Librarians respond to suggestion Amazon should replace libraries

[j.p.s]

Originally Posted by ekbell

My first assumption was that the article was tongue-in-cheek, making a point by demonstrating the absurdity of the opposing view. An enjoyable technique but hard to pull off effectively and liable to be misunderstood.

The Professor's reputation for wit and the (deliberately?) poor writing would fit this assumption.

I was wondering about the poor writing. Maybe his other columns are needed for context. Any deliberate irony or satire flew right by me. I suspect that it would be a rare business executive that get the point.

[PurpleStar]

What's with the dumping on libraries these days?? First the Tor thing and now this. Gheesh, not everyone can afford to buy every book they read!

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by PurpleStar

What's with the dumping on libraries these days?? First the Tor thing and now this. Gheesh, not everyone can afford to buy every book they read!

I find myself somewhat tempted to agree that the article was tongue in cheek. But then as a Canadian where the library ebooks are epub format, switching to Amazon would be a pain short of Amazon supporting epub format which might be a bit more likely than libraries being replaced by Amazon.

As for Tor, I regard their delaying the availability of ebooks in libraries much the same light as books being available in hardcover, trade paperback and then mass market paperback. A corporate attempt to maximize the profits. I've purchased several eARCs from Baen so the attempt can work.

[PurpleStar]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I find myself somewhat tempted to agree that the article was tongue in cheek. But then as a Canadian where the library ebooks are epub format, switching to Amazon would be a pain short of Amazon supporting epub format which might be a bit more likely than libraries being replaced by Amazon.

As for Tor, I regard their delaying the availability of ebooks in libraries much the same light as books being available in hardcover, trade paperback and then mass market paperback. A corporate attempt to maximize the profits. I've purchased several eARCs from Baen so the attempt can work.

Yeah maybe their sales are low lately so they decided to delay the books, who knows.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by ekbell

My first assumption was that the article was tongue-in-cheek, making a point by demonstrating the absurdity of the opposing view. An enjoyable technique but hard to pull off effectively and liable to be misunderstood.

The Professor's reputation for wit and the (deliberately?) poor writing would fit this assumption.

There are a couple of problems with this hypothesis. Firstly, the obsession with profit-making corporations and the bad writing seem consistent with his other articles. Secondly, when challenged on this article, he responded by whining about his library tax bill.

[Byrdie]

Tongue-in-cheek? No.
Written by a nincompoop? Yes. Definitely yes.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Byrdie

Tongue-in-cheek? No.
Written by a nincompoop? Yes. Definitely yes.

Perhaps the last line of the cached Forbes article is relevant:

"My recent book The Ten Golden Rules Of Leadership is published by AMACOM, and can be found here."

I do wonder about calling a book recent that is close to 4 years old and then to give a link to Amazon for purchase in an article suggesting that Amazon should replace public libraries. Nothing like the appearance of not being neutral.

And just to cut down the chances of receiving another PM suggesting that by quoting a portion of the article, I'm committing copyright infringement, I would suggest reading the details on the fair dealing provisions in Canadian Copyright Act. And, yes, it's called fair dealing not fair use.

[Fiat_Lux]

Originally Posted by rcentros

How in the world does something this stupid get OK'd in the first place?

A decade or so ago, there was a proposal in Washington State to eliminate funding for libraries, on the grounds that the Internet made libraries obsolete.

Amber