Additional notes from US Book Show 2022: Libraries are Essential, Part 2 session

This is one of the sessions I watched on demand after the conference. 

 

Session: Libraries are Essential, Part 2. 

Session to look at critical areas, especially in the "post-pandemic" times. 

Access to e-books and digital content:

• Yes, publishers' onerous restrictions on e-book purchases for libraries are inequitable (i.e. nothing new here). Publishers then suing libraries over it is just bullying. The bottom line on this issue is that it is about fair and equitable digital access. Publisher greed is not a good look no matter what lip service they give about libraries being good, etc. 
• On digital lending and e-book demand: 
• E-book usage continues to grow. Foot traffic in libraries fell with the pandemic and is not back to pre-pandemic levels yet in many places. Some libraries in fact encouraged use of electronic resources (my library certainly did). 
• Other libraries do report lower materials circulation. For electronic resources, again, publisher onerous demands and restrictions mean that libraries are less able to meet patron demand at a time when demand is increasing. 
• Defining equitable digital access. Collections bridge content gaps. To provide quality content for all in a safe environment. Equitable access to content that reflects the community. 
• Equitable digital access is difficult given publishers' exploitative pricing on e-books, which is often at least 3 times higher or more than print book pricing. So librarians are more likely then not to "license" more e-books and buy print, but this means many patrons can be left out, thus an inequitable situation. This can be blamed on publishers' greed. 
• Advances in technology have allowed publishers to avoid/refuse to offer fair pricing on e-books and electronic resources. Playing victim for them is a common disinformation tactic in their industry. Meanwhile publishers continue to disadvantage libraries. 
• Despite publishers' clout, some librarians are working to advocate for themselves and their patrons. However, it may be serious time, as stated by the librarian from Maryland, for libraries to withhold funding from publishers, i.e. time for boycotts of certain publishers. 
• Contrary to what publishers say, librarians do defend and support copyright. Libraries and schools teach about copyright. When we help a student cite their sources properly, we are defending copyright. 
• With better terms from publishers (as if, but work with me here), libraries could buy more content, including more diverse authors, debut authors too instead or in addition to just the "usual" bestsellers. Libraries propose digital access should be as access for print resources. Bottom line: librarians need to continue and expand their role as advocates, but also steer themselves and patrons to smaller and indie publishers willing to give libraries a better deal. This means then also to steer away from large exploitative publishers. Libraries need to put contingency plans in place. 

Interview with Jennie Rose Halperin, of Library Futures (advocacy group).  

• Publishers may not see everything libraries do to promote reading, culture, uplift communities, and providing new ways for people to understand their world (this is true as libraries go, but it is a very charitable way to see publishers. I'd say publishers are just willfully blind). 
• On a tech positive future for libraries. There are many reasons we need access and use electronic resources. The world is moving more to digital content, and libraries need to be part of this future. However, libraries, largely due (we are saying it again) to publisher onerous restrictions, face various challenges. 

Panel discussion: "We are still not OK: Protecting library workers after the pandemic." 

 

• (I should mention that I loathe the "after the pandemic" phrasing. At this point, the pandemic is not over no matter how much wishful thinking most of society is doing now.)
• This sessions mostly looks at libraries' work during the pandemic (a lot of this falls under the "we did good" category of library presentation). What many often did not realize was library workers' trauma at the time (and still ongoing). Many library workers remained at work in libraries that stayed open. (I worked even as the campus was, mostly, locked down in the early stages of the pandemic. Personally, I never "went home.) The issue of trauma has an impact on everyone. 
• "Normal" is a problem. The pandemic exposed various critical needs and forms of suffering. 
• Keep in mind that libraries, especially public libraries, had been suffering divestment and defunding before the pandemic. The pandemic just made things worse for libraries. 
• Trauma is endemic at all library levels according to researchers. Yet attitudes in library workers can be cavalier, meaning they may leave the work in libraries, get transferred out of public services, or just "mentally check out." 
• On defining trauma. A key difference is when people feel supported and able to cope they tend to see it more as a "bad experience" than as trauma. 
• The pandemic has disproportionately affected library workers of color (PoC). In addition, issues of low pay, white supremacy, mission creep need to be addressed. Still, the pandemic has shown and exposed changes that need to be done. 
• To library directors: it is a certainty your PoC library staff have endured abuse in some form at the reference desk. You nor the rest of the staff should be OK with that nor just let it slip. Directors, you need to make choices then, including policy changes. As leaders, you need to lead, not tolerate racist or otherwise abusive behavior. Period. Full stop. 
• A question asked: what if nothing changes? (I think that scenario is possible if not very likely.) The speakers believe change will come, even if some need to get out of the way. Thinking in 20th century terms is no longer an option. Overall, the speakers are optimistic (but again, what if nothing changes? As I often say, a magnificent question. I do want to believe.)

Panel on library leadership. 

 

• R. David Lankes, on panel, says library leaders need "radical empathy." However, leaders more than not are NOT in touch with front line workers (not surprising. That is a common situation, and one I have witnessed often. But heaven forbid you point it out if you are like me, i.e. a front line worker with no clout). 
• A lot of healing needs to happen in the profession. Asking your front line workers about "the future of libraries" may not be the best thing for leaders to be doing at this time (yea, you may want to shut up about that topic in the Hard Times, at least in front of your library workers). Instead of trying to speculate about futures take care of your library workers first.
   
• Flexibility is necessary in the Hard Times. Leadership needs to communicate consistently and clearly. It might also help if leaders take the same risks as everyone else (I am definitely not holding my breath on that). 
• Leaders need to do more than give pretty speeches (and this was said without irony given that we are listening to some very pretty speeches).