----------------------------Original message----------------------------
---------------------------- Forwarded with Changes ---------------------------
From: [log in to unmask] at @UCSD
Date: 10/24/96 7:36AM
To: leslie abrams at UCSDLIBRARY
*cc: [log in to unmask] at @UCSD
*cc: [log in to unmask] at @UCSD
Subject: Re: SFPL response (fwd)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 00:00:00 GMT
From: Liz Bryson <[log in to unmask]>
To: Multiple recipients of list SLAPAM-L <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: SFPL response

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE           CONTACT: MARCIA SCHNEIDER
                                                415 557-4355

SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC LIBRARY CHALLENGES ACCURACY OF THE NEW YORKER'S
"AUTHOR
VS. THE LIBRARY"

San Francisco, October 11, 1996 - In the October 14, 1996 edition of the
New Yorker, novelist and essayist Nicholson Baker has published a diatribe
against the San Francisco Public Library. While purporting to write on a
matter of national significance, the increasing use of information
technology in libraries throughout the country and the impact of such
technology on traditional library services, the piece is in fact largely
devoted to the library's previously intended disposal of its card catalog,
as well as its book selection and weeding practices.

In fact, the San Francisco Public Library's policies regarding the card
catalog and book selection and weeding of its collection are completely in
line with standard library practices throughout the nation. Any
suggestions to the contrary are simply wrong.

Baker's article contains a number of errors and false suppositions, in
addition to many basic philosophical disagreements with the library. These
errors range from misnamings, (correct names and spellings, as well as
measurements, such as linear miles, capacity of dump trucks, height of
ceilings, etc., appear to be a particular weakness of the writer), to
false conclusions based on hearsay and incorrect information.

Mr. Baker's crusade against San Francisco's new Main Library ignores a
simple truth: the new library is exceedingly popular. The average number
of daily visitors, circulation, and the budget for new books and materials
have all more than doubled, and the number of new library cards issued
each day has increased 450% over the old Main Library. Far from
undermining the new San Francisco Main Library, technology is in part
responsible for its extraordinary popularity. Children and teens flock
there to use the computers, multimedia programs and Internet access. The
circulation of print materials has risen in the branch libraries as well
as the Main Library. The San Francisco Public Library has undergone a
renaissance in recent years, with longer hours, more books, and more
computers. It is a vital, dynamic institution, strongly supported by the
people of San Francisco.

Mr. Baker appears to be particularly concerned with the Library Foundation
of San Francisco. Although the S.F. Public Library has a distinguished and
active Friends of the Library organization, the library had no formal
donor base to support a capital campaign prior to the formation of the
Foundation. The Foundation was originally formed to raise the funds to
furnish and equip the new Main Library. Currently, an expanded mission
statement will enable the Foundation to continue to raise funds for
endowment purposes, branch library renovations and improvements, the book
budget, and other priorities set by the library administration.

In a very brief period of time, the Library Foundation raised nearly $34
million to support the new Main Library. Nearly 18,000 donors contributed
to the campaign, ranging from individuals, families, family foundations,
corporate donors, and foundations. Not one of these donors had the means
or desire to exert undue influence on the library, though Mr. Baker would
have the reader believe otherwise. The campaign was inclusive in the
finest sense of the word - Chinese Americans, African Americans, gays and
lesbians, Filipino Americans, the Latino/Hispanic community, children,
seniors, environmentalists, history buffs, teens, literacy advocates,
people with disabilities, and countless others, including corporations,
who came together to support this library. San Francisco Public Library is
proud of and thankful for each one of these donors.

Mr. Baker asserts that the library punishes its internal critics. This is
patently false. This library has a particularly outstanding history of
supporting intellectual freedom. Staff members who are critical of
administration policies regularly speak out at Library Commission
meetings, and are not unknown to write articles for newspapers and speak
out on matters they disagree with on radio and even television. A small
group of librarians even sponsored a talk by Mr. Baker in the library's
own auditorium, in which Mr. Baker indulged in highly critical rhetoric
against this library administration. For months, a small and vocal group
of his supporters has subjected those in disagreement with him to verbal
abuse and harassment at Library Commission meetings. And Mr. Baker wonders
why he heard only from staff who agreed with his ideas.

