Why e-books, e-audiobooks could be harder to snag at your local library

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Ah, the solve world hunger argument. If you can't be all to everyone, it's not a good solution. In general, the more limited a solution is, the more likely that it's sustainable. Sometimes, special circumstances require a specialized solution.

For example, the Chafee amendment in the US allows for an exception to copyright law for the legally blind. That particular mechanism is likely a better solution for the print-disabled.

Universal design is almost always a better, more inclusive choice than "special", limited, gate-kept access like the small access programmes which require medical certification.

FYI, print disability encompasses far more than legal blindness. A variety of sensory, developmental, or physical disabilities may be involved. And I'm not speaking specifically of the USA; the Marrakesh Treaty is perhaps more relevant in a global group. Australia's service - or the only one I've been able to find out anything about after a fair bit of digging - is run through Vision Australia, is not promoted to people with non-visual disabilities, requires those with physical disability to be completely unable to hold all paper books in order to access the service (there is a huge spectrum of physical print disability that is left out here); and they don't include ebook lending anyway, only audio format. They refer clients who need ebooks to the public library system.

A library is far more than shelves of paper books. A public library's core purpose is to provide information and resources in a variety of media to the full spectrum of its community, and to reduce barriers to access (including but not limited to financial barriers). All the librarians I know would state equity to be very much a core value, and none would say that digital services and accessible formats (including ebooks and audiobooks) are an optional extra.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by meeera

Universal design is almost always a better, more inclusive choice than "special", limited, gate-kept access like the small access programmes which require medical certification.

FYI, print disability encompasses far more than legal blindness. A variety of sensory, developmental, or physical disabilities may be involved. And I'm not speaking specifically of the USA; the Marrakesh Treaty is perhaps more relevant in a global group. Australia's service - or the only one I've been able to find out anything about after a fair bit of digging - is run through Vision Australia, is not promoted to people with non-visual disabilities, requires those with physical disability to be completely unable to hold all paper books in order to access the service (there is a huge spectrum of physical print disability that is left out here); and they don't include ebook lending anyway, only audio format. They refer clients who need ebooks to the public library system.

A library is far more than shelves of paper books. A public library's core purpose is to provide information and resources in a variety of media to the full spectrum of its community, and to reduce barriers to access (including but not limited to financial barriers). All the librarians I know would state equity to be very much a core value, and none would say that digital services and accessible formats (including ebooks and audiobooks) are an optional extra.

I disagree. I've found that many times a solution that works well for 90 percent of the customer base and then handle to edges as special cases is a better approach.

One of the great follies is trying to be all things to all people. Sometimes known as the old saying "jack of all trades, master of none".

I do understand that many librarians (and teachers for that matter) tend to have a certain back ground and world view. I've mentioned that worked in libraries quite a bit in high school, both at my local library in a summer job as well as in my high school library during the year.

But when dealing with the realities of limited budgets, it's not always a wise use of resources. Many libraries specialize. When we are talking about online resources, rather than walk in resources, there is no reason not to use centralized resources.

As far as Australian resources go, well, that's something to be solved by Australia. The US put in it's own exception to copyright law to handle the situation. Perhaps more countries should do the same.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Subsidized? Read again, who said anything about subsidizing? Treat pbooks and ebooks equally when it comes to libraries. It is akin to charging double and more for an ebook compared to a pbook just because you are spared the expense of having a bookshelf at home. Publishers don't do it to you, why do they do it to libraries?

Why treat something the same, when they aren't the same? Loaning ebooks is more akin to subscription services than it is to selling ebooks. I suspect that at some point in the near future, ebooks will be much like music, i.e. many if not most will get most of their content via subscription services while a core of customers will continue to buy so they can own it. At that point, I suspect that libraries will simply be a specialized subscription service when authors (and publishers) get paid per use rather a one time paid price.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Why treat something the same, when they aren't the same? Loaning ebooks is more akin to subscription services than it is to selling ebooks. I suspect that at some point in the near future, ebooks will be much like music, i.e. many if not most will get most of their content via subscription services while a core of customers will continue to buy so they can own it.

An interesting comparison - our public library CD lending model hasn't been killed off by paid smartphone music services. Nor has our public library mixed DVD-lending and streaming movies-and-documentaries model gone away with Netflix here on the market. And the public library Homework Help service hasn't disappeared due to paid tutoring services proliferating. The future is mixed models, I think, and as leebase said it's going to take a lot of ongoing negotiation.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

I disagree. I've found that many times a solution that works well for 90 percent of the customer base and then handle to edges as special cases is a better approach. [...]
But when dealing with the realities of limited budgets, it's not always a wise use of resources. Many libraries specialize. When we are talking about online resources, rather than walk in resources, there is no reason not to use centralized resources.

When that "wise use of resources" means concentrating on serving your more privileged and highly-resourced customers at the expense of your less privileged customers? I'm glad the librarians I know disagree with you. And our public library ebook lending service is "centralised" in that it's a State service, which any council library member can readily access (including getting technical help at their local library). It's just not a Very Special Disability Service with barriers to access.

Originally Posted by pwalker8

As far as Australian resources go, well, that's something to be solved by Australia. The US put in it's own exception to copyright law to handle the situation. Perhaps more countries should do the same.

They have put in the exception. It's just defined in overly-limited terms and poorly implemented, as "special" exceptions so often are.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Of course, we also run into the real question of this whole debate, i.e. what is the core purpose of public libraries, and to what extent is the modern never ending copyright compatible with that. If copyright was still at 28 years, then much of the issues involving libraries and ebooks would be moot.

