Both ALA Presedential Candidates have answered your questions.
Katina Strauch is up second, since H comes before S. Her answers are below.
Thanks again to both candidates for participating this year, and thanks to all of you for the great questions.
Both ALA Presedential Candidates have answered your questions.
Katina Strauch is up second, since H comes before S. Her answers are below.
Thanks again to both candidates for participating this year, and thanks to all of you for the great questions.
Why should I vote for you?
I am a do-er and action person. I like to see things happen. ALA is
a mammoth bureaucracy and has been largely run by administrators and persons
who are high up in the bureaucratic ladder. I am a grassroots librarian.
I have no hidden agendas. I want to see the profession of librarianship
flourish in the twenty-first century. If I am elected, I hope to make others
aware of the concerns of the \”grassroots\” librarian and, so, make a significant
impact on ALA for all librarians. Please visit my website at www.katina.info
to learn more!
What are the biggest problems you see facing librarians in the
next 5 years? You may need to break this down to academic, public, special,
etc.,
Budgeting for libraries and the fair compensation for librarians and
library workers is crucial. Many of us are looking at unwelcome cuts in
our materials budgets and staff. We must counteract competition from the
many commercial entities who are getting into the business of libraries.
For the first time, libraries, librarians, and library workers of all types
are encountering people in business who want to get in on what we do best.
What we do now involves computers, technology, money, and information.
It seems “sexy” and more people want to get into the act. Libraries and
librarians have to become more adamant, more active, more self-assured,
perhaps more focused than we have been in the past. This relates to increasing
our value to and compensation by society. I believe that ALA must work
to enhance the role of librarians and library workers in the information
chain. If elected President, I will appoint a Task Force to study the Emerging
Roles of Librarians and Library Workers in the 21st Century. This Task
Force will complement the Task Force on Pay Equity which is already in
existence.
Another crucial issue is the tension between protecting intellectual
property through copyright and the need for libraries to preserve
the human record. Many publishers are commercial entities. The recent Tasini
Supreme Court decision finding in favor of freelance authors, while beneficial
to the authors, unfortunately has caused many commercial databases to remove
electronic content. Since ALA supported the freelance authors’ position
with their amicus brief, I believe that ALA must work with libraries and
librarians to assure that the period of time which is greatly impacted
by this decision (1976-1990) is preserved for posterity. As well, libraries,
librarians, and ALA must continue to lobby in Congress for changes and
emendations to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
Recruitment and retention of qualified librarians and library workers
is also crucial. By 2009, one fourth of us will retire. ALA PR must stress
the importance of library professionals and library workers as well as
the library. The librarian is a key cog in the service provided by libraries.
ALA needs to take more of an active, focused role. With its numerous diverse
groups, I believe that ALA sometimes becomes mired in quagmire rather than
in crucial issues. This must change for libraries and librarians to take
their justified role as leaders in society.
As a profession, we must become more computer savvy, more engaged in
research and study of the issues that impact libraries, and more active
in determining our own destiny and the destiny of information and knowledge
on civilization. ALA is the professional association which speaks for the
majority of librarians. As President, I will seek organized and concerted
input directly from the membership. I have stated that I would appoint
a Task Force on the Emerging Roles of Librarians and Library Workers in
the Twenty-First Century. As a profession, we must take action to assure
that we survive as key players in the twenty-first century.
In the past, the ALA has not been as forceful as it should be
in protecting librarian\’s interests in job protection, salaries, training
and other fields. Will you be a spokesperson for the librarians you represent,
or for the institutions of libraries or librarianship to help us in those
areas? Will ALA try to certify individual librarians, or under your watch
will it continue to only accredit the library different schools?
The profession is going to rise in status; the profession is going to
rise in salaries. This will happen, if for no other reason, than because
of the en masse retirement of the baby boomers which will create a drastic
shortage. The challenge is to raise the status and income the maximum amount.
That will require us to be masters of the rapidly changing technology and
control the configuration of the information delivery.
I learned a lot in library school and I learn a lot each day on the
job. I support the idea of the MLS degree because it is a professional
credential. It brings status and respect when we sit down at the bargaining
table.
What do you see the as the American Library Association\’s role
in recognizing & supporting the value of a \”quality library employee\”
versus \”only\” recognizing & supporting the value of a ALA Accredited
Institutional programs\’ \”Librarian\” graduate.
We need library workers. Libraries could not function without them.
Library workers have technical skills and levels of expertise that are
absolutely necessary to the smooth operation of the library. All too frequently
it becomes an “us” versus “them” situation when library workers believe
they are doing the work but librarians are getting the credit. We are all
in this together. We must credit library workers for what they do or the
gap will widen. This will benefit us all. Accreditation is a fact of life
that will not go away, but we much reach some mutually beneficial compromise.
Indeed, we will continue to move in the direction of more accrediting and
credentialing in all disciplines.
