by a “kind reader.” One disgruntled reader even wondered if AL had been fired. No!
What drew the ire of some U of A and Alabama readers wasn’t just AL’s argument against the proliferation of nontenured jobs—a national trend throughout academia, not only in libraries—but rather AL’s snide remarks about the U of A having trouble attracting job candidates, alluding to the state’s racist past, its unimpressive history and culture, plus bad weather (heat, humidity, and recent tornados).
Lou Pitschmann, dean of University Libraries at the University of Alabama, wrote an impassioned letter on the blog, pointing out that U of A has “nationally recognized librarians” on its faculty, including an LJ Mover & Shaker cited for her work at U of A (Jill Grogg). He might also have mentioned Steven MacCall from the SLIS, winner of the 2010 LJ Teaching Award. LJ hasn’t singled out U of A for derision. AL is not LJ, and LJ is not AL.
Others called and wrote personal letters to LJ, saying that AL was an embarrassment to the magazine and to the profession. In her post “Why I No Longer Read Library Journal,” a medical librarian, two-time graduate of U of A, and former fan blogged that “this time, [AL] you’ve gone too far.”
LJ’s proud U of A library school graduate (popular fiction editor Wilda Williams) agreed AL took some cheap shots at the expense of tornado victims and played on old stereotypes. Many of us here cringed at the glib reference about the tornados, even though we recognize that AL’s brand of satire is much milder than The Onion, for instance.
But even those at LJ who aren’t AL fans agree that AL brings up real issues and hits on them over and over, like tenure. In the nearly four years that Annoyed Librarian has been at LJ, the blog has provoked lively and often thoughtful discussions on library education, the fallacies of the graying of the profession, the overselling of careers in librarianship, the incoherence of the public library mission, the American Library Association’s hypocrisy and bureacratic plodding, library jobs that suck, the rush to embrace technology and to distance libraries from the book brand, and so much more. However snide, sarcastic, or snarky AL may be, the AL columns cover weighty, touchy subjects. Maybe that’s why AL is by far the most read blogger at LJ.
As for those who called and wrote to decry AL’s pseudonymity, or anonymity, that is a long literary tradition. Many librarians—and other bloggers—use pseudonyms to hide their identity and protect their jobs. Some want to know why LJ requires commenters on our blogs to include their email address. That’s part of the content management system we use; we don’t post the email addresses (and won’t give them out if requested by another commenter or reader). We don’t care if you use a fake email or a pseudonym. You’re entitled to the same protection as AL.
As I wrote back in 2008 when AL came on board (“Librarians Too ‘Annoyed,’ ” LJ 11/1/08), we don’t edit AL, or any of our bloggers. We expect them to adhere to boundaries regarding libel, defamation, and profanity. And we reserve the right to take down a specific post or end the relationship. There are plenty of people who will never read AL (or LJ); that’s their prerogative. But they may be missing out—both on AL and LJ.
There's a saying from the early days on the 'net: "You own your own words." You can't say AL != LJ with any seriousness.
As for that article, AL simply does not understand academic roles such as First Year Experience. (Confirming my hunch that AL comes out of public libraries, not that this matters.)
And you are really comparing AL to the Onion? Really? Eesh. You can give a turd a blog, but it's still a turd.
Posted by Karen G. Schneider on September 6, 2011 04:26:47PM
> AL’s brand of satire is much milder than The Onion, for instance.
Everyone wants to be as funny and biting as Jonathan Swift and they usually fail. AL isn't a humor column and you, dear Library Journal, are not The Onion. Swift also published under his own name.
I find the cheap shots and the nastiness tiresome and so usually only read LJ in print. I feel that the AL blog is here more for the clickbait than because you feel that it's an astute commentary on the library profession.
It's easy to "encourage discussion" by calling people names and pushing their buttons. Sheer numbers of comments and/or clicks isn't a measure of quality. The AL just does what they do, fine, but I was happier when they were blogging on their own site. Library Journal could do better.
Posted by Jessamyn West on September 6, 2011 07:22:46PM
<br><br>
@Jessamyn West and @Karen G. Schneider: Are you suggesting the Library
Journal should censor out the "turd," AL?
<br><br>
As Will Manley just said in a post discussing this FF/LJ editorial:
<br><br>
"The library profession is great at defending the concept of intellectual
freedom in theory and terribly hypocritical at exercising the reality of
intellectual freedom in the real world. Ours is a very, very normative
profession. If you speak out against those norms, you will be condemned,
ostracized, and eventually censored. No wonder the Annoyed Librarian writes
under a pseudonym. She clearly does not relish the prospect of hot tar and
feathers applied by people with MLS degrees."
<br><br>
Bingo. http://willmanley.com/2011/09/06/will-unwound-548-3-cheers-for-
francine-fialkoff-of-library-journal/
<br><br>
It's amazing such leading librarians as @Jessamyn West and @Karen G.
Schneider come here to perfectly illustrate what Will Manley and others have
been saying for a long time.
<br><br>
Well done, Francine Fialkoff, Will Manley, and especially, AL.
Posted by Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries on September 6, 2011 07:59:43PM
Dan, no one is talking about censoring anything. I don't like it, I don't read it. Simple.
Posted by Jessamyn West on September 6, 2011 10:31:01PM
@Jessamyn West, on another topic, you once said, "It also highlights the thing
we know about Banned Books Week that we don't talk about much — the bulk
of these books are challenged by parents for being age-inappropriate for
children. While I think this is still a formidable thing for librarians to deal
with, it's totally different from people trying to block a book from being sold
at all." Well librarians of all stripes and even non librarians are starting to
comment similarly. Librarians saying essentially the same thing and more
include Will Manley, Rory Litwin, Norma Bruce, etc. Non librarians include
Thomas Sowell and Jonah Goldberg who just wrote in USA Today about that
topic, an it's not pretty. So brava to you, JW, for speaking up on the issue.
Few in the profession do, precisely for the reasons Will Manley and Francine
Fialkoff have identified.
Posted by Dan Kleinman of SafeLibraries on September 6, 2011 08:41:36PM
what Jessamyn said. rub your nose in the turd if you like. Just don't hold it
up and declaim it golden.
Posted by k.g. Schneider on September 7, 2011 12:21:26AM
"[W]e don’t edit AL, or any of our bloggers. We expect them to adhere to
boundaries regarding libel, defamation, and profanity. And we reserve the
right to take down a specific post or end the relationship. There are plenty of
people who will never read AL (or LJ); that’s their prerogative. But they may be
missing out—both on AL and LJ."
You do reserve those rights. Yet, in this case, you didn't exercise them. Poorly
done.
I didn't read AL in the first place, but I'll cease reading LJ until those
aforementioned rights are executed appropriately. I'm proud to be a current
UA MLIS student, but I'd be making the same decision if LJ stood behind AL's
targeting of libraries in Japan, Vermont, Joplin, lower Manhattan, or the Gulf
Coast.
The point isn't which institution was targeted or why, but the fact that LJ
stood behind a bad decision and continues to do so. Censorship is certainly
out of the question, but "cring[ing] at the glib reference" to the April
tornadoes is nowhere near enough. Is there really nothing in between?
The approach taken by AL regarding UA specifically, and Tuscaloosa and
Alabama generally, was unfair and insensitive. Regardless of where one falls
on the tenure argument, the entire issue could've been better addressed by
taking petty, absurd commentary out of the equation, and perhaps instead
supplementing it with some actual sources outside of Wikipedia. You imply
frustration with librarians for a "rush to embrace technology and to distance
libraries from the book brand" when that approach is obviously useful in
many circumstances, instead suggesting that it is somehow akin to "library
jobs that suck." Yet LJ continues to support AL for the exact same thing.
WIKIPEDIA, for chrissakes!
In this instance, the blog extended far beyond a "weighty, touchy" subject and
instead derided an entire community that has shown extraordinary strength
and compassion as they continue to recover from the horrendous storms. The
implication to take it or leave it makes it very easy for me to make my own
decision to leave LJ and AL to snarkiness while the rest of us actually try to
build community and grow as a profession.
Posted by Brittany Turner on September 7, 2011 12:05:47AM
I'm gonna start a for-profit company, and then when the contributors who drive traffic to our company's website say anything controversial, I'll say "they aren't speaking for us". THIS IS AN AWESOME BUSINESS IDEA YO.
Posted by WHAT I LEARNED FROM LIBRARY JOURNAL on September 7, 2011 10:27:48AM
I love the AL blog. I don't always agree with her/him, but I often find much to ponder, however uncomfortable it may make me and others. We librarians, as a group, are hyper-sensitive about our image, our position on the career ladder, etc., which points to our collective low self-esteem. We need to lighten up a bit and learn to laugh at ourselves occasionally. Also, if you don't like it and don't read it, why comment on it?
