Slashdot Mirror
ALA President Not Fond of Bloggers
Phil Shapiro writes "American Library Association president Michael Gorman is not too fond of bloggers and blogging. '[The] Blog People (or their subclass who are interested in computers and the glorification of information) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of digitization and a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'"
Think of your photo collection and music collection. It's just another extension of that (think DIARY).
Don't let this guy read any Slashdot comments in that case.
Caution: this post contains generalizations. Most of which are, unfortunately, true.
Bloggers think they're going to be the revolution of the press, and that they'll take the place of the New York Times and Washinton Post, and Newscorp will crumble at their feet.
Not with the half-assed misinformation and melodrama on the vast majority of the political and "news" blogs I've seen (to say nothing of the wild spitting and sputtering in the comments).
Not as long as they have no problem with their complete and utter lack of accountability of any type, and the vicious, one-sided partisan nature designed solely to incite vitriol in their groupthink audiences.
Not while they do nothing more than constantly pat each other on their virtual backs and reinforce their own worldviews and twisted near-conspiracy theories, ignoring any and all other sides of the story while simultaneously thinking of themselves as "open minded" and the only revealers of "the truth".
Blogs have a place in the world of information. And, like all sources of information, I'll concede that some can, in general, build a reputation for trust and accuracy. But many, particularly political blogs, have no regard for anything but the furtherance of their own agendas, taking things wildly out of context, and going on vindictive missions to build a one-sided case to paint the target of their ire in the worst possible light, without any consideration for any other motivations or other sides of the stories.
And they think they're the future of the media?
No fucking thanks.
Look out! The "Blog People" are going to burn books!
I like suggestions, but I don't like contributing towards them.
It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.
Not sure what
a random
paragraph is. The temperature here is 33 degrees
fahrenheit. I took a walk today. My HP
doesn't like talking to CUPS.
There are 3,472 green M&M's in the
jar.
man, I feel like mold.
I don't even understand how this person became President of such an organization. His writing styles is absolutely atrocious. He offers no supporting evidence for any of his points. He really needs to go back and take a basic college writing course. I would fail him if he was my student and turned in a paper like that.
See subject.
Read complex texts? Ha! /.ers can't even be bothered to RTFA.
i blog (log) my thoughts in an attempt to share them with others who might have a more insightful point of view, and in the end these are for me and not for you mr german. i was just about to read the da vinci code but hmm i might just not blog it instead so others out their wont know about it.
Something you can't control is always a bad.....
I'm not to fond of these ALA president people. From what I have superficially seen they make broad sweeping generalisations and knee jerk statements about others who they do not take the time to understand. I also heard that they don't shower very often and are cruel to puppies. There was a rumour going around that they get their tertiay education from discarded tissue boxes and glue sticks.
"[The] Blog People (or their subclass who are interested in computers and the glorification of information) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of digitization and a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... ."
Took me two reads to understand that this is english he is speaking in.
This probabaly is the most complex sentence ever i read on slashdot.
BAIN http://www.devslashzero.com
I'm very sorry to see that the ALA Prez (an org I respect) cannot see past his dead trees. Yes, blogspace is hard to archive, and much of it low quality -- because it hasn't been selected [censored] by printing press owners. There are also some gems. He's a librarian, he should go look.
I do not have contempt for heretics who do not share my beliefs. I merely beat them mercilessly until they do.
share that is.
man, I feel like mold.
"It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs."
Kind of like slashdot readers?
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... At least he can relate with the idea, if not the reason.
Chairs, for the most part, are optional.
...how about he get a giant collection of journals/diaries from the 50s and 60s and see how they stack up?
A Blog is little more than a person's personal journal. Of course they're not put up against an editor or an ombudsman, THEY'RE JOURNALS. This guy's assuming that a blog is supposed to be held to some kind of higher standard.
Great to see a librarian laying it on the line. I've long suspected some of them feel this way. If it's out in the open, maybe we can have a good debate that reveals how librarians sacrifice the needs of users to serve their own interests of hanging onto their control of information budgets in academia.
News flash: A brontosaurus is not too fond of mammels and live birth. 'The mammels (or their sublcass who are monkeys) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of being small, having a relatively large brain and the ability to withstand, say, a large meterorite striking the earth. Given the quality of their roars, I doubt that many of the mammals are in the habit of thundering across the primordial plains. It is entirely possible their survial needs are met through hair, live birth and quick adaptability.'
Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts.
Yo is sure to get schooled from my mad skillz. Oh by the way, this 3l33t haxor had oatmeal for breakfast this morning. Oh and here's a picture of my cat.
It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.
On one level, blogs are intended for brief communications or thoughts that often revolve around a central theme, but not always. Often they are intended as a means for maintaining communication with family and friends or as a creative outlet. However, this guy has obviously not been very informed or is lazy about finding informative/interesting blogs out there like:
Kevin Sites whose reporting pioneered the use of the blog in combat reporting.
Dan Gillmor whose new efforts are targeted at grassroots journalism from sources exactly like blogs.
Or Chris Anderson's blog The Long Tail which discusses businesses, economic, cultural and political models whose goals are to take advantage of the significant portion of those populations underlying the distal distributions of a curve.
And many others whose careful investigation, research, thought and reporting go into the content on their blogs.
Oh, and then there are the blogs like mine........
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
meant to post anonymously. damn you, autologin.
how do I get my original account back when @home died long ago?
You realise he is also insulting Google.... Better smash him good
-- You're too stupid to be an atheist.
... Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'"
thats patantley fols.
Blog people, hackers, coders, geeks, nerds whatever we choose to call ourselves are people that collect, store, and disseminate information electronically. And I dare say that we are just as fascinated and obsessed and as diligent in our efforts concerning computers and digital information as our ancestors were with the printing press. We are kindred spirits. And it's a great shame that a library association president can't figure that out.
Romana: "How did you know?" Doctor Who: "Ah, well, knowing is easy. Everyone does THAT ad nauseum. I just sort of hope"
Is that blogging is all about attention. People who write blogs crave attention in the real world, don't get it, or not enough, and so use blogging to fulfill it.
