Everybody loves free
Mar. 18th, 2011 01:36 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
deborahI've seen some people in the blogosphere saying things like "the New York Times charging for online access to its articles oppresses poor people".
So, guys. I'm a librarian. Hell, I'm a digital archivist. I believe information was meant to be free. I live information was meant to be free.
And you know what's awesome? It is. In most parts of the United States, there are public libraries. Most of those public libraries have print subscription to the New York Times. In fact, most of the public libraries are part of larger networks which enable their users to plug their library card numbers into a website and get digital access to the most recent issues of the New York Times without ever leaving their seats. This is important, especially for people who live in rural areas, don't have transport to the library, or work unusual or excessive hours.
Does this mean that all of the linky-linking that goes on in the blogosphere, with people labeling their links "here" and not identifying the article in question by title or date, will be less accessible to people who don't pay the New York Times? Of course it does. But just because I believe information was meant to be free, doesn't mean that I believe that the New York Times is obliged to make it trivially easy for everybody to get free access to their expensively-generated content in the most easy way possible without doing any extra work. Bloggers can damn well learn to cite the articles they link to. The rest of us can learn how to login to our local library systems' databases.
You should note that the more you use your online library's databases, the higher their use statistics are, that they can then bring back to the town during budgeting sessions explaining how heavily used they are and how they should get more money to subscribe even more online databases. Supporting libraries for the win!
And as for supporting newspapers, well. I'm in the front lines of people bitching that most newspapers have stopped doing investigative journalism and instead just reprint wire pieces or post she said/he said controversies. But investigative journalism is expensive, and journalists asking to be paid is not oppressive.
(Libraries are awesome, guys. Of course I want you to be supporting your local independent bookstore, but remember you can always order books and DVDs via interlibrary loan! FREE.)
So, guys. I'm a librarian. Hell, I'm a digital archivist. I believe information was meant to be free. I live information was meant to be free.
And you know what's awesome? It is. In most parts of the United States, there are public libraries. Most of those public libraries have print subscription to the New York Times. In fact, most of the public libraries are part of larger networks which enable their users to plug their library card numbers into a website and get digital access to the most recent issues of the New York Times without ever leaving their seats. This is important, especially for people who live in rural areas, don't have transport to the library, or work unusual or excessive hours.
Does this mean that all of the linky-linking that goes on in the blogosphere, with people labeling their links "here" and not identifying the article in question by title or date, will be less accessible to people who don't pay the New York Times? Of course it does. But just because I believe information was meant to be free, doesn't mean that I believe that the New York Times is obliged to make it trivially easy for everybody to get free access to their expensively-generated content in the most easy way possible without doing any extra work. Bloggers can damn well learn to cite the articles they link to. The rest of us can learn how to login to our local library systems' databases.
You should note that the more you use your online library's databases, the higher their use statistics are, that they can then bring back to the town during budgeting sessions explaining how heavily used they are and how they should get more money to subscribe even more online databases. Supporting libraries for the win!
And as for supporting newspapers, well. I'm in the front lines of people bitching that most newspapers have stopped doing investigative journalism and instead just reprint wire pieces or post she said/he said controversies. But investigative journalism is expensive, and journalists asking to be paid is not oppressive.
(Libraries are awesome, guys. Of course I want you to be supporting your local independent bookstore, but remember you can always order books and DVDs via interlibrary loan! FREE.)
