 |
 |
Error during command authentication.
Error - unable to initiate communication with LISTSERV (errno=10061, phase=CONNECT, target=127.0.0.1:2306). The server is probably not started.
----------------------------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