Posted by Pseudonymous Madame Librarian on September 7, 2011 01:40:43PM
AL readers betray their ages and mindsets when they cannot "get" a form of
ironic humor best seen on Comedy Central and perhaps even NPR with WWDT
Me.
Posted by Johanna Bowen on September 7, 2011 02:23:44PM
It didn't take much smarts to know the AL was going to get nasty feedback about this post. The minute I read it, I new Yellowhammers would be flying his way! I also live in a state that often gets pummeled by columnists who are trying to be funny. It's ultimately just offensive.
Posted by Reggie Jet on September 7, 2011 02:54:58PM
Pseudonymous Madame Librarian (and Will Manley at Will Unwound, #548) has it right: librarians could use a sense of humor. For years LJ got letters saying we--and the profession--should lighten up.
Don't know if I'd go as far as Johanna Bowen, who says "AL readers betray their ages and mindsets when they cannot 'get' a form of ironic humor best seen on Comedy Central ...." It's not a question of age, but she's right about mindset.
Posted by Francine Fialkoff, LJ on September 7, 2011 06:13:57PM
I can take a joke as well as anyone, often better. Maybe that's how I know there is nothing funny about the Tuscaloosa tornadoes. I have a hard time believing that is anyone's idea of humor, but AL and LJ prove me wrong.
Posted by Brittany turner on September 8, 2011 01:49:32AM
It is frustrating to see that there are people out there--Francine Fialkoff, John McGraw, Will Manley, Dan Kleinman, others--who still fail to see that what we in Alabama are angry about is not the general bashing leveled against us by the Annoyed Librarian. We are angry that this anonymous person chose to mock us by way of the tornado that killed scores of people in our state and left so many others homeless or worse.
All anybody wanted, as far as I can tell, was for the Annoyed Librarian to admit that it was a mistake, and in very poor taste, to use this tragedy to bolster his/her argument that Alabama is a bad place. A simple mea culpa on this point would have ended this mess before it became so horribly tangled.
Alabama is actually a very fine place, but I won't try to convince anyone of that. If any of you took the time to do a little research, you would find that the University of Alabama is a world class institution and a great place to work. But you have your prejudices and are free to indulge them.
So, go ahead and throw you stones at us. Feel smug because we don't know where your glass houses stand. And if I am wrong, if any of you live in a place free of prejudice or hatred or poverty, please give the angels my fondest regards.
Posted by Jeff Weddle on September 8, 2011 08:52:17AM
The Annoyed Librarian has long been one of my favorite library blogs. No, I don't always agree with AL, but I do feel that she is the one of only library voices that is consistent in viewing the field with a critical eye. I also like her sarcasm, but then again, I tend to like dark, cranky humor more often than not.
Posted by Laura on September 8, 2011 11:46:30AM
AL offended me long ago, so I stopped reading and don't subscribe to LJ, anymore. If I need an LJ article, I read someone else's copy or hit the website. It sucks that a trade publication allows an anonymous blog, but not in same breath doesn't allow anonymous commenting.
The "dark humor" angle some commenters have cited is a cop-out. I like long flowery articles about how great the libraries I work for are, but that doesn't mean that LJ should publish them.
Anonymous blogging gives the writer keyboard courage, and doesn't allow for responsible journalism or accountability. Writers have to be accountable for their opinions no matter how offensive or silly they are.
Cowards, the lot of you.
Posted by Anonymous, because if AL can be, than I can too. on September 8, 2011 02:12:49PM
OK - I think people need to take a step back and not get "their panties in a wad"!
Having provided that eloquent assessment of the whole AL issue, let me expound...
For proponents of free speech and intellectual freedom, there still seems to be a lack of a sense of humor in our profession. In addition, I frequently think we could accused of taking ourselves too seriously.
If people want to stop reading AL or even Library Journal because of AL - that clearly is there prerogative. However, I would propose, as the library blogger Andy (Agnostic, Maybe)has stated, "My personal opinion is outweighed by my desire to remain widely read and knowledgeable about what people are saying in different corners of libraryland."
Agreed.
One thing the internet can inherently encourage is insulated, isolated pockets of like-minded people who only read/listen to whatever particular niche philosophy/hobby/etc fits their own. I would hope that librarians are able to see past that. We are, are we not, a last bastion of intellectual freedom?
PB
(My views, of course, do not/may not represent that of my organization.)
