LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  November 2016

CODE4LIB November 2016

Subject:

Re: Post-election reflections for Code4Lib

From:

Kari R Smith <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 16 Nov 2016 17:13:28 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

+1 (x1,000)

Kari R. Smith
Digital Archivist, Institute Archives and Special Collections
Massachusetts Institute of Technology Libraries
617.253.5690   smithkr at mit.edu   http://libraries.mit.edu/archives/

-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michelle Lubatti
Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2016 12:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Post-election reflections for Code4Lib

This probably isn't the place to discuss collection development or diversity, but why should librarians have the authority to define "pseudo-science" and "pseudo-mysticism?"  If our definition includes only empirical science and fact, then we will be required to eliminate or label most books about religion, philosophy, essay collections, etc.  We could only allow materials that have a fact-based historical commentary on these subjects.

I disagree with many of the religious and "pseudo-mysticism" books in my library, but I do not agree that I have the authority to discard or create a "fringe" category for them.  This would go against all my assertions of accepting and promoting diversity.

I do not adhere to Buddhism, but it's important we carry books about it, both history and practice.  I do not believe in spirit animals, but books on this topic are popular here and reflect one part of our diverse community.  Neither Buddhism nor spirit animals have empirical science behind them (science is based on physical matter, so really only philosophy can challenge these), but they still hold value for our community.

We do make a decision to include them under religions, because this seems
most appropriate and where people will find them.   Although we do have
books on a Buddhist flavor of mindfulness in our medical section.  These have some empirical science behind them, but it's not medical journal terminology and quality.

Collection development is a difficult topic, especially since we are inclined to want our own worldviews to be preeminent (even if just subconsciously).  This is a good example of where we as librarians can
(must?) do practical things to encourage diversity.

Michelle

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 2:34 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Eric, I think these are questions that go far beyond online services. 
> My public library carries books with descriptions such as: "Learn to 
> interpret and understand the cosmic language being spoken by the 
> crystals, and unlock your own mystical potential." This is crap, to 
> put it mildly, and shouldn't be in the library. If the shelves are 
> filled with pseudo-science and even pseudo-mysticism, we aren't doing our job.  This is the whole "neutrality"
> thread - it's not "neutral" to serve documents without regard to their 
> quality, especially since some of the anti-science/medicine things 
> stated in books can do actual harm. We should at least do as much as 
> Wikipedia does and label the fringe topics as *fringe*, not file them 
> alongside the proven science without comment. (Yes, I know this has 
> issues; I still think it's what we should do.)
>
> As for "safe from surveillance" etc., libraries are not miracle workers.
> Everything we do is in the real world. Given that the NSA captures 
> every byte conveyed from point A to point B, how *could* libraries do 
> anything about that? We've tried, we've honestly tried to shield our 
> users from overt surveillance, but our only hope is against inept 
> vendors who can be staved off with a simple proxy server.
>
> kc
>
>
> On 11/15/16 9:28 AM, Eric Hellman wrote:
>
>> I'm sure we've all read articles about the fake news that circulates 
>> in an information environment anchored by social media, and the 
>> relation of that information environment to the election.
>>
>> Libraries are participants in this new information enviroment, so I 
>> have some questions.
>>
>> 1. Do libraries understand the algorithms and metadata that guide 
>> search results and suggestions in the services they provide? Do these 
>> algorithms reproduce biases in our society?
>> 2. Are libraries provide compelling enough services to be meaningful 
>> and reliable participants in public discourse?
>> 3. When libraries connect their services to social networks (for 
>> example with a Facebook "Like" button) are they making user's the 
>> information environment better or worse?
>> 4. With many users fearing a more authoritarian state, are libraries 
>> providing services that are safe from surveillance by commercial or 
>> government entities?
>>
>>
>> Eric Hellman
>> President, Free Ebook Foundation
>> Founder, Unglue.it https://unglue.it/ 
>> https://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/
>> twitter: @gluejar
>>
>>
> --
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> m: +1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager