Dear Sam:
This is outrageous and the reply from OCLC is downright rude. This is obviously not the OCLC that most of us contributed to back in the day—when all sizes of libraries were welcomed—and they were more intent on building their database. My former library,
the Craft and Folk Art Museum Research Library (given to the L.A. County Museum of Art in 1997), which was much smaller than the Amon Carter Research Library, paid a small annual fee (sorry, I can’t remember now how much it was) that was definitely affordable
and I was able to attend many free workshops as well. Has this issue ever been addressed by ARLIS/NA’s Museum Libraries Division?
Best wishes,
Joan M. Benedetti (Ret.)
Former Head, Craft and Folk Art Museum Library
From: ARLIS/NA List <
[log in to unmask]>
On Behalf Of Sam
Duncan
Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 10:50 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ARLIS-L] Feedback on WorldCat Holdings Policy
Hi all,
Just sharing a concern of mine that goes way back having to do with holdings listed on
worlcat.org. Current OCLC policy does not allow a library to have all its holdings listed on
worldcat.org unless you are a subscriber to WorldCat Discovery of Firstsearch (I believe that’s right). For small-ish libraries like ours, a subscription is expensive, around $2,500. I believe it’s a great disservice
to our patrons and libraries. Many specialized libraries like ours offer many unique holdings, and, ironically, current OCLC policy allows a record to display with no holding libraries listed (see attached screenshot).
One OCLC representative wrote back when I addressed this concern, “I understand you do not agree with the policy, but the Cataloging and FirstSearch subscriptions are how we fund
those services (along with
WorldCat.org). We try to keep them affordable for the majority, while covering our costs, but it still does not work for everyone.”
Here’s a great example. Keep in mind that if you’re associated with a university library, you’ll probably see holdings. The problem is with cases where a patron is searching at the local
Starbucks down the street, for example, or at home.
I totally understand that there is a price tag associated with making
worldcat.org available, but it’s an egregious levy for a library to pay to have its holdings masked and totally antithetical to what OCLC is supposed to be doing for libraries (IMHO). When I have suggested a more equitable pricing structure, there has been
no interest in investigating it.
Thanks for your feedback. More than anything, I need a reality check from my colleagues.
Sam
[log in to unmask]"><image001.png>
Samuel Duncan | Head of the Research Library