Here is Tim Spalding’s take on eBooks in libraries, excerpted here:
Libraries–from the library of Alexandria to the “social libraries” that preceded public libraries–came about because of the value of aggregation. And contemporary libraries are in large part valuable for the same reasons. They are:
1. Bringing physical items together makes access easier than having books spread all around.
2. A library can allow many people to use an item many times for the same price a person would pay for a single use.
Ebooks undermine 1 in their digital form. There’s no getting around this. It may be good for the world, but it isn’t good for physical libraries.
Ebooks undermine 2 in their terms. Few will say it openly, but publishers have never liked selling books to libraries, at least when it cannibalized sales to consumers. They don’t like that almost a half of all book reading is provided by libraries although libraries account for only 4% of their sales. For similar reasons, publishers dislike personal lending, donations and the used book market.
Ebook licenses allow publishers to close off all this. And they do. Nobody disputes the other three, although, in an exception that proves the rule, you can loan some Nook books once for two weeks and then never again.
Protectionism?
It’s hard to argue with Birdie’s very specific points here. However, on a more philosophical bent (and at the risk of being heretical – sorry it’s late and I’m tired), I have a hard time with blanket statements like “bad for libraries.” It smacks of knee-jerk reactionism. Libraries, both public and private, are here to serve a populace: Their patrons. If librarians take a protectionist stance against every new technological advance that might “threaten libraries,” what does that REALLY say about our service orientation? Our we truly interested in serving our patrons needs or are we merely propping ourselves up and preserving our institutions no matter what the cost? Maybe some coming advance will enable our patrons to gain better access to information and materials than we can possibly provide to them; perhaps a more efficient and tolerably cost-effective means. Our raison d’etre is to serve our patrons, not to squash every threat, perceived or real, to our existence. The more we beat the protectionist drum, the more anachronistic we appear. The public isn’t stupid. It knows when its best interests are no longer being served. We’re here to serve, not merely to exist. Once we allow libraries to become irrelevant in the marketplace and largely dependent on protectionist regulation or strategies for survival, we’ll no longer deserve to survive.
not my points
Blog was written by Tim Spalding of Library Thing.
Is the world more important than Libraries
{{{ Ebooks undermine 1 in their digital form. There’s no getting around this. It may be good for the world, but it isn’t good for physical libraries. }}}
Yeah, that is what it comes down to. We are on the verge of creating a new digital culture. How much of the old culture is obsolete?
Plenty of people want other people to do DUMB things with computers because it will help them make money. We are supposed to buy more and more powerful computers to play status games with each other but most people can’t explain the difference between a complier and an interpreter.
But soon a $200 smartbook will be able to hold 10,000 e-books. The question is which 10,000 e-books are worth storing. Why go to a library? And then there are all of the public domain e-books. The 1948 book The Brain is better than the 1984 book Neuromancer. William Gibson didn’t know anything about computers when he wrote Neuromance even though he gave us the word “cyberspace”.
The Brain
.
Sheesh!
It’s Guns AND Roses
not
Guns or Roses
If rock and roll can get it right, why can’t we?
why e-books are “bad” for libraries rebuttal
I lean with you on the first pt. but no. 2, no way. That really is quite the blanket statement. Certainly, it’s a economic battlefield between libraries (esp. academic) & publishers. What else is new? Personally, I prefer print but this isn’t personal, it’s business & good customer service. The patrons want, need & use E-books.
Speaking of blanket statements…
“The patrons want, need & use E-books.”
Change that to “Some” and you have yourself a winner. Leave it as is, and “That really is quite the blanket statement” is quite apt.
Which is not to say that Tim’s piece isn’t also heavy on blanket statements–e.g., I’m pretty sure there are a fair number of publishers that *love* selling to libraries. (Publishers with strong survival instincts, for example.)
why ebooks can kiss my ass
if someone tells you he can’t read a print book, you send him to an ESOL or literacy class or even to a class for the language in that book…
but ebooks take hours of tech support… I can’t download… I don’t know where it downloaded.. did I download?… what software do I need?… the book license expired.. I can’t transfer.. I said I have a Nook, but I just looked and it’s a Kindle… my app deleted my book… my blah blah wasn’t blah blah… all this for 3% of our library patrons…
if someone demanded as much tech support for a print book, you, yes you, all of you, would call him a pain in the ass and pass him off to someone else.
those questions
Libraries don’t make computers, but we are answering questions about them, teaching classes, and (sometimes) providing limited tech support. I don’t really see people passing or pawning off the majority of these types of questions.
I’ve been answering general questions about ebooks already, so it’s just a matter of time before the specific ones follow. Should libraries get ebooks? Depends on their communities. But I think it would worthwhile to know what is coming, what to expect, and to know what to talk about when it comes to ebooks, ereaders, and their issues.