 |
 |
Oh Dear there is so much here that is of concern. Yes libraries are publicly funded and they compete for those funds within the local authority against demands of other services. IF the library cannot demonstrate its impact and value it has less chance of demanding the funds it needs not only to continue but to improve what it is doing. I didn't make the world we live in, but there are competing activities for today's society and other things that people (and listen to them, watch them, read some of the reports) want to do, and are doing. Society and the way people engage within it and with each other has dramatically changed. No point doing the job, if no one wants it, or they can better else where. This really is head in sand stuff you are promulgating., a sort of 'all our yesterday' ethos! Some things the others do they do do better than public Libraries e.g. speed of delivery, (and direct to the home), what youngsters want,( and of course they have the money and freedom to spend as they want., but even if they don't they are there and are competitors and cant be ignored!. Any service, has to have an eye on what it does, what it does well, what is its core service, what does it users and non users want., nothing can stay the same for ever it has to develop and move on., and one of the problems the public library has s it does not have the major funding for development that it does so need., and the fact that it is victim to the vagaries of public money and cuts is a major problem. The mentality you refer to is not what will kill libraries, and is not at all short term, the thinking is looking at the environment we live and work in., what the future is likely to be and trying to predict what will life be like., this is just good sense, you need to take short and long term views. It is doing business well, which applies to whatever the service or business is for goodness sake! What an admission that we have lost the battle to communicate with politicians. What I do agree with as we are at the end of the line when it comes to what the government and local authority has at its priority for the spending, so little choice there. If we haven't been advocating and communicating with politicians as we should have been, then there's the rub., we have had long enough to get that right. But profiles for libraries are low! Local governments and their policies are transitory., much of the world is and the rate of change is unbelievable and will get faster. We have a long way to go to catch up. Fundamentally I think the public library sector, I am sorry to say, would not be safe in your hands, I am afraid your view is not a realistic vision of how things are now and how they need to be in the future! f -----Original Message----- From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David McMenemy Sent: 20 July 2007 19:40 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Audio Visual Supplier Selection > Why does it HAVE to be the destination of choice? Are you serious (I > sound like John McEnroe), but if they are not, what on earth would > they be there for. There has to be a reason in a highly competitive > world, to make people want to go to their public library. Libraries are a publicly funded service, it is not their job to COMPETE for leisure time with the private sector. It is their job to provide access to a broad range of knowledge free at the point of use for the general public. Their role is inclusive, not competing with WH Smith, Amazon, Youtube or any other of the currently in vogue services that supposedly do things so much better than public libraries do. It is this mentality that will kill public libraries because it leads to short-term thinking and a complete departure from the past to justify their existence to people who don't understand why they are there in the first place. All your comments prove to me is that we've lost the battle in communicating to the politicians what libraries are for. It's not a victory to adopt the langauge of the governemnt just to curry favour. Governments are transitory, but public institutions are not. Certainly selling the soul of a highly valued national service just to look good in the eyes of people who deep down may actually despise what it stands for is risible. I do not assume we are > doing anything wrong, BUT we may not be doing what is needed and wanted? Needed and wanted are not neccessarily the same thing. "Wanted" might be 500,000 copies of Jade Goody's autobiography or the latest Big Brother DVD, but I hardly think they are actually "needed" unless all we want is to count numbers of issues. > "What is more important in a library than anything else - than > everything else - is the fact that it exists." NOT any more I am afraid! > Times have changed and are changing more rapidly! > > We've been enlightened enough for 150 years to understand that. > What's changed? Everything, the world, communications, society Mytube > , Ebay, Amazon et el.Competition!! > >> Are issues the bee all and end all of what a 21st century library is >> all about >> >> The competition out there for reading material is quite severe, it is >> easy to go else where. How are we going to make libraries the >> destination of choice? >> >> Library staff have had the decisions for 150 years, and we are where >> we are? I don't know, where are we? If we don't value public libraries for what they actually are, i.e. a centre for knowledge in their communities, then we might as well shut them down now.