I am a big supporter of flex-time and tuition support for all library
workers to allow them to further their education. All of us can benefit
from this. ALA must recognize this as well.
In reference to all of the controversy surrounding last years\’ conference
at the Marriott in SF. I\’d like to if you honored the boycott or entered
the Marriott Hotel. I would like you to justify your position and discuss
how they would have handled the matter they had been in a position to make
the decisions about conference logistics at the time.
I crossed the picket line because I had traveled all the way to San
Francisco from Charleston to attend specific meetings. I had invested time
and money to attend the meetings which is the reason that I attend ALA.
It was unfortunate that the picketing was taking place and that many of
us had to cross the picket line.
Though ALA knew about the boycott when they signed the contract with
the Marriott Hotel in 1997, they were banking on the fact that the dispute
would be over by 2001. In fact, there were reports that the dispute had
been resolved which was not the case as we learned when we arrived at the
Marriott in SF. Due to the size of ALA conferences, they can only be held
in a limited number of cities, and the hotels and convention centers in
these cities are subject to union action at any time.
ALA should investigate facilities as much as possible, but some things
unforeseen can happen. A librarian who is not in the “inner circle” would
not know what had been done or had been determined. Conference attendees
attend ALA for the meetings and work to be done. Since the average librarian
or library worker could not control this unfortunate circumstance, they
had little choice but to cross the picket line.
I quit ALA several years ago because of the ever increasing cost
of membership. What can be done to bring down the cost? I can\’t
justify the cost currently because I find that it is a case of diminishing
returns. I get more out of joining and participating heavily in regional
and state organizations. The ALA conferences are also extremely expensive
to attend when compared to other national and regional conferences.
I would actually like the option to join ACRL or LITA without joining ALA.
I was an undergraduate economics major. I believe that if you lower
the price, quantity demanded will increase. Whether your total revenue
will rise is the question. We need more data before we can answer that..
But aside from total revenue there is the question of an organization that
lacks the participation of a flabbergasting number of librarians. Purely
on the question of inclusion, we need to lower the price.
I have been upset during my campaign for President of ALA at the number
of librarians who are not members of ALA though they are committed to the
field. A lot of people feel the cost of membership is too high and do not
feel that they get what they need out of ALA. If I am elected President,
the first thing I plan to do is to sit down with ALA \’s leaders and tackle
this problem. I am currently in the process of setting up a survey at my
website <www.katina.info> asking people whether or not they are members
of ALA and why or why not. I plan to share the aggregate numbers of this
survey with the association.
Believe me, I understand what you are saying, especially now, that I
am having the experience of running for ALA President! There are very real
issues in the profession, but ALA is largely removed from the librarian
who is “out in the trenches.” In running for President, I have talked to
a lot of people. Easily half of them are not ALA members, yet they are
committed to the field. They have many valid reasons as to why they are
not ALA members, yet I disagree with them. ALA is a membership organization
— not an amorphous “they”. ALA is you and me. If ALA does not seem relevant,
it is because we are either not speaking up or not being heard. We can
change this. Did you know that fewer than 7% of the ALA members elected
our last ALA President? We all need to communicate both within and outside
committees and structures.
People who know me describe me as a high energy person. I like to make
things happen. For over twenty-two years with the Charleston Conference,
I have brought professionals together to debate the issues. The best solutions
are found through collaboration, coalitions, and open communication of
ideas. If you and I take charge, we can make things happen. I promise to
listen to you, the front-line ALA members. And I promise to meet with you
on a regular basis in different venues — email, conferences, phone calls,
letters — not just the annual President’s Program.
How did you stand on ALA\’s decision to enter an amicus brief on
behalf of freelance authors in the Tasini case?
The current issue of the journal which I edit (Against the Grain, February
2002) deals with this case. I will be happy to provide copies free of charge
to those of you who are interested.
ALA was faced with (1) siding with the publishers to assure access to
as much electronic information as possible, (2) siding with the authors
and risking the loss of access to some of that information, (3) taking
a neutral position. ALA\’s decision to stand with the authors on the
Tasini case was made far too hastily and without consideration of how publishers
would react vis-à-vis the mass of data where their ownership was
questionable. Rather, I agree with David Bender and the SLA who took
a neutral stance. The case has serious implications for the free flow of
information and has already resulted in the loss of access to information
electronically between 1976 and 1990.
What can we at ALA do to improve our image in the eyes of those
citizens who have been told, by Dr. Laura, that we promote child pornography,
and etc.? I would like to see ALA take a leadership role in countering
the negative impact of Dr. Laura\’s views and voice. Do you have any ideas?
The filtering issue is tremendous for public and school libraries, indeed
for all of us. Dr. Laura has appealed to citizens on a “hot button” level
which is disturbing. We know that the media is guilty of simplifying issues
to the point of absurdity. Unfortunately, with mass communication today,
people in the limelight such as Dr. Laura are “attention-getters.” The
main way to counteract this is to educate the public on the role of libraries
and information access. It is not possible to have selective free access.