Mr. Baker insults not only this library and all its staff when he writes
of the library's collection development plan and book discard practices,
but all libraries across the country. San Francisco employs highly trained
and skilled professional librarians, all of whom hold post graduate
degrees in library science, and many of whom have worked in their field of
subject specialty for decades. Library staff apply the same professional
standards to weeding as they do to materials selection. Nothing is
discarded without serious evaluation based on established criteria, such
as outdated information, multiple copies, poor condition, or lack of
demand.

It should be noted that in the year and a half prior to the move to the
new Main Library, this library added more than five times as many books to
its collection as it withdrew. Over the past decade, on average the
library system has discarded approximately one percent annually from its
collections, a figure far lower than standard library practice.

Prior to the current library administration, 90% of whom assumed their
positions after 1989, all library discards routinely were sent to
landfill. It was only due to the concerted efforts of this administration
that two pieces of legislation were passed that enabled the library to
offer books to the Friends for resale and to other community groups and
individuals serving the public good. It is disingenuous of Mr. Baker to
imply otherwise.

Nicholson Baker has done a great disservice to the San Francisco Public
Library and the people of San Francisco. He has insisted that the new
library is smaller than the old one. To prove his point, he and others
broke into the old Main Library to measure the shelves and subsequently
published their erroneous results on the front page of a San Francisco
daily newspaper.  In fact, the new Main Library has over nine miles more
shelf space than the old building. Only when the library extended an
invitation to the local press to measure the shelves for themselves did
Baker admit that his figures were wrong (they were off by 25 miles).

All things considered, the San Francisco Public Library is pleased that
our new building was designed and built by architects, engineers, library
professionals, and space planning and library moving specialists, rather
than writers of fiction.

Mr. Baker has implied that the librarians of the San Francisco Public
Library have shown poor judgment in selecting and discarding books. A
group of six SFPL librarians, with a combined experience of 130 years of
selecting and maintaining library collections, disagreed, and took it upon
themselves to respond, writing to a San Francisco newspaper: "Withdrawing
material is a professional responsibility and an essential part of
maintaining a viable collection. Unfortunately, it is a responsibility
that is often shirked, partly because librarians love books. Furthermore,
because San Francisco Public Library was perennially understaffed, first
priority was given to direct service, not to old books.

'During the closure before our move, it was both natural and responsible
for Main Library administration to encourage subject librarians to examine
their collections and withdraw appropriate materials rather than paying to
have them moved. Almost all of the volumes withdrawn from the collection
prior to our move were either duplicates or volumes so old and worn out
that they were no longer useable. In the latter case, replacements may be
on order.

'There is a small group of library staff whose aim seems to be to foment
dissension, whether it be over withdrawals, corporate donations, or the
card catalog (which, by the way, is only rarely asked for by the public.)"

Despite its overwhelming popularity, the new San Francisco Main Library is
going through growing pains. It is dealing with an unprecedented and
extraordinarily high volume of traffic. Budget problems have resulted from
a previous Library Commission's decision to implement more extended hours
than recommended by Library Administration. Union intransigence has
prevented implementation of a recommended new classification of library
workers to shelve the books in a timely fashion.

The San Francisco Public Library now has in place a plan to deal
immediately with the issues most frustrating to delivery of good public
service, including long lines at service desks and the shelving backlog.
The library is adapting to its budget limitations and anticipates closing
this fiscal year with a balanced budget.

In the meantime, patrons continue to flock to the library, proving that
computers and books can co-exist, and they do at the new San Francisco
Main Library.


# # #





--- End Included Message ---



>-- Saved internet headers (useful for debugging)
>Received: from UCSD.EDU by mail.ucsd.edu; id HAA22003 sendmail 8.6.12/UCSD-2.2-
>Received: from netcom4.netcom.com (netcom4.netcom.com [192.100.81.107]) by UCSD
>Received: (from mcculley@localhost) by netcom4.netcom.com (8.6.13/Netcom) id HA
>Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 07:36:02 -0700 (PDT)
>From: "P. Michael McCulley" <[log in to unmask]>
>X-Sende
>To: Leslie Abrams <labr
>cc: Larry Cruse <[log in to unmask]>,        Bill Pfender <Bill_P
>Subject: Re: SFPL response (fwd)
>Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.961024073547.9903D-100000@netcom4>
>MIME-Ve
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAI