Week 8 - Workshops and HarperCollins/Overdrive

This week we begin preparations for our one-shot workshops on ethical issues in libraries.  I will be interested to see how we tie all of this together in class, and what types of ethical issues we will be presenting during Week 9.

"Creating a Library Assignment Workshop for University Faculty" - Pixey Anne Mosely, The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol 24, no 1, pp. 33-41

This article gives details of planning and implementing a workshop at Texas A & M University specifically aimed at faculty who include library assignments in their courses.  I appreciated the article because it gives a relatively complete picture of "behind-the-scenes"  implementation of a one-shot workshop - from assessing the University's needs and designing the workshop to meet those needs, to implementing the workshop and incorporating participant feedback into future iterations.  

I particularly appreciated the thought process involved behind the different types of activities they included in the workshop.  The role-playing exercises seemed particularly effective - it is a great way to show faculty how librarians interact with students and addresses the faculty's lack of prior knowledge about library services.  It would be interesting to include some type of role-playing activity in an ethical issue-based workshop as a more powerful demonstration of how the issue would occur in a real-life situation, and to set the stage for more meaningful, practical discussion. 

Code of Ethics of the American Library Association

Although this was not the first time I have read the ALA Code of Ethics, it was the first time I read it with a particular ethical issue in mind (ie. the HCOD issue).  In general, I particularly appreciate the ALA's statement that the profession is "explicitly committed to intellectual freedom and the freedom of access to information," and that the ethical guidelines are intended to "provide a framework... they cannot and do not dictate conduct to cover particular situations."  Librarians need to understand core professional and ethical responsibilities, but also need the freedom to act within their own best judgment with regards to specific situations.

HarperCollins/Overdrive ("HCOD")
Oh, boy.  Where to begin?  We were asked to read at least three articles or blog posts about the HarperCollins/Overdrive issue which has taken over the library world the last few weeks.  Wanting to get a range of views on the subject, I read:

• HC's official statement on Library Love Fest blog 3/1/2011 "Open Letter to Librarians"
• Jason Griffey - "HarperCollins and some numbers"
• Steve Potash (OverDrive CEO) - "A message from OverDrive on HarperCollins new eBook licensing terms"
• Marilyn Johnson - "The 27th Patron"
• USA Today, 3/8/2011 - "Librarians launch boycott in battle over e-books"
• Free Range Librarian - "HarperCollins's Memento Plan: Short-term Greed versus Long-term Culture"
• Information Wants to be Free - "My thoughts on the Harper Collins/Overdrive controversy" (Not listed for class reading, but I highly recommend for an additional view of the situation)
• (I've also been following the coverage from Andy Woodworth at Agnostic, Maybe as part of my regular blog reading.)

Rather than summarizing or enumerating what each source said (if you're really interested, I recommend reading the material at the provided links, as well as the letter from Overdrive that started the whole thing), I want to focus on my general thoughts and concerns about the situation.

It seems like a lot of people are focusing on the "twenty-six circulations" policy.  While I think this brings up interesting questions about ownership versus licensing of digital information, the fundamental differences between print and digital materials, and the transparency of electronic resource policies, it is honestly not the aspect of the debate that is most concerning to me. 

The other two big parts of the issue - those of restricting the "geographic and territorial rights for digital book lending" and "the size and makeup of large consortia and shared collections" - are much more interesting and alarming to me.  Basically, I do not feel comfortable with a publisher or distributor having power to determine 1) to whom libraries issue borrowing privileges or 2) how libraries organize themselves to make the most out of their rapidly shrinking resources.  I am much more concerned with publishers attempting to tell libraries to whom they can lend and how, than whether or not twenty-six circulations is analogous to the life of a print book.

Another part of the issue that concerns me is how this debate is being viewed by the "non-library" world.  While I was reading news coverage from USA Today, I was struck by the number of negative, anti-library comments from the public.  A lot of them see this as just another example of "whiny librarians" who are not in touch with the modern world.  Others also "discuss" (more like, declare) that public libraries are unnecessary and the government's money would be better spent elsewhere.  So, while internally we are quibbling about the fair number of circulations for an ebook, for a large part of the country this issue is generating more questions about the need for libraries at all.  Is anyone else concerned about this, or even noticing it?

In addition to the important professional problems the HCOD debate raises, librarians really need to be careful about how our reactions are viewed by the general public and how we are representing ourselves as a profession.  Because really, without public support, the issue of ebooks in libraries will be moot - public libraries have to exist in order for ebook lending to be an issue, and continuing middle-class, public support to essential for public libraries to survive.  Therefore, while we are debating the issue within the profession, we also need to find a way to make the public understand and care about us, too.