Quote:
Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash
I'm on the fence regarding this whole thing, but...
Let's avoid elevating one type of reading over another. I think it more accurate to state that libraries *should* cater to a variety of readers while focusing on the demand of their particular user demographic. Because if there isn't enough stuff that their users want to read, regardless of whether it's genre fic or litfic or women's studies or what have you, this whole conversation is moot. If people aren't using libraries, there won't be libraries.
|
No argument there.
And I'm not looking to elevate one type of content over others, just pointing out that if they only carry bestsellers they'll be leaving out a good chunk of their "customers"/taxpayers.
Libraries operate in a zero-sum game; they have a budget and getting one thing means not getting another. They need to address all their constituencies not just the bestseller hunters. That means having a variety of content, both currently "hot" and merely warm.
People who only use the library on occassion pay taxes too and if they don't find what they look for they'll use it less and support it less.
So, yes: "If people aren't using libraries, there won't be libraries."
Libraries are already under pressure to support both ebook and pbook readers and if ebooks become expiring rentals there will be more pressure to put their money where it will last longer: pbooks.
Who knows, maybe the intent is to steer library funds to pbooks.
Or maybe the plan is to put out an unpalatable plan so they can get politicians off their backs:
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2013/TOB/H/201...614-R00-HB.htm