Why librarians won't protect your children.
It's your responsibility. It's that simple. Movies, internet, e-books, music or books. Our UAPL head librarian says so. Our local news channel had an interesting interview last night with a reasonable, educated Upper Arlington parent who discovered her child was checking out X (or maybe it was R) movies from the public library when the overdue notice came. She requested a block on her child's library card so that he couldn't check out this material, but was told it isn't the library's responsibility (interview with a very stone faced, reasonable, educated library director). Apparently, parents need to go to the library with all children under the age of 18 to protect them from porn on the computer screens and disgusting movies. Because kids will be kids. In my day we had the National Geographic Magazine. The other extreme is the parents who use the library as a drop off day care center. I've been at the terminals when they come in from the nearby school. For some reason, library staff put up with this role for the really careless parents, but won't cooperate with the really caring parents. I've read articles in professional journals about what a service this is.
I was a librarian. I have a master's degree plus. And 23 years of working the desk, budget, committees, publications circuit, continuing education requirements and stacks duty. True, I've never been employed by a public library--I'm just a client, a tax payer and a critic. This much I know. Librarians are very smart people--some aren't the most charming folk you'll ever meet--but they have a lot of education and high IQs. Can find information for you on all kinds of things and amazing excuses not to buy what you suggest if it doesn't line up with their political and religious views.
There must be a way for librarians to figure out they are responsible to and paid by their community--especially when when the main building sits in the city park next to the largest elementary school. At least get a clue in time for the next bond issue.
UAPL has recently created a $47,000 a year public relations position to work on its image. There's a cheaper way to do this: be responsive to the concerns of the community.
Posts
6 comments:
In all seriousness, how many people in your community care about this?
Being responsive to the community doesn't mean acting on the wishes and complaints of every single person.
And, anticipating your response, a story on the local news about the fact that they don't prohibit kids from renting R movies and one parent who had a problem with it does not a movement make.
When did not knowing what your kids are doing become a license for outrage and not a reason for shame?
Does UAPL have any disgusting movies?
Finally, I find your statement that librarians "Can find information for you on all kinds of things and amazing excuses not to buy what you suggest if it doesn't line up with their political and religious views." to be divorced from reality and experience.
Have you actually observed this or read a credible account of this behavior?
Chuck: I use this library all the time, and have heard the excuses. Try the web page. You won't find a suggestion box for purchases. No e-mail for the staff. At least not the last time I looked for one. "We don't have more Christian titles because they aren't reviewed by our sources" (paraphrase), or "we can't buy that [political] book because of the price" (paraphrase) or "there is no demand."
My all time favorite is the newest book on Lutherans was over 40 years old and there are 3 Lutheran churches in this suburb, one of them one of the largest in the country. To their credit, when I filled out the proper paper work with a title and ISBN, publisher and price, they bought one. But gosh Chuck, when I was working I was expected to know the community I served and buy accordingly. I think the vet college would have been a little unhappy with me if I didn't collect anything about horses and dogs. When there are 15 copies of Bob Woodward's latest book and 1 of O'Reilly's with 11 holds, the average patron can get the message. The shelves are groaning with the anti-Bush books. The traffic is created by the DVD and video collection, so I don't think anyone really cares much.
"how many people in your community care about this?" you ask.
Probably not many. (But this is my blog and I can complain if I want to even if I'm the only one.) Maybe the same percentage as use your library. Library user numbers are dwindling all over the country. Part of it's the internet, but it started long before with radio and TV, some of it is the general state of education. Some of it is the old fashioned gatekeeper mentality of librarians.
Our community is highly educated and very mobile; we can go to Grandview, Columbus, Dublin or Worthington quickly. Or to bookstores. I can get my Christian and social science books through OhioLink from any library in the state at Ohio State. My PL is useful for medical, political and financial magazines and access to genealogy digital sources. OSU doesn't have that.
I'm not surprised she hired a public relations person, but I would have preferred that the librarians and staff people got a raise with that $47,000 (+ benefits). They work very hard and don't smile much.
Chuck, you don't need to defend a public library just because . . . it's a library. Or maybe you work at UAPL. If so, get out of the basement or the office and look around. It has very good sources in some areas [cookbooks, crafts, fiction, newspapers], a fine facility, all kinds of programming that should be done by other community groups, and it is going to asking for more money soon.
Again - comments about people's appearance. Why don't you express your opinions without attacking people's appearance. It seems contrary to your repeated claims of being a Christian. God does not judge people by their appearance.
Peace.
Huh? You mean AL's copying someone else's comments about the librarian candidate who blew his nose with his fingers? Is that what's making you unhappy? It wasn't my story--I linked to it. What is it with you and appearances?
I was referencing your comment "stone faced". Also, your poem about fat men at Rusty Bucket, your speech about H.R.'s wrinkles. It's seems that you hurl insults at people whose politics you don't agree with.
Ugh.
Anony: Well, I'm glad you clarified that. I'm sorry your feelings are hurt (how to apologize without admitting
guilt--learned it from liberals I see on TV).
People do have faces that appear to be chiseled in stone as they make a point they believe in (librarians rarely smile--low salaries, bad lighting);
some people (usually over age 40) do have wrinkles from the pull of gravity and constant scowling, and some are are fat because of the 2nd and 3rd pitcher of beer and the double fries at Rusty Bucket causing a pressure point between belly and table. And Nancy Pelosi is the best dressed woman in Congress, but she's still wrong. Some guys look terrific on the golf course but still have bad scores.
You call it unkind and unchristian to mention the obvious or write poetry or essays about what I see and think. I call it observant and having an artistic eye. To turn a phrase made popular by the Rutgers women, you are trying to steal my joy by being mean to me.
I invite you to read some of my other poetry that has nothing to do with politics, or read my Monday Memories. Or, you could leave suggestions at the blogs of people who have called GWB stupid, or simian, or who have drawn cartoons of Condi Rice as Aunt Jemima.
If it's not too dangerous (because of your place of employment), set up your own blog and then your readers can pick through your essays and comment only on what they disagree with.
Post a Comment