[Publib] libraries are limited, obsolete

[Houghton-Jan, Sarah]

I agree that libraryland is not the only place to get the word out, but
in addition, within the community itself.  Michael and I, to that end,
also wrote a joint letter to the editor of the paper, condensing and
combining our two takes on the issue.

And it is indeed quite puzzling why the paper decided to run this piece.

Sarah Houghton-Jan

-----Original Message-----
From: publib-bounces at webjunction.org
[mailto:publib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of K.G. Schneider
Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:44 PM
To: publib at webjunction.org
Subject: RE: [Publib] libraries are limited, obsolete

> Your thoughts regarding the original column at ljworld.com, as well as
the
> blog responses, are most welcome.
> 
> Bruce

I wrote a response, which I finally got posted (it had to be under 3000
characters, including spaces, so it took me a few attempts). 

I don't think the strategic place to have this discussion is on library
blogs or lists. I'm NOT criticizing Sarah or Michael's posts; in fact
their
posts were crucial news alerts, and they gave me a lot of food for
thought.
I'm also not saying we shouldn't discuss this on PUBLIB and elsewhere.
But
it's REALLY important that the people of Lawrence hear how libraries
offer
value to society and why Lawrence needs a better library.  

That editorial is by a guy who clearly has no use for public libraries,
and
it's published a few days after a couple of articles about scaling back
the
proposed library design. It would be interesting to know what shaped his
opinions: was it a bad day at a library, a series of events, conjecture,
assumptions, or simply that he doesn't like spending public money?  I'd
also
want to know why the paper chose to run this piece by this guy. Whose
ear
has he got? 

Karen G. Schneider
kgs at bluehighways.com 



_______________________________________________
Publib mailing list
Publib at webjunction.org
http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/publib