These blogging communites are full of people just like that. Nobody cares about your inane rants except other socially inept bloggers.
I don't say it to be mean, but it's generally the truth.
t is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs
He must be new here...
Honestly, what does he expect from a Journal instant-publish format? The only thing that even remotely compares to blogs would be an Opinion column in a local Newspaper, except you never have to retract anything.
It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.
The times are changing, get with it.
You post to Slashdot, and you're concerned with a waste of resources? Bwahaha!!
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Blogs are famous to be independent, but they transport usually a very narrow point of view. If you don't like a fact, why would you blog it? Blogs are a perfect complement to mainstream media: They comment on facts that are easily overseen. They ask questions the journalists forgot. Sometimes bog contents go to mainstream.
Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.
Frankly, this assessment doesn't sound too far off to me. A major portion of understanding a field in depth is categorizing the raw data one has compiled in order to turn it into information. Blogs just aren't capable of doing something like this without sinking to the lowest common political bias.
A major strength of having access to a large library is actually having a librarian point out where to find a large body of information on the field you're interested in. But once you get there, the sheer volume of information precludes the possibility of a librarian introducing a political bias, though there might be a systematic bias in the publishing world.
After all, I am strangely colored.
As boring as it might sound...to me at least...my mom started from the ground up a yellow pages for librarians which was freely distrubuted and stayed afloat by librarian vendors paying to advertise in her free publication. She started it 14 years ago and She is selling it within the next two weeks because the market has run dry. The point of all this? Her buisness did just fine until google came along. Why do you need to go to a library and support them when you have a wealth of information at your fingertips? What is closer your pc which resides in your room, or the closest library? You do the math. This is just a case of someone who is bitter towards the "google" generation because it steals his buisness. Just ask my mom =|
In the case of bloggers: "First they don't read your blog, then they laugh at your blog, then that's pretty much it."
Comparing the "blogging phenomena" to the Indian independence movement is a fine way to illustrate your massive sense of self-importance, though.
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
Sounds like a classic (and rather well written) shot in a blog war.
You're one of us now Michael.
Enjoy the ride and don't worry, the blogger-shagging is great fun.
'There is a Light that never goes out.'
Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen
Yeah, he does have a point:
Besides, I don't think we can trust the guy. Of course he sounds official. Er. Officious. He uses a lot of big words, like "antidigitalist" and "progressives" and "hubris" and "neologism" and "pillory"...
the beginning of the web and blogs finally being categorized via the dewey decimal system. Quick, buy stock in card catalog cabinet manufacturers!
He's just bitter because the idea of mapping IP addresses to the Dewey Decimal System never caught on.
-- Gah.
Be proud, don't hide, that was a fantastic post!
The similarity to the open source debate is too close to ignore. You have company/association using traditional cathedral model, relying on hierarchy structure for quality control, and home types using the bazaar model, relying on incessant peer review.
I think the fact that this guy is commenting at all is a sign that the cathedral model is losing again.
What do you think ?
Servlet v2.4 container in a single 161KB jar file ? Try Winstone
If he is opposed to "inefficient search" then the Dewey Decimal system must infuriate him. Google is great for getting a rough idea of what is out there, occasionally it may lead you to something really worthwhile - but most of the time it only cuts down on the early legwork, something very worth doing.
[Set Cain on fire and steal his lute.]
This guy is pretty biased, and sounds like a conservative.
But even conservatives in America - who aren't fascists - allow for freedom of speech and freedom of the press.
If you don't want to read someone's blog - you don't have to. Apparently the seeming paradox here is that this well-educated and distinguised fellow spends his time reading the rantings of what he considers uneducated, pompous asses. Why waste your time, fool, if you really don't like bloggers? Why are you so threatened by a group of people - or one person - expressing themselves over a medium that YOU must subscribe to or go to in order to read? Why not just continue to read your high-society books and keep your head buried in the past?
I mean, after all, you're reading the rantings of someone who is below you.
Then again, he consdiders computer enthusiasts a "sub-class" of bloggers? I think he's confused and his anger is clouding his rational thought, if he has any.
He's more guilty of being a raving lunatic than those he points his fingers at. Sad.
I've not yet started to keep a Web Log, but I think that now I'm a bit more motivated by this self-righteous bigot of a man who belittles himself by attacking those he consideres his subordinates, yet gives them more airtime than his own progress in the field of communications.
Brooklyn.
Hasn't he effectively described Slashdot?
Of course this guy hates blogs. They're forms of publishing that are outside the limitations of print and finally allow a marketplace of ideas for everyone to participate in and contribute to. Call it the "new media" if you want to. Someday our books will probably just be portable book-sized web browsers that access the book URI somewhere via wireless Internet3, with hotspots as common as streetlights. Here's hoping Slashdot has a new design by then. Hey, a guy can dream.
Those all knowing blog poeple with their digitization... The searching algorithms are the tool of the devil! I can look trought 10 books a day and that's the way I likes it.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
Blogs are to the media what open source is to software...if enough eyes look at a story, the odds of a critical piece of information slipping through the cracks is drastically lower, even if the prose in question looks suspiciously like the product of 20 billion drunken monkeys. Case in point: Guckert-gate. A whole room full of professional journalists, who no doubt possess grammatical skills far greater than the average blogger, missed the obvius fact that the schmuck in the front row asking questions was a GOP plant. Leave the creation of literature to the literati...blogs are at their best when they keep the "real" media honest.
Didn't this guy write his blog-bash in a blog?
Is this the first published online usage of the term in english? Google thinks so.
but Michael Gorman seems like he has something shoved up his sphicter. Blogs are not created for producing highbrow english texts anymore than surrealist painting is for portaits..... Each is a form of human expression and should be examined under that light
This message was brought to you by "Lack of Sleep."
"Bloggers think they're going to be the revolution of the press, and that they'll take the place of the New York Times and Washinton Post, and Newscorp will crumble at their feet."
Who cares what they think? Some people believe that the messiah is coming and some people believe that trees have souls. Who cares?
"And they think they're the future of the media?"
