Comments on: If Libraries had shareholders http://stevelawson.name/seealso/archives/2007/07/if_libraries_had_shareholders.html a library weblog by Steve Lawson Mon, 14 May 2012 16:51:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Steve Lawson http://stevelawson.name/seealso/archives/2007/07/if_libraries_had_shareholders.html/comment-page-1#comment-3167 Steve Lawson Thu, 19 Jul 2007 02:19:42 +0000 http://stevelawson.name/seealso/archives/2007/07/if_libraries_had_shareholders.html#comment-3167 I didn't think it was all that misleading, but then I know what "ARL" means and non-librarians will gloss over that (though he does spell it out, and says in the first line that he's talking about "a small number of very large research libraries"). I didn't have room to put in my brief del.icio.us post that I'm sure the trends are different at Colorado College, but I don't have the numbers at hand to see how different. I didn’t think it was all that misleading, but then I know what “ARL” means and non-librarians will gloss over that (though he does spell it out, and says in the first line that he’s talking about “a small number of very large research libraries”).

I didn’t have room to put in my brief del.icio.us post that I’m sure the trends are different at Colorado College, but I don’t have the numbers at hand to see how different.

]]> By: walt crawford http://stevelawson.name/seealso/archives/2007/07/if_libraries_had_shareholders.html/comment-page-1#comment-3165 walt crawford Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:14:37 +0000 http://stevelawson.name/seealso/archives/2007/07/if_libraries_had_shareholders.html#comment-3165 Sigh. Peter Brantley's essay uses the universal "libraries" for misleadingly-presented graphs that represent a subset of ARL libraries. Since ARL libraries don't necessarily map well to academic libraries in general, and since public libraries--a bigger subset of "libraries"--show generally increasing circulation, this is a case of absurd universalism. Add a bunch of qualifiers and it might or might not be an interesting discussion--albeit with way too much emphasis on Library As Business. Sigh. Peter Brantley’s essay uses the universal “libraries” for misleadingly-presented graphs that represent a subset of ARL libraries. Since ARL libraries don’t necessarily map well to academic libraries in general, and since public libraries–a bigger subset of “libraries”–show generally increasing circulation, this is a case of absurd universalism. Add a bunch of qualifiers and it might or might not be an interesting discussion–albeit with way too much emphasis on Library As Business.

]]>