Re: Yes, it's time (RE: Is it time to stop printing journals?)

But there are such services--and Proquest and Ebsco and
Wilson 
and others have been providing it very successfully for a
number 
of years now. They have among other things greatly
facilitated 
the ability of libraries to keep intact files of this
material, 
and for university to provide access to a wide range of
material 
to which they would not ordinarily subscribe.

At a more popular level, the problem has been solved by the

(usually free) web editions of many magazines and
newspapers, and 
their aggregation via RSS. And in many fields, the growth of

web-only magazine-like services--for me, the most important
of 
them is slashdot--there has ever been an equally good way of

access to this sort of material.

It is not only librarians and conventional publishers who
can 
figure out effective ways for distributing content.

David Goodman, Ph.D., M.L.S.
dgoodmanprinceton.edu

----- Original Message -----
From: adam hodgkin <adam.hodgkingmail.com>
Date: Friday, April 27, 2007 10:18 pm
Subject: Re: Yes, it's time (RE: Is it time to stop printing
journals?)
To: liblicense-llists.yale.edu

> A rather delayed response to this thread, which I found
very 
> interesting. It has been leading me to puzzle out why
the 
> consumer magazine market has not gone in the same
direction (at 
> least it has not gone there yet)
>
> http://exacteditions.blogspot.com/
2007/04/journals-and-consumer-magazines.html
>
> I have also been wondering why a similar aggregation
solution for
> consumer magazines, seems so unattractive. Can one
imagine a
> Science Direct for all the major consumer magazines? It
would be
> a rather monstrous compilation, but does that not tell
us
> something about how much the big research libraries
really
> wanted/needed solutions like Science Direct? Only with
big and
> efficient aggregators such as Elsevier could the STM
library
> world have moved so quickly towards an electronic
solution for
> their patrons. Libraries are of course vastly more
important to
> the STM market than they are to the consumer magazine
publishers.
>
> However, it seems likely that there is some role for
> comprehensive aggregation services for digital books
and digital
> magazines. Adam
>
> On 3/31/07, Rick Anderson <rickandunr.edu> wrote:
>>> I am curious to hear whether this is a commonly
held sentiment.
>>
>> I wouldn't call Scott's statement an expression of
sentiment; it
>> was an observation of what's happening among his
patrons.  And I
>> would largely second it from the perspective of my
institution.
>> A few years ago we instituted a strict and explicit
program of
>> online preference for our journals -- if a journal
is available
>> online and someone wants us to acquire it in print,
that person
>> must submit a written justification to the Dean of
Libraries.  I
>> think I can count on one hand the number of
requests that we've
>> received.  The fact is that printed paper is a
lousy format for
>> distributing journal content.  It's a great format
for extended
>> reading, but a terrible one for any other kind of
>> information-seeking.
>>
>>> If this equation has indeed flipped in a matter
of a half-dozen
>>> or so years, this ranks as one of the most
important periods in
>>> scholarly communication history.
>>
>> I don't think there's any question that this is
exactly the case.
>> What's been remarkable to me is the range of
responses to these
>> dramatic changes -- library patrons have largely
taken them in
>> stride, few of them seemingly aware of the
fundamental and
>> radical nature of the changes that have taken place
in the
>> marketplace that serves them.  Many of us in the
library
>> profession, meanwhile (though by no means all of
us), are in
>> denial, defending our traditional territory and
furiously
>> continuing to focus on the materials that our
patrons are least
>> interested in.
>>
>> Is it time to stop printing journals?  Yes, and
past time -- even
>> in the humanities, where affection for print has
tended to
>> linger.  Regardless of content, ink-on-paper is a
highly wasteful
>> and ineffective way to distribute discrete,
article-sized chunks
>> of information.
>>
>> It's also, by the way, time to stop thinking in
terms of journal
>> "issues" -- the issue is a meaningless
construct that made sense
>> only in the print realm.
>>
>> Rick Anderson
>> Dir. of Resource Acquisition
>> University of Nevada, Reno Libraries
>> rickandunr.edu