Charleston Conference 2012

Against the Grain, Jul 2016

Published on 07/14/16

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6213&context=atg

Charleston Conference 2012

Charleston Conference 2012 - n e2012 Charleston Conference — 32nd Annual c nIssues in Book and Serial Acquisition rcall For papers, ideas, conference Themes, panels, Debates, Diatribes, Speakers, poster eSessions, preconferences, etc. ... 2012 Theme — Accentuate the positive! Idiscuss a particular topic, please let us know. The charleston conference prides itself on creativity, innovation, flexibility, f you are interested in leading a discussion, acting as a moderator, coordinating a lively lunch, or would like to make sure we and informality. If there is something you are interested in doing, please try it out on us. We’ll probably love it... The Conference Directors for the 2012 c harleston c onference include — Beth Bernhardt, principal Director (UNCaGreensboro) <>, g lenda Alvin <>, Adam c hesler <adam. >, c ris Ferguson (Furman University) <>, Joyce Dixon-Fyle in(DePauw University Libraries) <>, c huck Hamaker <[email protected]. tedu>, Tony Horava (University of Ottawa) <>, Albert Joy (University of Vermont) <>, Ramune Kubilius (Northwestern Health Sciences Library) <r-kubilius@ anorthwestern.edu>, c orrie Marsh <>, Jack Montgomery (Western Kentucky kUniversity) <>, Audrey powers (UFS Tampa Library) <. . edu>, Anthony Watkinson (Consultant) <>, Katina Strauch (College of Charleston) <>, or www.katina.info/conference. w Send ideas by July 31, 2012, to any of the Conference Directors listed above. w or to: Katina Strauch, MSC 98, The Citadel, Charleston, SC 29409 • 843-723-3536 (voice) • 843-805-7918 (fax) w843-509-2848 (cell) • <> • http://www.katina.info/conference Little Red Herrings — Ten Reasons Revisited Part 3 Conclusions by Mark Y. Herring (Dean of Library Services, Dacus Library, Winthrop University) <> IReasons Why the Internet Is No Substitute for n parts one and two I reexamined my “10 a Library” (http://bit.ly/5oYnQb) in an effort to see where I went wrong, or right, as the case may be. On balance, critics notwithstanding, the article holds up well against the empirical data, less so against what one hopes the Internet will be (but isn’t yet). Herewith, are some concluding remarks about this brave new, digital world. conclusions While I still believe the Internet is no substitute for a library, I understand that I am in the minority in that belief. But believing that doesn’t make me, or anyone else for that matter, a Luddite. Unless one is a makebate who holds to an either-or view of things, one can see the Internet for what it is, and still see libraries as, for now anyway, infinitely better as a full-service shop for research and resources. As the dean of a mediumsize academic library, I cannot ignore the rise of the Web and the digitization of everything. For this reason, we have ebrary, loan ipads, Kindles, Sonys, and laptops. With rare exception, nearly all our article information is digital. At the height of print, we subscribed to some 3,000 titles. Today, that number is less than 600, but our students have access to more than 30,000 titles. Additions like multispectral imaging (http://econ.st/s1X5iI) Against the Grain / September 2012 that delve more deeply into manuscripts to solve mysteries that heretofore remained unknown add up to positives on the Web side of the ledger, and make it a more robust tool for the future. But none of these things are free. No individual could subscribe to the resources a library does all by herself. Meanwhile, library budgets remain static at best. I hoped that my article then, and its reassessment now, would make the case that print books are not the enemy, and large libraries are not the devil in disguise. Sure, they are costly and yes, there are ways we can make them ever less so. But let’s not throw the cake out with the cake box. If we do, we’ll likely never get libraries back. Moreover we’ll have nothing that is a viable ersatz. My objections to the Internet are valid ones against a change that is not, not yet, the panacea for everything. Print reading hangs on only because most serious readers are over forty and are not yet sold on the eBook reading experience as the exclusive alternative. Even young people half that age are not entirely sold on it for scholarly reading. More than this, however, is the fact that print publishing, the cash-cow of many publishers, will fade only when another equally-profitable model replaces it. Until then, expect digital delays. (And please, don’t ask again for c ongress to fix the copyright problem. That’s part of this problem even now.) Let me remind you that eBooks have been around now nearly three decades. We should be within eyesight of the paperless horizon, but we have yet to reach its border. And now news comes that eBooks are on the way out in five years (http://bit. ly/N86JSu). Even granting the rapid rise of eBooks, my 2000 text stands up better than my critics are continued on page 10 (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6213&context=atg

Charleston Conference 2012, Against the Grain, 2016, pp. 45, Volume 24, Issue 4,