The Letter Z

When I first wrote about the librarians in Sacramento who are circulating a petition protesting, among other things, the library’s collection development policy, I said that I thought the blog posts I had seen on the topic were fairly one-sided and unreflective, and I suggested that this was an example of what Steven J. Bell has called the “speech chill [of] the library blogosphere.” I still think that this was more or less true. But as I have been watching the issue more closely over the past few days, I have seen some really thoughtful discourse taking place on library blogs. And as my blogging feet are still quite tender, this has been an interesting lesson for me in the way discussion takes shape in the blog world.

First of all, some great comments were posted in response to what I wrote, both on this blog and on others. Some helped provide support for my arguments, some respectfully disagreed, and some pointed out places where my reasoning was unclear. All in all, they helped me to clarify my thinking on the issue. Furthermore, a number of people have posted comments on a number of blogs over the past few days which have deepened the debate.

I think that two of the most important points that have been brought up in the course of this discussion are 1) the issue at the Sacramento Public Library is about much more than just collection development, and 2) the issue of collection development is much bigger than what’s happening at the Sacramento Public Library.

To explain point 1, many people have pointed out that while the Union Librarian post and the original article in the Sacramento Bee made this out to be an issue of the quality of the library’s collection, the Sacramento librarians are upset about management that they feel wastes money and doesn’t listen to them. It seems that the collection issue is an almost insignificant aspect of this dispute. It just happens to be what the press, and hence, the library bloggers (myself included) have latched on to.

And as for point 2, it’s been pretty evident that most of those who’ve written about this are concerned with the fact that collection building is a clash between the conflicting values of giving what’s asked for and helping create an informed public. And this is a tension that, in my opinion, helps define the library profession. And of course, most of what we’ve been writing about hasn’t really been about the Sacramento Public Library, even though we care about what’s going on there. (As K.G. Schneider correctly observed, we really don’t know much about what’s going on there — although some of the comments from SPL staff at Librarian In Black, as well as this Sacramento radio program have helped give some perspective.)

The interesting thing to me about this in terms of blogging is the way that I’ve seen the discussion develop — not so much in main blog posts but in comments. The original posts I read on this topic (Union Librarian, Blyberg.net, Free Range Librarian, Librarian.net, and Librarian In Black) were fairly one-sided and uninteresting. But the comments, by visitors and by the bloggers themselves responding to what visitors had said, explored the complexities of this issue in great depth.

As for the question of discourse in library blogs, this has convinced me that it is happening. But a recent piece by Seth Finkelstein in the Guardian (found via LISnews) has clarified what some of the difficulties are with even this apparent level of discourse. Blog audiences, he writes, are often narrow and self-selected. In other words, just as it’s easy to post without thinking, it’s easy to refuse to read, much less comment on, the posts or comments that you disagree with. Blogging is hardly a conversation in the way talking is, because it takes no effort to get out of it. You just ignore things you disagree with.

But this only brings home the point that serious discourse requires a serious commitment. Because all writing is voluntary, each thoughtful post is a gift to the wider community. Discussion and debate are really difficult, but when they happen, we’re all richer for it. Kind of like those decisions about what to put in your library collection.