Theories of the Information Society, Third Edition - Cryptome

INFORMATION AND DEMOCRACY
1
1
1
2
1
1
which is almost by default ‘middle class’, but also in occasions of censorship of
materials by librarians. In this regard one may point to examples of some libraries
removing books such as Enid Blyton’s Noddy stories because these have been
judged to be racist and sexist. Moreover, the argument is made that behind the
rhetoric of public service lies the unpalatable fact that librarians look after themselves
rather well, spending three times as much on salaries as on books (Adam
Smith Institute, 1986, p. 2). As recently as 2004 over half the total of library
expenditure was committed to staff salaries. Ostensible friends of public libraries,
notably Tim Coates (www.libr.org.uk), the founder of the Waterstone’s chain of
bookshops, voice this complaint, echoing Will Hutton’s (2004) call for ‘substantial
redundancy and redeployment among existing staff’. How much better, goes
the reasoning, if such a self-serving and elitist profession were made answerable
to customers who, in paying for their information, will value it precisely and
call to account those employed to serve it up?
There are other complaints made about public libraries. One is that, since
most users borrow light fiction and biographies from libraries (these account for
around 60 per cent of all loans, with borrowing of fiction amounting to twice
that of non-fiction), and since these readers are chiefly quite affluent, there is
no reason why their leisure pursuits should be subsidised from general taxation,
especially since the ‘paperback revolution’ has made the sorts of book that
are most heavily borrowed cheaply available. Bluntly, with the library system
predominantly meeting what are arguably the entertainment needs of users,
‘Agatha Christie on the rates’ is scarcely defensible. Reminding ourselves that the
top five borrowed adult authors in 2004 were John Grisham and Josephine Cox
(four separate times!), we may appreciate the observation of the Adam Smith
Institute (1986): ‘While the ambitious librarian may like to look on him or herself
as part of a vital information industry, the bulk of library customers use the
service as a publicly funded provider of free romantic fiction’ (p. 21). If this is the
case, then is the library service any different in principle from the cinema industry
or professional football? All are entertainments, pleasant diversions, the difference
being only that one is free while the others require payment of a fee to enjoy
the spectacle.
A second criticism observes a contradiction between public libraries functioning
as a free service when it comes to providing information to organisations
which want it for commercial reasons. For instance, where a company wishes to
investigate a legal or financial matter or to investigate chemical literature as a
preliminary to technical innovation, these have consequences of economic significance
for businesses yet companies incur no cost in using library resources (and
these can be extensive, requiring professional assistance to locate information as
well as reference to expensive materials). Critics suggest, with some plausibility,
that there is an inconsistency here and that charges should be made in such
circumstances.
A third area of concern is public libraries’ provision of reference works, probably
the aspect that is closest to public service and public sphere ideals. The
image is one of the library as a grand repository of ‘knowledge’, access to which
is facilitated by the expert librarian (increasingly termed ‘information scientist’),
179