We must get the message out. Parents should have a role.
We live in a highly politicized, competitive environment and it is becoming
more so. Unfortunately, many of us are apathetic about ALA. We must become
active in the association and make our opinions heard. We cannot do this
if we fail to vote and are not active in the association.
Anonymous library cards (backed by a cash deposit) could permit
library users to check out materials without fearing that intrusive \”fishing
expeditions\” will subject them to scrutiny for what they read. On the other
hand, providing this service could make libraries unpopular with those
who support law and order above all else. What\’s your take? Is it worth
risking the ire of Homeland Security to provide true privacy to our patrons?
Every librarian I know works to preserve the privacy of patron records.
However, if lives have been lost or are at stake, we need to make exceptions
for those in authority to preserve lives. My fear is that anonymous library
cards will simply bring pressure for an even more insidious system of surveillance
and informing.
What will you do as ALA president to fight for fair use in an
increasingly online world where content owners are fighting to destroy
fair use to increase profits?
We must fight the hard fight to preserve fair use. Curiously, this most
serious of all issues is the very one where we have the most clout. ALA
regularly interfaces with the Congress. Our numbers and distribution among
all the states — particularly when allied with the NEA — make us a powerful
voting bloc. It is a hard fight because we are up against well-heeled industries
that freely give campaign contributions, but we can and will win.
Do you think that ALA should meet with and work with the publishers
to reduce the chaos and disorganization in the acquisitions and archiving
of electronic journals, especially among noted publishers?
Yes. Absolutely. This is one of my strengths. Through the twenty-two
year old Charleston Conference and the fourteen-year old Against the Grain,
I have worked to create a forum for librarians, publishers, and vendors
to openly discuss key issues in the archiving and acquisition of all types
of library collections, print and electronic. This type of open discussion
must continue. ALA must be a key player at the table in order for libraries
and librarians to assure their role as primary information providers.
Are the proprietary interests of library automation vendors essential
to libraries\’ long-term success? Which ecology of software do you think
would most benefit libraries: the Microsoft model, where source code is
proprietary, or the Linux model, where source code is available? What,
if anything, should ALA do to encourage the development of free library
automation projects like <http://www.koha.org/> Koha?
I think a problem inherent in the phrasing of the question is the notion
that it is either/or for proprietary vs. open source software. In fact,
we have a dedicated, but small open source community in the library world
now. If you look at Koha, you see an open source library system developed
initially in New Zealand. But, there are others such as applications like
MyLibrary and Jake and other applications like those found at OSS4Lib.
Open source, then, is already a part of the library landscape.
What do these open source library applications have in common? They
tend to be small, quick, applications that meet a problem that people working
in a library see. Eric S. Raymond\’s The Cathedral and the Bazaar describes
just this kind of development when he describes a program he worked on
and uses that to describe Linux in particular and open source in general.
So, we are doing this kind of thing already.
Should we do more? I think we should. Why? Two major reasons:
Open source is like what we do. You can\’t read The Cathedral and the Bazaar
and not be struck by how the development of open source software is like
scholarship. It is done the same way research is done: people interested
in a topic work on it cooperatively and advance it. The library field is
a cooperative field. Some people catalog books, some buy them, and others
help people find them.
We are not a proprietary calling and all the new laws that surround
the information industries like DMCA, UCITA, the newly named Consumer Broadband
and Digital Television Promotion Act, and the dream that some publishers
have of making databases proprietary should give us pause. I don\’t know
what the answer is, but we know what happens when large corporations which
supply us services look at their spreadsheets and decide that something
vital to us is not pleasing Wall Street investors enough. Where is Notis?
What happened to Geac? If there were an open source alternative, we would
have choices.
When I am elected, I will seek to start a conversation in the field
on this question. The most technical among us are aware of the situation
and, as a field, we need to understand the issues involved, and have a
response and a commitment from the library community. My guess is that
we will still have applications from both the open source community and
proprietary companies but that ultimately open source will be a more important
part of our world.
In 1999 the intellectual freedom office of IFLA issued a call
for library associations around the world to condemn the campaign of persecution
being waged against volunteer librarians in Cuba. What is your attitude
toward the Latin American subcommittee of the ALA International Relations
Committee, which ignored this appeal to condemn this systematic violation
of intellectual freedom in Cuba? How do you feel about the ALA investigative
team which visited Cuba in 2001 and could find no evidence whatsoever of
censorship in that country?
I’ve never been to Cuba, but I’m very leery of a host-guided fact-finding
mission in a totalitarian state. From what I have read, there is no free
press or speech in Cuba, the average monthly income is $10, homosexuality
is a felony, and many women are forced to sell themselves as prostitutes.
IFLA was and should have been the main organization in this process. However,
ALA’s IRC should have also been aware of IFLA’s stance and worked with
them.
Recent Comments