You seem to be confident that they aren't simply based on thier opinions of where the future of blogging could go in terms of journalism, but it isn't journalism - it's the op ed page in all of the newspapers you mentioned above.
Who cares what bloggers that you don't care about think, say, or do? They're entitled to write - thank God - thanks to the freedom of the Internet. Let them express opinions - be it wrong or right, moral or immoral - because the more we hear thoughts from fellow humans, the more quicker we move towards progress for a better world.
Or did you not understand that?
Why is everyone so threatened by bloggers?? You're only giving them more credibility!
Brooklyn
...You have to think it in a voice like Bill Buckley's or the millionaire guy from Gilligan's Island.
Yes... Quite!
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
I hope he realizes that while most blogs aren't worth the bytes they are printed on in terms of content, there are enough gems that one can't write the entire concept off as a bad idea. In any case, judging bloggers by the quality of their writing largely misses the point--blogs aren't supposed to be a regulated, edited, meticulously researched medium of writing--they are a means of sharing thoughts with the world without having to jump through hoops. Whether the world listens, complains, enjoys the blog, takes offense to it, or feels that the author should have gingerly lucubrated every detail as if each entry were a Nobel Prize acceptance speech is beside the point entirely.
Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. --E. W. Dijkstra
Haven't we all been in a social situation (out to dinner or a bar, for example) where a serious conversation starts up about a serious topic and what ends up happening is that the folks with the least informed opinions do much of the talking, whereas the ones with a more enlightened view say very little? There must be some facet to the human condition that predicates that ignorance breeds arrogance, and wisdom breeds restraint.
Our current U.S. political climate bears this out.
There are plenty of articulate and educated bloggers, certainly. But there are many many more who aren't. We should slow down and think more about the quality of our information, not just the quantity.
2/25/05
hay wutz up?? nuttin much happenin here. so some assclown from da ala said us bloggers suck like he wantz us 2 read moby dick or smth. funk dat. i type fine you can understand this right?? lol!!!
oh yeh anne sez that patty made out with some random guy after soccer practiz!!!!!! lolololololol i cant wate to im her with that chatting aim bot thing and pretend im him. i gots sum report due tomarow on some westing game book but i just googled it and got some kidz one. hahaha.
peace xoxo
But seriously, who thinks blogs are where great literatire is to be found anyway? The best blogs-with-a-purpose seem to be the ones that report news stories the mainstream media won't cover. The blurring of the Tinfoil Hat as it were. Anyway, when I want good literature I usually turn to a book. For example in the wake of last weekend's suicide by one of my favorite writers, Hunter S. Thompson, I decided to finally crack open a copy of Hey Rube given to me last year which I had not gotten around to reading. I found this in the Author's Note at the very beginning:
You don't need to wear a Tinfoil Hat these days to see that the plutocracy now in power in the U.S. controls the message and the media. Bloggers who attempt the lost art of Journalism can become a powerful force for truth and justice, keeping the old-guard media whores honest (if that's even possible anymore). But I don't think the ALA has to worry about dumbing down Americans' interest in literature. For 90% of the masses television finished that off decades ago.
I'm no blogging cheerleader, but the patronizing tone he uses is bound to alienate a less enthusiastic booster of the blogosphere than I. He comes across as an arrogant prig who's using his (extremely limited) bully pulpit to bash those about whom he admittedly (and rather proudly) knows little. I have nothing but regard for the ALA and love my local libraries, but this mocking, snobbish attitude isn't going to win anyone over to his side.
What I got out of it is that the president of the ALA is afraid that his way of life and his preferred methods af acquiring information are becoming less relevant, and rather than changing the way he and his association do business, he figures he'll stand up and mock the people who are changing things in hope that others wil listen. Nice try, man.
Bloggers leach off the main stream and not so main stream media. Occasionally they find something original. Dan Rather, Churchill, and Easton Jordan all got their shove down the mountain from bloggers. Every once in awhile the MSM picks up a story from bloggers.
Their goal is not to replace the MSM, but to provide a single point of entry for people to get a wide range of stories that the MSM won't touch or simply glosses over.
Claiming that bloggers aren't real journalists is as retarded as claiming people who work on open source aren't real programmers.
The only difference between bloggers and the MSM is that there are more independent bloggers and as such the quality ranges from very low to very high which the MSM has a pretty consistent level. Quality blogs issue corrections very fast based on reader input. The MSM occasionally posts corrections on page 100 in the corner fine print.
You can't go to Live Journal and make rediculous generalizations about bloggers. The MSM is just pissed that they're getting ripped on by "amatures" and people are losing their jobs because of it. The MSM is no longer an unchallenged medium. How often does the LA Times print objections to something the Washington Post wrote?
The goal isn't the be the new media but rather to complement the existing forms of media by bringing in a variety of sources to a single location.
It's a lot easier to go to a blog and see what's going on around the world than it is to visit a dozen different MSM sites.
Work Safe Porn
"Bloggers think they're going to be the revolution of the press, and that they'll take the place of the New York Times and Washinton Post, and Newscorp will crumble at their feet."
How about something like, "Ah, you give these guys a printing press and before you know it, everyone's on about the king. I say, hang 'em!"
After all, it wasn't long ago that most people got their news from CBS/NBC/CNN and in less than a few years THAT'S changed.
Elitism works boths ways methinks. Just a thought...
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
I'm very sorry to see that the ALA Prez (an org I respect) cannot see past his dead trees. Yes, blogspace is hard to archive, and much of it low quality -- because it hasn't been selected [censored] by printing press owners. There are also some gems.
Let me counter your Gandhi with the traditional monkey analogy. If you have a couple million monkeys hammering away at their keyboards for a few years, undoubtedly they will produce some remarkable works. Not Shakespeare perhaps, but quite possibly e.e.cummings (which is still literature, of sorts).
The problem, of course, is that to get those rare gems of the blogosphere, you have to wade through seventy metric fucktons of monkey shit (99% of lj etc). I am not in the mood for such adventures. I wait for people or organizations whom I trust (/., boingboing, etc.) to give me the links. In short, access the blogosphere through a publisher.
