[WEB4LIB] WEB4LIB digest 3655

[Greg Schwartz]

What I love about Gorman's response is his delusion that "Rest assure
(sic) my views on 'blogs' have nothing to do with my activities as ALA
president-elect or president." Come again? Since when does one's
stance on a technology embraced by a perhaps small, yet definitely
outspoken segment of your constituency bear no connection with your
role as unifier? Since when does insulting said people, some of whom
likely voted for Mr. Gorman, constitute good PR for ALA amongst
librarians? And when does insulting the blogosphere as a whole
represent good PR for ALA in general? And how does this have nothing
to do with one's activities as president?!?!?!?

Greg Schwartz
Open Stacks - http://openstacks.net/os


> Topic No. 14
> 
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:52:05 -0800
> From: "K.G. Schneider" <kgs at bluehighways.com>
> To: "'Multiple recipients of list'" <web4lib at webjunction.org>,
> Subject: FW: [ALACOUN:14105] "Blogs"
> Message-ID: <20050225145212.A860E28689 at frontend3.messagingengine.com>
> 
> This was Michael Gorman's response, btw.
> 
> Karen G. Schneider
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: owner-alacoun at ala.org [mailto:owner-alacoun at ala.org] On Behalf Of
> Michael Gorman
> Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2005 5:46 PM
> To: ALA Council List
> Subject: [ALACOUN:14105] "Blogs"
> 
> Dear Colleagues
> I am sorry that Councillors Hartman and Schneider feel like that.  The piece
> (LJ, February 15th 2005) was intended to be satirical, though I am certainly
> no fan of "blogs," having an old fashioned belief that, if one wishes to
> air one's views and be taken seriously, one should go through the
> publishing/editing process.  I am surprised that people who attack an
> article as mine (LAtimes, Dec. 17th 2004) has been attacked should be as
> thin-skinned as some appear to be.
> Rest assure that my views on "blogs" have nothing to do with my activities
> as ALA president-elect or president.  I merely air my views and believe that
> everyone (including me) has a right to speak in any way they wish and that
> others have a right to respond.
> Best wishes, Michael
> 
> _________________________________________________
> Michael Gorman
> President-elect, American Library Association
> Madden Library, CSU, Fresno
> (559) 278-2403
> "The best reading, for the largest number, at the least cost"
> www.michaelgorman.org
>  
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Topic No. 15
> 
> Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 09:47:59 -0500 (EST)
> From: "Blake Carver" <lists at lisnews.com>
> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <web4lib at webjunction.org>
> Subject: RE: FW: LJ: ALA Prez-Elect Gorman on the
> Message-ID: <14337.148.144.175.2.1109342879.squirrel at 148.144.175.2>
> 
> A few thoughts from a blog person.
> 
> Blogs are indeed often unpalatable, and always untrammeled by editors.
> While he meant this to be insulting (or was it satirical?), us bloggers
> should be able to admit these are legitimate complaints. Though at the
> same time these are some of our greatest strengths. There is nothing wrong
> with people not seeing value in what we do, not everyone will.
> 
> Most blogs are not great works of literary history, most bloggers are not
> great writers, but that's not the point. Many of us are simply using our
> blogs as journals. We share small parts of our lives with our limited
> number of readers, and that's all we set out to do. Others use our blogs
> to bring people together and create communities. Much of what we are doing
> will be lost at some point in the future, but blogs will provide a
> wonderful window into this time period for historians in the future. Maybe
> in 50 or 100 years some of the best blogs will be considered classics of
> this time and medium.
> 
> Though he provides no reason why it's absurd to give us press credentials,
> is it so hard for us to believe that someone would think this way?
> Especially someone who says he believes a computer that is able to search
> well over 8 billion documents in less than a second is "notoriously
> inefficient." His response to Google is nothing more than typical
> librarian thinking that leaves us shackled to vendors that provide us with
> what WE want, and leave out users hanging in the cold. This line of
> thinking continues to make us less relevant and expose the ugly
> curmudgeonly underbelly of our profession that holds back projects that
> could really help. That's not to say we should be rushing into every crazy
> new idea out there. But not being able to see the value in what Google
> does now, and what it'll be capable of in a few years is not just short
> sighted, it's dangerous for our profession.
> 
> The funniest part of the entire article was just how much this article was
> nothing more than a post I'd read on any day @LISNews or any other blog. A
> post that would probably get moderated as flamebait.
> Something tells me this did little to stem the tide of email and comments
> that say "Michael Gorman is an idiot" Worse yet, this will work to
> alienate more of us from the ALA at a time when they probably don't need
> to push more people away. This coming from the president is simply
> terrible PR at the very least, and I'd guess will lead to people calling
> for him to resign.
> 
> -----
> Blake Carver
> LISNews.com
> Librarian & Information Science News
> http://lisnews.com
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of WEB4LIB Digest 3655
> **************************
>