I recorded my initial reaction to Mr. Lowry’s column this morning over at LISNews and thought I’d share it with you, in case you hadn’t stumbled across it.

Warning: This post is so long that I have, for the first time, employed the Extended Entry option. Read on…

There’s a thread on Slashdot today that promotes something called the Distributed Library Project. The basic premise is that Bay Area people create accounts and list their collections for other’s perusal. If the potential borrower and owner can coordinate times, items can be checked out.

Here’s the “What is the DLP?” blurb from the project’s site:

“The Distributed Library Project is an experiment in sharing information and building community in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Unfortunately, the traditional library system doesn’t do much to foster community. Patrons come and go, but there is very little opportunity to establish relationships with people or groups of people. In fact, if you try to talk with someone holding a book you like - you’ll probably get shushed. The Distributed Library Project works in exactly the opposite way, where the very function of the library depends on interaction.”

Now of course, you’re horrified by the assertion that libraries do little by way of community building, as was I. Fortunately, the Slashdot community agrees.

Read the rest of this entry »

{Jestful CIPA commentary}

As evidence of the inefficacy of filtering, Simon says (sorry) that he couldn’t access Library Stuff at work due to the filters on his computers. He was unable to identify the offensive elements, but I’ll be damned if I don’t at least try.

Of course, Steven is a dirty, dirty man and the phrase “get the stuff every day” is just fraught with innuendo unacceptable for children (whether it’s visible to filters or not). Other questionable phrases? You bet.

“C’mon and join the party” - 1-999-LIBERRY. Our ‘professionals’ are online and waiting for you.

“will not be reading Harry Potter” - No kid should ever see those words together!

“attending the Dixie Chicks concert” - That’s un-American!

“tool” and “nuts” - No comment

From the OPML list:

“Big Pink” - Whoa, nelly!

“Good’ Sharewood” - Yikes!

“Fuzzystuff” - Hmmm….

“Open Stacks” - How dare he!

“Agnostic” - Well, that’s the last straw. To the blacklist with you, Steven M. Cohen!

{/Jestful CIPA commentary}

So there’s this article today linked from LISNews about Passaic’s (NJ) consideration of turning over library operations to LSSI. Now I’ve commented on privatization before, but this time it’s the relationship between the city and the library that raises my ire. To wit:

“It’s being rushed through without much attention and thought. We’ve only had the last three weeks to look at it,” said library Director Kathleen Mollica, referring to a proposal from LSSI. “Apparently, the city has been looking into this since February.”

“Before we suggested this to the library trustees, we wanted to make sure that this was the right thing,” he said.

Excuse me? What qualifications do you have to make that decision, Mr. Schaer (who serves as the City Council President)? Heaven forbid the library be involved in the needs assessment.

It gets worse:

To encourage the nine-member board to vote affirmatively, Schaer and the council offered to add an extra $50,000 to next year’s library budget.

Well, whoopty-doo! That’s almost enough to pay someone with the qualifications to make such a decision. Almost.

Add to this equation a mayor who is heavily in support of privatization, yet does not possess a library card:

“We need better things, better equipment. And I think that’s the way to go,” he said.

Note the vagueness. He appears less qualified to speak to the issue than the guy surfing porn in the computer lab. At least the board president is honest:

“I have no judgment at this moment as to whether this is a great idea or a lousy idea,” he said. “More understanding of what the proposal is needs to be clarified.”

Well, I wouldn’t go looking to the City Council for answers.

I’m sure I’m not alone in fearing for the citizens of Passaic and mourning the imminent demise of their public institution.

Jessamyn links to this article written by Senator Orrin Hatch in defense of the Patriot Act. The article is, not surprisingly, chock full of vagueness and sidestepping. While there are many passages worth picking apart, this one really caught my attention:

“Nothing in the Patriot Act threatens our cherished Bill of Rights. In fact, the act is expressly designed to enhance our nation’s fundamental freedoms. Moreover, despite the steady drumbeat of opposition by some groups, none of them has cited one instance of abuse against our constitutional rights, nor one shred of evidence to contradict the fact that these tools have saved American lives by preventing terrorist attacks against our people.”

Well, Senator Hatch, how convenient that there is no evidence, when the Patriot Act goes out of its way to prevent said evidence from ever being produced. Can you say “gag order,” Mr. Senator?

Similarly, Mr. Senator, where is this evidence to support the “the fact that these tools have saved American lives by allowing law enforcement and intelligence agencies to prevent attacks on our country”? Let’s try not to condemn “unsupported arguments” by offering unsubstantiated rhetoric.

I saw this post on Extranet: Library looks at going private. It’s this part that really raises my ire: “No one calls it privatization. It’s more accurate to call it ‘outsourcing,’ said a representative from Library Services Systems Inc., …”

Let me be the first to dispute the claim that no one calls it privatization when you turn over all public library operations to a private interest. This is exactly what I would call privatization, just like Patricia Schuman did five years ago*, and you know what? In the long run, it’s not gonna work, just like it didn’t work in Hawaii.

The reason is simple…public management is accountable to public interest and private management is accountable to the bottom line. How convenient that someone from LSSI would argue the purely euphemistic term “outsourcing” is somehow more accurate. I’m not saying that there are not appropriate and beneficial applications of outsourcing, but turning what is essentially a community center over to outsiders (who bring little or no genuine community interest) undermines the whole conception of public libraries, as far as I’m concerned.

*Schuman, Patricia Glass. “The Selling of the Public Library.” Library Journal
123(August 1998):50-52.