Fact of life. People (yuck) often want to touch books! Books as we know hold _KNOWLEDGE_ as well as _HIS WORD_ and are thus sacred things that should be cared for by librarians and touched as little as possible by people.
I think most blogs suck too, while not being a librarian myself...
realkiwi
Evidently, this man is somewhat, umm overly convinced that his opinion matters. Until this article I had never heard of him. How then, does his smelly opinion even matter?
ALA President Not Fond of Bloggers Like we care...
fuvoo: watch something
The fortune at the bottom of the page right now reminds me of another Lazarus Long quote that seems appropos of bloggers:
"Despotism is the idea that one man is smarter than a million men. Democracy is the idea that a million men are smarter than one man. Who decides?"
Why should I pay attention to what any blogger has to say? And why does the fact that there are a million bloggers change the answer to that question?
And of course, there's the old saying about opinions and assholes...
I read professional sites/magazines/newspapers because I have reason to believe that, due to the training and experience of those who run it, and those who report for it, what is published has a good chance of being approximately true, and approximately informed. While it is true (before others point it out) that this belief is becoming increasingly unlikely to be true, nevertheless I have NO such expectation for any random blogger's musings, and so I see no reason to read them, except perhaps for amusement.
Blogs as the future of journalism? I doubt it. I certainly fear it.
"Don't blame the log for the fire." --Andrew Ratshin
In the eyes of bloggers, my sin lay in suggesting that Google is OK at giving access to random bits of information but would be terrible at giving access to the recorded knowledge that is the substance of scholarly books. I went further and came up with the unoriginal idea that the thing to do with a scholarly book is to read it, preferably not on a screen.
I've found lots of useful knowledge through Google's book searching, although I've used it mainly to see which books were worth going to the library to check out. It's a lot easier to have a title and author in hand rather than trying to find the many places that books on flow cytometry might be found. The Dewey Decimal System and subject searches at the library are useful, but not for very specific things.
I do agree with him on some of his points-- one being that most blogs out there are quite horrendous-- but he's yelling at the wrong people to get his main ideas heard. If he wants Google to spend money funding libraries instead, talk to Google, not to a community of mostly-pissed-off bloggers.
Anyway, in other parts of the article, he makes legitimate points (IMO) about using google link as substitutes for deep understanding. But then again, he may be living in a reality distortion field after all.
While I agree some things aren't as googable as others, quotes like this make me question whether the guy actually uses the Internet or just trying to make a career complaining about it. Regardless, Google, blogs, and the Blog Subhuman species he refers to all have done wonders to raise the profile of one Michael Gorman, President of the ALA.
Maybe it's just me (in fact, it's *probably* just me), but I can imagine Ed Tuft steaming in the background -- "Whining about the display of information is MY turf, pal! If you know what's good for you Michael, you will let this rest...NOW"
Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'
Ooh, Michael Gorman, I see you have mastered the skill of making generalizations...
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
...their subclass who are interested in computers and the glorification of information...
Ranting against those who are interested in computers and the glorification of information?? Isn't he...erm...a LIBRARIAN??? The glorification of information, if I am not mistaken, is his JOB.
Ride the skies
A blog is a species of interactive electronic diary by means of which the unpublishable, untrammeled by editors or the rules of grammar, can communicate their thoughts via the web. (Though it sounds like something you would find stuck in a drain, the ugly neologism blog is a contraction of "web log.") Until recently, I had not spent much time thinking about blogs or Blog People.
The word "blog" has existed for years now and has become so ubiquitous that most news channels, TV shows, magazines, and newspapers don't even feel the need to define it, let alone pick apart a word that practically everyone already knows the root of by now. This is like a radio DJ ranting about MTV in the '80s and starting his speech off by defining the term "television".
If you're just now learning what the word "blog" means and believe that the people around you have no clue what it could mean or where it comes from, you're at least a couple of years behind the times, and are far less qualified than the average American to speak about the subject. If Tom Brokaw could regularly use it during the news coverage the presidential election a few months ago without even bothering to define it, it's pretty damn mainstream.
...trying to convince anyone about a news groups' impartiality. First of all, it's simply not true - EVERY news group has some degree of filtering going on.
The basic problem many on the Left have with Fox is that it's not the party line that is CNN/NBC/ABC/CBS. Ask them what the real difference is between THOSE networks and they really can't tell you. That's because they are, and have always been left-leaning.
Then when one network comes along and at least PRETENDS to present another side, these guys go ape. The reason why Fox News is KILLING the others is because of the obvious difference in reporting. And if you can't understand that mindset, then you're probably still in shock over the election too.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
If you consider the sum total of all books printed you'd find that the average quality of the text would probably be at a 6th grade level due to the fact that infinitely more trashy pulp novels are printed each year than there are noble prize winning books describing the social structure of ants in Ebonia.
Same thing goes with blogs.
Not everyone has talent, but most people think they do. And that's true for writers *and* bloggers.
--Rob
A few links to librarian blogger responses:
Free Range Librarian
librarian.net -- "blog people say "ugh" to Michael Gorman"
After the fact, Micheal apparently has claimed that he was being satirical, in which case he didn't write the article very well. Gotta add more smileys, I guess...
it's so true. as a programmer turned public administrator (think MBA without the greed...please dont flame me, lol) i turn to slashdot because it satisfies my interests in random tech factoids and associates me with a specific class of people -- geeks and a bit of nostalgia.
On the other hand, without slashdot and friends in the open source and non-MSM community i would be reliant on marketing and MSM advertisements for all my information. as a soon-to-be public admin (im back in grad school), those random facts and paragraphs from slashdot help me see other options outside of relying on information from private companies whose goal is profit (whether accenture or the NYTimes) -- and thus well help me make decisions that are more fiscally responsible AND equitable -- wouldn't i prefer to fund open source and possibly invest in local communities instead of encouraging IP ownership by major international corporations?
the ALA fails to understand the value of the dissenting voice...and the also fail to look forward toward stronger quality controls (which readers will demand and aggregation/knowledge management)....they'll get it over time i'm sure, but like many managers confronted with changes in organizational structure/processes due to tech, they're only viewing the negative side of the changes
He wrote a column about google.
