Librarians in the information age (A rebuttal)

In a response to an op-ed that I covered last week on the under-appreciation of librarians, Dan Terzian, a fellow at the legal clinic New Media Rights, claims that libraries and librarians have to adapt and conform to the "digital revolution."

Terzian opines that the revolution has "made many librarians obsolete." Traditionally, librarians provided valuable services that advised research and guided information seekers, but now with the advent of the internet and Google, those services are slowly being taken over by automation and digital sources he said, citing Google Books and Google Scholar as examples. For many college students, he states, Google is the first and last information searcher they need.

The New York Public Library, photo by David Iliff

Terzian states that the revolution should "spark library evolution." Classically trained librarians have a place in academia and university settings, but are largely obsolete in public libraries. He suggests that the role of librarians in public libraries should be taken up by English or other liberal arts majors who are attracted to the "literary librarian lifestyle." These new librarians wouldn't safeguard information, he claims, rather they would "teach patrons basic research in the information age."

He does acknowledge that librarians have been hit hard by budget cuts, but attributes it not to the specific targeting of libraries for budget cuts, but rather just the entire public system needing to tighten its belt. Others have been hit just as hard, he states, like public university students and other state employees.

He calls for innovation in libraries and cites the New York Public Library as an example, with its "digital strategy -- including e-publications, crowd-sourcing projects and a user-friendly online library catalog." He points out that with these achievements, the library actually makes more money than it spends.


Los Angeles Times