This may mean the public has finally listened to the doomsayers and other library directors’ idiotic declarations that libraries are no longer needed or wanted. The fact that it took ten years for the buzz to catch fire out there in the customer base we serve might mean the whole critique is stupid and wrongheaded to begin with - possibly.

But we look foolishly silly and just a bit clownish reacting to this argument as if it suddenly cropped up from outside. We invented, crafted, and nurtured its nuances. A simple search of the professional journals, the conference workshop sessions, or intermittent (we)blogs will allow one to trace the incidious creep of this absurd debate.

I live in Silicon Valley, and support for libraries as well as some of the bond measures has been pretty good, considering we need 2/3’s approval to pass. However, I meet so many people here and in other places who have little idea of all the resources available. While some won’t consider print reference any more, many don’t know about online resources paid for by many libraries, and as others have mentioned people like Mark Hirschey really think the web ecompasses most of human knowledge.

In working with indigenous groups and some oral cultures I think of the domains in a sort of Venn diagram where the online and print (current and archival) stuff overlaps with what is online. I don’t think there is the money or will to put everything online, and part of this is due to IP issues. A third intersection is the world of oral information and knowledge. Sure, some chats reside in telco databases and voice traffic at three letter agencies or in the archives of security cameras, but it’s not really accessible yet.

It would be interesting to engage a group of people like Mr. H. in an ongoing conversation and get the discourse outside of the library ghetto. I do note that some of the previous comments were not from librarians though.

My first thought in reading this post and your responses is maybe it’s time to bring the librarian to the people. To me a library offers a human aspect that cyberspace—not matter how hard it tries—can never match. Being equipped with technology and tools and Internet access is only one part of the equation. Understanding how to navigate in this new world is the other. Let’s face it: There’s a lot of information out there. In fact, it can be down right duanting to find the information you’re looking for even when you understand and know how to use the tools to mine through it all.

Sure, some libraries offer “online chat” options but it’s still such an abstract form of service—even for the most tech-savvy individual. It is unlikely that even the most well-funded libraries can compete with the world wide web as far as volume of information goes. Therefore, librarians and libraries should embrace the one, sweeping competitive advantage they have—the human factor.

If people aren’t coming to the libraries, the librarians need to go to them. Remember bookmobiles? Perhaps the time has come for the mobile librarian? Allow the public to schedule one-on-one time with a librarian in their home. They could submit inquires that the mobile librarian could research beforehand and bring materials to the patron… the role becomes educational.

To take it a step further: What if there is a “special collections” book of interest to the patron. Or a program offered in the library that could help them in their quest—however large or small (i.e. to read more=join the monthly book club meeting). The mobile librarian could inform the patron that they need to physically visit the library to utilize that resources. Innately, you are selling the patron on why libraries are important and why they need to physically be there to reap the full benefit.

This may be out of context or off topic a bit. But like I said, I’m just starting downt the path and have no library experience or inside knowledge other than reading and being a lifelong patron myself. All I know is that I would agree that big business can be self-serving and have the wrong motivations. But the strategic thinking in a big business is a highly useful exercise. The best businesses know that in order to survive, people need to hear and subscribe to your message. It is no different for anything else—libraries, political parties, an artist or a band, a scientific theory… Enough people need to support an idea in order for it to survive, grow and flourish.

My advice would be to tap into your greatest resource—your patrons. Get your communities to talk about their changing lives and needs and see what your library can do to meet those needs. The 21st Century is all about customization of user experience and I believe that, in order for libraries—particularly public libraries—to be a relevant force in a “2.0″ world, they need to adapt and change.

How? Well, I’m not enough of an insider to answer that question. But judging from what I read on this and other such blogs—you all just might be the people to figure it out. And hopefully, someday soon I’ll be joiingn your ranks.

*Kelly

I’m certainly not qualified to judge all school librarians; I’ve never studied the matter formally and don’t think I’ve seen any comprehensive survey of the field. But I can judge anecdotally from my own conversations and from watching the traffic on LM_NET, probably the most broad-based listserv for school librarians, where these issues erupt periodically between otherwise collegial discussion of reference questions and collection development. And there are still — to me — alarming numbers of librarians out there who are meeting this challenge with some variation of, “That’s not the way we’ve ever done it and I’m not going to start now.”

Some others are way out in front. I lay no claim to original ideas; I’m just following the leaders. Joyce Valenza, for example, is a one-woman engine for paradigm shift. School Library Journal is always full of instructive advice about new technology, new services (like gaming), and ways to LISTEN to our users, with contributions from insightful and forward-thinking bloggers like Chris Harris and Will Richardson. But I do wonder whether we as a group will be able to transform before it’s too late, before some critical mass of school library programs are defunded and destaffed. Those of us who deal with teens are facing escalating irrelevance on two fronts: administrators and school boards who don’t understand our value; and students who increasingly see us as old and in the way.

I think you raise a really poignant question, “Why should we get those dollars?” We should all be asking that question at the start of every morning.

In my (middle) school, at our year-opening orientation for the teaching staff, we offered a “who, what, when, where, how, why” of the library. The “Where” is obviously that the library is everywhere. For the “What,” meaning what is this physical space, they were told that “the library is a sandbox.” Most of them got it with a minimum of explanation. Now we’re starting up after school gaming, we host the monthly faculty breakfast, a tutoring collaboration with a local business, students fasting during Ramadan, whatever service we can reasonably provide. (And, by the way, our circulation numbers are up).

Somehow, I missed the story of Google’s acquisition of YouTube on Monday. It was the Thanksgiving holiday here in Canada so I wasn’t paying much attention to the news. I remember reading last month when Mark Cuban said that only a moron wou…