Some people, The Blog People, Flamed him, Trolling him successfully into hi-jacking his own dialog, and now is talking about 'Blog People.'
It's nothing but an everyday ol' flame war.
His original article, basicly saying Google sucks, was flamebait.
Just a n00b being trolled. Nothing more.
Now I've seen Everything
It seems to me that blogs help people develop an understanding of the links between information. For that matter, I think the main value of blogs and homepages is the building of links between the blog and world at large. A well linked blog becomes a discussion with the world.
In someways, blogs are a welcome relief from published literature which can be a bit too introspective or polished. I do agree with the librarian who is dismayed at the hype given blogs. Everything in computers gets overhyped. Individual blogs like mine really mean nothing. In aggregation, they provide an interesting topology of the concerns of our culture.
Well, he just stated that the self-expression of most of the bloggers correctly reflects their intellectual development level
They're both true, of course, but it's silly to forget either one in a debate.
I'm a novelist, and my work has been nominated for ALA awards in the past. I think there's something to be said for the point of view that blog writing is not as complex as what is found in most published books. On the other hand, I think this is overlooking the value of blogs. Blogs are not meant to be, usually, examples of sophisticated writing, and people who like blogs to read/write, may also like most sophisticated works. It is NOT an either/or. I blog on my webpage in an effort to be accessible to interested readers of my work, and potential readers, by providing insight into my writing an my life as a scientist. My goal in blogging is not the same as it is with my novels, and I don't see a problem with that. We need a diversity in writing the same way we need diversity in all artistic expression. Limmericks and haiku are not as sophisticated as sonnets as sestinas, but that doesn't make them bad.
Professor of Astronomy, Author of Spider Star & Star Dragon (Tor)
"17th. This morning bade adieu in bed to the company of my wife. We rose and I gave my wife some money to serve her for a time, and what papers of consequence I had. Then I left her to get her ready and went to my Lord's with my boy Eliezer to my Lord's lodging at Mr. Crew's. Here I had much business with my Lord, and papers, great store, given me by my Lord to dispose of as of the rest. After that, with Mr. Moore home to my house and took my wife by coach to the Chequer in Holborn, where, after we had drank, &c., she took coach and so farewell. I staid behind with Tom Alcock and Mr. Anderson, my old chamber fellow at Cambridge his brother, and drank with them there, who were come to me thither about one that would have a place at sea. Thence with Mr. Hawly to dinner at Mr. Crew's. After dinner to my own house, where all things were put up into the dining-room and locked up, and my wife took the keys along with her."
Wow. What a momentous day, he did some paperwork then had a drink and dinner with some friends. And yet I'll bet the ALA have a copy of this diary, and respect Pepys as a great writer.
It's horses for courses. Blogs aren't intended to produce Literature, they're just an informal comments trail or perhaps a progress report on something (development blogs).
Cheers,
Ian
after more than 40 years of working in libraries ... I have spent a lot of my long professional life working on aspects of the noble aim of Universal Bibliographic Control--a mechanism by which all the world's recorded knowledge would be known, and available, to the people of the world.
and (5) his desire to show that the old man is still a "hep cat", and "with it", with phrases like "burned at the virtual stake". Here is a howler:My sin against bloggery is that I do not believe this particular project will give us anything that comes anywhere near access to the world's knowledge.
Well, allow me to retort! You are probably wrong and you certainly don't have a clue about Zipf's law or social network theory, or just the fun of publishing in a less self important way that writing some crusty rant in the Los Angeles Times.
In wartime... truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies. (Churchill)
Mike writes an article. Some people don't like it, so he writes another article explaining himself. Isn't he, kind of, well, blogging?
Fox is full of inaccurate and one-sided reporting
I think its time that we started to seperate terms for these things . .You cant compare the diary of say a mozilla developer with the reporting of War storys or what Susangirl131 had done to her hair
Such an eclectic grouping of diffrent styles all under one name.
A tape , a Hardrive , a book , a cave wall and a CD all of these things perform the same purpose The storage of information , perhaps im using a bit of hyperbole
though i think it makes my point well
The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
...William Shatner?
Google is, in fact, the device that gives you thousands of "hits" (which may or may not be relevant) in no very useful order.
Wow, what a total lack of reasearch on this guys part... Google gives you results based on the number of other sites that refer to the results. The more sites that refer to a result, the higher it's relevancy. It's an extremely efficient system, as the idea that other people can find relevancy in a site is trusted. (And it works.)
Real programmers can write assembly code in any language. -- Larry Wall
I don't really fault all librarians for this, some of them try to have a diversity to choose from, but the system is stacked against them. Thank goodness there's the Internet. Right now I am helping a group (who have some contacts with Project Gutenberg, and might send them material, but are operating autonomously for now) putting material on the Internet. I am scanning and OCR'ing material that is legally public domain, so that people all over the world can read it. In another window, I am writing an article for a wiki encyclopedia which I am sure is a lot different than the Encarta entry on the topic - and which goes into more detail as well because these encyclopedias pay a lot of attention to kings and wealthy people but very little to workers, peasants and so forth.
I also work at a local infoshop (bookstore) run by volunteers which has a free lending library (with a $5 refundable deposit) containing books hard to find in corporate chain bookstores. We get a lot of customers even though we only have ONE bookshelf while there are thousands of public library bookshelves within a mile of our store, that should tell people about the narrowness of material on certain topics.
It's all about empowering the reader. Libraries and traditional encyclopedias don't do that, and now they are railing against what is replacing them. The smart ones will get witht he program and start empowering their readers.
No mention of John Kerry, what he had for dinner, what his cats are doing, how he's ass-fucking an administration official, or how another blog got credit for something he wrote about first.
--Rob
Is it just me, or is it ironic that the parent's comment was modded up?
Never have I seen a more accurate description of Slashdot.
24d0a008b73bc87f81f04d8f2a325a66
Mr. Gorman, sadly, falls into the latter category. He is the president-elect of the American Library Association, which maintains a lobbying office three blocks from the White House.