Posted by PB on September 8, 2011 04:15:54PM
AL's work is satire and critical, but not without merit.
Many of you need to understand that it is not a personal attack, but a piece to raise some important questions.
And much of the instructional tenure track faculty are asking the same questions about the future of higher education. As for the big east coast private colleges, who cares. The real issue right now that many public and four year colleges are facing is competition with for-profit colleges and tiny state budgets.
Posted by Jennie on September 8, 2011 05:22:45PM
Cuddos to LJ for not succuming to pressure and keeping AL's voice out there. We all have a point of view and a voice. Like or dislike it's nice to have diversity, even in comedy.
Posted by Jeanne Casey on September 9, 2011 10:13:16AM
Wow! This is interesting. Not being a follower of the blog or a consistent reader of LJ, reading this feels like walking into a firestorm.
But two things stood out when reading this: 1. name calling, intellectual freedom & censorship: I am very conservative politically and I do not find that the library profession is open in anyway to a conservative Christian viewpoint, so I rarely provide one. Yet in this exchange, the name calling, censorship and intellectual freedom cards all got played. Generally as a conservative Christian, I am referred to in the media as ignorant, witless and judgemental. So this is why I do not usually share my worldview opinions. Because I am a Conservative Christian, immediately what I have to say has no value, because of my world view, not what I really am saying. It is one of the things that I dislike the most about political commentary; too much pontificating, name calling, & prejudicial bias to really speak to the issue. 2. Normative Profession: that is an understatement for the library profession. Toe the line on intellectual freedom and allow adults to access pornography on the computers in the public libraries as a first ammendment right. Ok - now I am pontificating but I agree, there is an expected response to certain issues and if, as a professional you do not agree with the ALA response to anything, well then, you aren't really one of the professionals.
Bottom line: what has gotten lost is the issue that academic librarians are not viewed as a member of the education team with valuable knowledge to share with faculty and students. As such, the librarian are not afforded the same respect in the academe to be offered tenure. As a librarian working in Academics with no faculty status when I approach faculty about coming to their classes to teach information literacy skills, the response is "Oh thats nice, it should take you about 5 minutes right?" and then they wonder why their students cite Wikipedia or Ask.com. As an academic librarian, I have a teaching role without a formal classroom, provide value lessons to students and bring value to every class on campus. Doesn't that deserve some recognition, financial security, continuing education support and status?
Posted by Nursing Librarian that wants to keep her job on September 9, 2011 08:46:07AM
I read LJ online quite frequently and AL only on occasion. She writes to a select audience, and rather poorly. The commenter who says she's the only one who is looking with a critical eye at the library profession: seriously?! Is that the only blog you read? Francine, I'm disappointed in your defense. There's a lot of value in LJ, but AL's blog is clearly meant to ruffle feathers, which gets her off. She hurt people in her 8/22/11 post and gets to hide behind anonymity without apologizing. Very unprofessional on her part and yours, LJ.
Posted by Jane on September 9, 2011 02:21:04PM
'Clickbait'? Really? Do you see how sad and depression for
librarians that statement could be? That one of our largest
professional publications needs to resort to a satirical
blog in order to get enough traffic to keep ad revenue up
enough so it can continue to function. That the entire rest
of the site, that calmly discusses new trends and facebook
and publications and do-gooders, isn't found interesting
enough for librarians to visit all on their own?
AL is far from clickbait and I along with Dan and Will
Manley applaud Francine Fialkoff.
Also everyone could use a lesson from Professor Internet
(remember if your arguing on the internet you've already
lost) see tinyurl dot com/madaboutsomething
Posted by The Liebrarian on September 9, 2011 05:05:33PM
There's been more than one AL. Look at the writing of at the beginning of this blog and now. It's quite different. I preferred the old AL, and have stopped reading this one, mostly because this one is meaner though though I recall there was a nasty bit about children's librarians when the former AL wrote and later recanted. Neither one of them seemed to know much of anything about public libraries.
Posted by Amber on September 14, 2011 11:10:42PM
I am late to the game here, but as to Ms. Fialkoff's assertion that "AL isn't LJ, and LJ isn't AL": 1) one accesses AL through LJ, and 2) she writes "In the nearly four years that Annoyed Librarian has been at LJ..." and 3) "As I wrote back in 2008 when AL came on board..."
AL is a part of LJ, and does reflect on LJ, LJ's schizophrenic denials to the contrary.