How so? People want access to "in demand" books, music and movies. If a library was simply a source of 28yr old and older material, I doubt many people would be satisfied.

The wrinkle ebooks add to the already long standing issues....is that it is (or could be) every bit as convenient to check out and read an ebook from the library as it is to buy and read an ebook from Amazon (or any other commercial place).

As such, MORE people would be incentivized to use their library than buy a book. This is, I would imagine, the reason publishers are making ebooks more expensive for libraries....to cut down on the substitution of sales for library check outs.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

One question is exactly what sort of ebook market libraries really are. Is it really a small, vocal market, or do lots of people use it.

We agree. That is the question. I'm sure the publishers and libraries have the actual data.

And while there are disability issues, and there are poverty issues, how much of library usage goes to the impoverished and disabled? When I check out an ebook, it definitely is a sales substitution. When I was a child, my library usage didn't really take away sales...but it certainly counted as audience acquisition.

[leebase]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Subsidized? Read again, who said anything about subsidizing? Treat pbooks and ebooks equally when it comes to libraries. It is akin to charging double and more for an ebook compared to a pbook just because you are spared the expense of having a bookshelf at home. Publishers don't do it to you, why do they do it to libraries?

The impact that ebooks from libraries on sales is likely higher than that of paper books due to the convenience of checking out a book from an app without ever needing to go to the library

[leebase]

Originally Posted by meeera

An interesting comparison - our public library CD lending model hasn't been killed off by paid smartphone music services. Nor has our public library mixed DVD-lending and streaming movies-and-documentaries model gone away with Netflix here on the market. And the public library Homework Help service hasn't disappeared due to paid tutoring services proliferating. The future is mixed models, I think, and as leebase said it's going to take a lot of ongoing negotiation.

I hate to disagree with out agreement

I think you have the services backwards. It's not that commercial options obviate the desire for library services.

What if the library had music streaming?

What if the library had movie streaming?

Would such services offered by the library reduce Netflix and Spotify subscriptions?

[Lsantiago7859]

There were ebook pricing issues from the beginning of everybody's ereaders; publishers were afraid prices were going to be lower. We pay taxes but do they cover libraries enough? Get involved in your local gov't and find out, if you see something, say something! I know I donate to libraries what I can (not much) because of what they do.

[Fbone]

I checked my library's annual report.

Total budget $148,703

Of that only $8,839 was spent on books, media and periodicals. There are 6 members in the book selection committee and each can select 5 books per month for purchase.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by leebase

How so? People want access to "in demand" books, music and movies. If a library was simply a source of 28yr old and older material, I doubt many people would be satisfied.

The wrinkle ebooks add to the already long standing issues....is that it is (or could be) every bit as convenient to check out and read an ebook from the library as it is to buy and read an ebook from Amazon (or any other commercial place).

As such, MORE people would be incentivized to use their library than buy a book. This is, I would imagine, the reason publishers are making ebooks more expensive for libraries....to cut down on the substitution of sales for library check outs.

I tend to view libraries in a more traditional fashion than many do now, i.e. less about whatever is popular at the moment and more focused on books of long lasting value.

[DNSB]

I was looking at the 2018 annual report from one local library. Over the last 4 years the number of pbook checkouts (2015-2018) has dropped while the number ebook checkouts has climbed. Oddly, pbooks show a drop in adult and youth checkouts but an increase in the use of in-library resources.

We might want to meander into the realm of audiobooks where Audible has a policy of no library sales. For one local library, this meant the speaker at their grand opening of their new building had none of her audiobooks available in the library.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Treat pbooks and ebooks equally when it comes to libraries.

If publishers did that, the total cost of ownership, or of a lend, for the library, of an eBook would be a fraction of the pbook price. So public libraries would be incentivized to buy/lease so many eBooks that there would be no or little wait. This would cannibalize retail big five sales while, eventually, undermining taxpayer support for physical libraries.

Few seem to recognize what a great job publishers of narrative nonfiction books have done in navigating the digital transition while magazines and newspapers, employing the same sorts of authors, have been devastated. Fiction readers may not care -- because no matter have good or bad the economics, their kind of books will still be written and distributed. Not so much with the kind I read. Most of them are based on book proposals that won't result in anything good to read unless they are funded.

I am now finishing up Frozen in Time: An Epic Story of Survival and a Modern Quest for Lost Heroes of World War II. Author Michael Zuckoff explains that he spent his advance on the "modern quest" making up about half the book. No advance, no modern adventure, no book.

Contrast with the university press model. Advances are only a couple thousand. Or less. This is not enough to allow the author to produce a better manuscript. University press editing for readability, for most titles I see, is ineffective in comparison with the big five standard. And as for public libraries, university presses, with exceptions, refuse to lease them eBooks at any price. In these ways the university presses are almost as bad as Amazon's publishing ventures. Why the silence regarding them?

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

If publishers did that, the total cost of ownership, or of a lend, for the library, of an eBook would be a fraction of the pbook price. So public libraries would be incentivized to buy/lease so many eBooks that there would be no or little wait. This would cannibalize retail big five sales while, eventually, undermining taxpayer support for physical libraries.

A rather interesting claim. If an ebook and a pbook cost the library the same, the cost of the ebook would be a fraction of the pbook price? What is the basis for that statement? The cost of library staff is going to decline? The cost of their physical plant is going to shrink? Oh, I know! Overdrive and its competitors are going to drop their charges for managing the ebook loans? Perhaps in my wildest dreams...

You may also have noticed that today's libraries do much more than warehouse and loan books though that is a major portion of their raison d'être.

One item from the IFLA and Sharon Day from the Edmonton Public Library can be found here: Libraries Can't Get Enough eBooks.