Here you have an interesting specimen of the increasingly rare species "Effetus snobbius", known colloquially as an "Ivory Tower Windbag" (because of their incredible lung capacity). People just don't appreciate these rare creatures... They used to be more common, you know.
Originally, their lifecycle depended on consuming large numbers of dead trees. In that way they were similar to beavers, although they stacked their dead trees in structures made of other dead trees and avoided water almost entirely. This gave them a somewhat musty odor, which we suspect may have aided in the gradual erosion of their ability to locate mating partners. Sadly, in the past twenty years, we have failed to locate even one female willing to mate with a Snobbius. The species is almost certainly going to go extinct. And, what with bloggers destroying their natural habitat, well... What chance do the poor creatures have?
My, but this is a fine specimen. And, he's feisty, too! It's such a shame.
Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
I have on several occasions tried to find a book that covers some particular detail of something, and failed, only to later find it by accident in a different book that I wouldn't have expected to cover it. Mr. Gorman must never have had this experience, or he would welcome new tools to help him find relevant books.
I suspect that this is what the bloggers understand and have not been successful in conveying to him. But since I don't know specifically which blogs and bloggers he's referring to, it's hard to say.
I think we could use a little context here. Gorman had written an article. for the LATimes questioning the value of Google's search engine for books (as contrasted with say spending the money on a library). The position of the article is that information in context (i.e. in a book written by a researcher) is worth far less to someone doing research than a far greater quantity of facts without the organizational structure of a book.
Bloggers who focus primarily on
-- putting together collections of obscure references
-- often don't have formal training in their areas
objected to the classical approach to research that Gorman advocated.
I see this article as written response the blogs which attacked Gorman. As a society we could wonders on the library front for a fraction of the cost of projects like Google's; this is a point that no one questions. The real issue is what is the relative value of libraries as contrasted with digital information repositories.
Blogging proposes a very democratic model of information evaluation that any intelligent person given access to the information will be able to derive the correct conclusions quickly and easily. The classic approach argues that a guided program of study is highly advisable prior deviling into raw sources of information. In feeds in which you are an expert which approach do you think is more correct?
----
Go canucks, habs, and sens!
next thread please...
welcome our intellectualy fulfilled by random facts and paragraphs Blog People overlords.
Did the aliens also steal your Shift key?
Mark Cuban had an interesting blog entry about the bloggers.
If the head of the ALA were a publisher, he would know that the overall quality of bloggers' work is no worse than the output of the vast majority of so-called "writers" who submit manuscripts. The fact that some people have talent and others don't is a trivial and uninteresting observation. His reaction sounds more like resentment that mediocre authors, whose work otherwise wouldn't be published, are able to attract large audiences on the web. Maybe he thinks they don't deserve it. Or maybe there's a crumpled up rejection slip in his wastebasket.
I think people need to be clear about what it is they're seeking when assessing whether blogs can replace media.
If it's news, it's highly unlikely that someone sitting in his bedroom somewhere in the suburbs or a city apartment can replace the networks with their hundreds of trained journalists around the world ready to be at the scene of the event.
If it's analysis and opinion, then fine. Read all you want. But personally, I have come to the conclusion that most of those whose analysis and opinion I value are very unlikely to be blogging because they usually have better things to do and better outlets to distribute their words.
If it's gossip and rumors, then yes, possibly, I could see blogs being of some use there. That's more likely.
I think blogs are musings, for amusement. Nothing more. Even those of the highest traffic usually have a very, very low standard of journalism.
I think the ALA homeslice has a point, but I think he neglects to consider the Darwinian effects of peer selection. Sure there are a lot of crappy blogs. This is the predictable result of anyone being able to create one. If a twelve year old or a fan of Lenny Kravitz can make a blog, there will always be crappy blogs. But from this huge pile of crap Darwinian forces will allow a meritocracy of brilliance to rise from the slime.
The flag just makes more sense than the constitution. - Judas Gutenberg
He says what I often felt which is:
those who do do, those who can't blog
Blogs are for consumers and bimbos to talk about fluff; like that they woke up and had a cup coffee, or they really think some celebrity is 'cute' or they just bought an iPod or something. Whatever. Do I look like I give shit ?
They are not for creators and those with something to really say.
There are probably 1 or 2 interesting blogs out there, but most of them I have seen are just an ego trip into drivel and trivia mania by clueless authors who think it's cool to have a website up about absolutely nothing.
I remember a year or 2 back the Guardian newspaper in the UK was saying how wonderful blogs were and how they were going to change the world, politics and so on. But that seems unlikely when the majority of blogs are about what I do for a living/pictures of my office, pictures of my cat, iPod mods, cute pixel graphics or what some other blog is gossiping about etc etc.
Ironic that something that was 'supposed' to encourage radical new ideas and thought has become exclusively a tool used by people with nothing to say
Life is too short for blogs.
cool, can u post a link?
The image that this woman is describing of a blogger is preety extreme and bogus. Sure, I read Slashdot, I read some comments and I post some comments. Period. I don't consider myself a blogger. I also watch TV, read books, the NYT and listen to the radio. None of these media by themselves would accurately describe my life. Nor they are my only source of knowledge (by all means!).
I don't think that most of the people around here devote their lives to blogging. If you work at slashdot, or you are an editor (I don't know how that works) you would be considered a "pro" blogger. Big deal. Any profession confines you to an area of specialization, I don't think that this is particularly harmful in that respect. Even in this case I'm preety sure that is better than people that dedicate their lives to cat shows as far as intellectual development goes.
If this is all you read, this is all you write and if you think that you are changing the world by ranting about MS in this forum, yes, you are a /. blogger and the description of this woman may very well fit you.
I remember talking once to a person of a numerically unimportant religion, considered to be a little crazy. She said to me: yes, there are some people like that, but for some reason, people tend to identify us with the most exaggerate ones; they are a minority in our group and they don't run the show.
True bloggers are a tiny minority, not representative of the crowd.
- # -
You my friend have become a caricature of your own people. And now, everybody thinks that they are all like you.
