I meant to also add that the concept of:
Sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me.
Is fine stance to take (verbal bullying is now accepted a problem) but 'name
calling' stereotyping pulls the service we offer down and when this happens
we get less customers as people don't want to come into an environment that
they perceive as antiquated and be bossed about and told of by the stereo
typical hushing librarian. The unfortunate result here is that a drop in
customers leads to funding being cut and a general sense of being
undervalued by us touchy and defensive types! ;)
Cat
,,,^ . . ^,,,
Wot no mouses?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cat Watkins" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: Image and the revenge of the Librarians
> The preoccupation probably stems from the fact that arguably accountants,
> estate agents, and insurance agents tend to have customers who are aware
> that they are the only ones who can provide the services they require and
> therefore image is less important than the marketing of their wares. The
> door to door salesman goes to his clients and it is at that point he risks
> having the door slammed in his face. The traffic wardens are not trying to
> appeal to 'customers' they are performing a role.
>
> As a librarian the marketing of services is much more tied into the image
> not
> just of the librarian but of the library as we have to entice and inform
> people
> as to what we have to offer. The way we are perceived often goes hand in
> hand with how well we can reach people and pull them into the library and
> make them aware of what we can offer through the library and how
> approachable as a profession we are.
>
> This is especially important as stats show that we as a profession 'lose'
> young users when they become adults and experience has taught that adults
> tend to think that because they have the internet and a cheap book
> shop/supermarket they don't need a library.
>
>
> Cat
> ,,,^ . . ^,,,
> Wot no mouses?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shafika Abbasi" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 9:58 AM
> Subject: Re: Image and the revenge of the Librarians
>
>
> Just a thought .
>
> Why are some of us so touchy and defensive about not being perceived as
> cool, sexy, street and so on?
>
> What kind of fundamental insecurities are hidden behind this (frankly a
> touch boring) preoccupation.
>
> Accountants, estate agents, traffic wardens, insurance agents and door to
> door salesmen have worse images (and reputations) but I suspect that most
of
> them don't give a damn. Can we speculate on the reasons why?
>
>
> Shafika Abbasi
>
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1064101,00.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
> rom: Beth Dark <[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: Beth Dark <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Image and the revenge of the Librarians
> >Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2003 11:59:25 +0100
> >
> >Hello everybody...
> >
> >This is the first time I've done this so here we go...
> >
> >I'm researching for a project about the Image of the Librarian.. and
would
> >like any feedback; views, links, etc.
> >Had a look at the 'librarian doll' posts in the archives - noticed some
> >mixed opinions there!
> >Why are Librarians still pigeonholed in the age of the Information
> >Professional - can we reclaim the stereotype?
> >
> >I'd love to hear what all of you think..
> >
> >Thanks a lot,
> >
> >Beth
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get Hotmail on your mobile phone http://www.msn.co.uk/msnmobile