He might as well say, "I don't like people having discussions." After all, isn't that what a blog is? Me talking about what's going on in my life, or in my mind, in a soliloquy of sorts? It's not supposed to be a fucking library, it's a collection of things that people feel the need to write down, so that other people can read it and learn what's happening. Complete apples/oranges scenario.
The gentleman who heads the ALA is perhaps nervous for some reason, otherwise he wouldn't have a need to attack blogs as if they were comparable to libraries. Might as well just say he hates boats because they don't fly.
Blogs are not a replacement for books. Check.
Blogs are not a replacement for news. Check.
What are blogs good for then? Mostly as a sort of news-filter. I can't imagine sitting down and reading an entire newspaper every day. It might be worthwhile, but frankly I doubt it. Most newspapers have alot of filler, and I'm just not interested in whatever they "put in front of" me most of the time.
However, I do read slashdot alot, since it generally grabs stories that I am interested in. Then I read the posts, because every once and awhile someone knowledgable adds something, or relates a story which is interesting.
I completely understand what he is saying about blogs as direct sources of news. Bloggers either go out and investigate stories (very rarely) or they just pull information off of established news sources (somewhat common) or they actually seek out and find sources that agree with their views, and then they use it as a sort of evidence in favor of those views (almost always).
This last bit is the really perverse part, although there doesn't seem to be much danger. Rush Limbaugh has been lying three hours every weekday for 15 years and the world isn't melting quite yet, and now there is Air America to give the inverse lie to Rush's 24 hours a day.
The REAL problem with political blogging is many-fold. The first is that they do not attempt anything like a NPOV in selecting stories. If you use blogs as a primary source for information you are effectively screwing yourself over. It goes something like this:
1. You are interested in the World and what is going on.
2. You seek out news to fulfill that curiosity.
3. You find a blog or blogs, and use them for your day to day news.
4. Profit! (Blogs, not you)
5. You read one sided news guided by the political philosophy of the blogger(s).
Thus you defeat 1. since you are not finding out about the world and what is going on, rather you are finding out exactly the facts about the world that reinforce the political view held by the blogger.
Another thing that is REALLY wrong with blogs is that they are at best tertiary sources of information. They don't generally interview news makers, or investigate outside of what can be found on the internet. So nothing new is contributed, they just repackage someone else's work, or give you their straightup opinion and analysis, which is really likely to be crap.
Some people will say that their political beliefs are made up, so it doesn't matter that they only see news that reinforces those beliefs. These people are complete idiots. If you cannot possibly imagine a world where evidence could come along that would cause you to modify your political beliefs then your imagination is broke.
Finally, there is the gruesome twosome of political discourse, Confidence and Understanding. Most political hacks (including bloggers) truely believe that they understand what is wrong with the world and given the chance to run it, the world would run smoothly and happily, wheras the other side either doesn't 'get it' or knows they (the hacks) are right and intentionally ruins things for personal gain.
That is to say, most political idealogs believe in the incompetence of everyone but their side, or in a conspiracy of ignorance, where everyone who disagrees is just refusing to admit the truth for some reason. If you don't believe me read some of the right wing blogs where they actually say that "the left intentionally ruined education in america to produce a dependant welfare class who would then have to vote for Democrats" or in left wing blogs where they say "the right intentionally created the national debt so that the interest payments would force the government to cut spending in other areas". These statements are actually very common, and are but a selection from the insanity of each side.
But the "understanding" of these hacks is apparently so developed that they can analyze any problem anywhere, and the analysis never reads (which it almost always should if they are being honest or weren't blinded by ideology) "we just don't know, it's really really complicated".
there day or rambling on about there hobby. the majorty of them are just that little online diarys people post to. There not some big media outlet like the media makes them out to be.
I'm perplexed. Google - "notoriously inefficient"? What the heck is this guy talking about? What am I missing?
Unfortunately, the op-ed piece didn't link to the origional article (or any discussion on it). Blog People would have managed to do so, by the way. So I was forced to look for it on my own. On Google. And found it. First try.
Huh.
I use Google daily. And since most of my querries involve technical subjects, Google tends to serve me very well. And while Google is usually stellar on non-technical subjects too, there are times that I just don't find what I need. It seems there are some rare subjects that just don't get good coverage on the Web. But then - isn't that what this digitization project is about? Bridging Web-based knowledge with classic print?
Again - I'm obviously missing this guy's point.
Though he makes a few valid points, I doubt this rant of his was in the best interests of libraries (in general).
The number of people reading books keeps decreasing each year. The number of people going to libraries keeps decreasing even more. Around here, at least, people seem to prefer anything to a library.
If he wants more people in libraries, the last thing he should do is alienate kids. (I'm generalizing, but in my experience most bloggers seem to be in the 12-18 category). If he positions himself as "against" bloggers and blogging, more people will be skipping libraries and preferring to stick to the internet for their information.
This may not be a bad thing on the whole, but it's bad for libraries IMO.
StrayByte.Net
Mood: Flustered
I'm reading:
a history book called _Marriage and Family in Medieval Times_ by Frances and Joseph Gies.
before that, _Cathederal, Forge and Waterwheel: Technological Innovation in the Middle Ages_ by the same authors.
before that, _The Sparrow_ by Mary Doria Russell.
No wonder this guy's not to fond of blog culture. Librarians are people who delight in seeing well referenced works that can be categorized and easily referenced. Most blogs are poorly referenced or use other blogs as evidence to support their opinions. It must be like listening to nails on chalkboards to read that sort of thing to them.
Stop intellectual property from infringing on me
That here we are, creating an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs, with no attempt to build up to a complex document ...
Did Mr. Gorman just troll Slashdot??
If you honestly believe that CNN is left-leaning, I think you need to seriously re-examine your definition of left. American media has always been right-leaning. If you think otherwise, you need to do long-term comparisons of what stories were covered in the American media and the language that was used to cover them. You will find that the liberal media myth is completely false and that the standards of journalism have been pulled to the right by reactionary "journalists" like Bill O'Reilly.
Just because you're less right wing than Bill O'Reilly doesn't mean you're leftist.
What Future?
If I want to read a textbook, I would do just that. Blogs are for casual writing. He's gotta feel proud of himself by editing his writing with complex looooong ass words and sentences. Holy crap, his writing reminds me of my history textbook.
http://www.theunrivaled.com
Blogs fill the same purpose that his little rant does. It lets people just say what they want, and people naturally gravitate towards blogs they find interesting. He may not call it a blog, and it lacks a feedback system, but he's essentially criticizing exactly what he's doing himself.
You gotta love someone who says YOU loath them while proving THEY loath you.
Seriously, while his comments may be accurate about a portion of the blogs out there, the elistist attitude and obvious lack of checking out some of the really top-notch resources out there are symptomatic of someone who's day is done: dead tree libraries just aren't as important as they used to be.
Blogs are glorified message boards and people like them because it's like having an auto+5 post. It's essentially reality TV for the Internet...so I guess it's reality internet.
It will not replace modern journalisim because modern journalisim will replace itself. At best it could make editorial pages less read.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
Ahhhhh yes, if he could only speak english..........
~Alan
I think what he fails to realize is that the benefit of blogs over mainstream press is that the amount of noise present directly equates to more information from which to sift.
In the sense of traditional information theory, noise is information (to simplify a bit). Without noise there is homogenization of signal equating to a lack of movement toward chaos or entropy. Information therefore is created by breaking down communication channels, altering the signal (in this case news) between source and destination. The creation of noise hence creates a dynamic system of information in which all elements are going toward a state of complexity.
Complexity = good.
When extrapolated toward blog vs. popular press, blogs present a situation in which subjective filtering and emergence from it creates the content, rather than content coming from one source.
It is a distributed publishing model which puts the onus of interpretation, use and distillation upon the reader rather than the propagator of said content.
So taking information theory and applying it to blogs, blogs create more dynamic states from which useful information can be gleaned, but it changes the practice of information dispersal to the extent that the hierarchy which typified the dissemination of information pre-Internet has been flattened and in some sense elimnated. No longer is there a differentiation between the reductive properties of grass-roots press and large press.
The issue I see with this guy is not that he is a Luddite, but that he is threatened by the breakdown of the hegemony imposed previously be the hiearchy created by movable type and the publishing industry.
Having read TFA, I find myself struck by nothing so much as how very much like a blog entry this alleged "article" reads...
SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
Hmm. It's true, the same sort of things *were* said about the first newspapers. Of course, it's also true that early newspapers were a lot more like the blogs of today than like today's mainstream media: they were independent, aggressive, personal, propagandistic, & often wildly inaccurate.
There's no inherent reason to assume that the blogosphere won't be lulled into complacency over time, as well. After all, just because you have access to a medium doesn't mean you'll use it; photocopying brought print publication within reach of the unwashed masses, but how many people do you know who write zines?
(Zines were going to be a revolution too, anyone remember that??)
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
...that I've been chatting online with babes all day." --Kip, Napoleon Dynamite
Authority questions you. Return the favor.
fuck you
You mean left-leaning, but still on the right?
Most of the bloggers I know (ie, my livejournal friends) are in fact voracious readers. What they write in their diary is no indication of how much reading they do, how good they are at writing, or their level of education.
The worst offender on my friends list is in fact an English student in her third year of college. She works in a library and takes every advantage of her unlimited access to it. The serious writing she does is very good and she gets high marks for it in class.
But the fact of the matter is that a livejournal is just a diary you share with your friends. Historically, diary entries have been kept short in no small part because to do otherwise is very time consuming. The fact that you are keeping a diary at all is an indication that you are embarking on some kind of adventure and actually going about living your life. As such, you don't have a lot of time at the end of the day to write much, unless your living is made as a writer.
I encourage Mr. Gorman to read the diaries of others and stop passing judgement on those who write them. He might stumble upon the plain fact that diaries usually aren't written by professional writers, but have their own worth anyway.
"No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
Seriously, I think this is one aspect of the serious Internet-derived problem of link-suck. It's really hard to stay focused when the mysterious lure of the next link-click lies before you. These days it is just so easy to get *VAST* amounts of meaningless data, but the effort of sustained reading (as in a non-fiction book) is harder to make. And cohesive writing? The limit of most Americans is about two sentences explaining the "honor and integrity" of Dubya.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
"Ask them what the real difference is between THOSE networks and they really can't tell you."
No, it's actually rather easy to spot the difference between Fox News and the rest of the networks.
The reason I find Fox News offensive is not simply because of any leanings in political spectrum (although I do think it is a right-leaning group); the reason I find Fox News so abhorrent is because it reduces complex issues into single-phrase arguments pundits can shout at each other on TV. I agree that CNN and other shows have these kind of things too - the earliest one I can remember is the McLaughlin Group on PBS I think (not sure). However, Fox News takes it to a new extreme.
Watch Hannity & Colmes sometimes; it makes your stomach turn to see issues that the American people need to see all nuanced facets of reduced to a Left vs. Right shouting match. Guess what, not all issues are as simple as that, and it's a travesty to the public to make it so. Listen to NPR news or the BBC sometimes, and tell me their careful, measured, discussions of the economics of the Social Security problem aren't far more informative and stimulating.
Fox hypes news using constant flag waving and important-sounding music while stripping the public discourse of any semblance of reason. THAT is why I dislike Fox News.
SMS, instant messaging, E-mail, message boards and blogs are all from time to time trashed by professional writters for not containing the same standard of writting as the traditional media, like (paper) letters, newspaper letter columns, and diaries (by grown-ups).
That is probably true if you look at average numbers. Well, apart from newspaper letter columns, which I find slightly below Usenet posts in quality. And we don't really know about the private media, we tend only to see written diaries and letters from famous people.
However, they also mean that a lot more people are writting than ever used the old media. Honestly, how many in here would ever consider writting to a newspaper letter column? And would you write long, carefully formulated letters to friends and family if you could not use SMS, IM or email? And how many of the bloggers among you would write a diary instead?
What the professional writters are really complaing about is that they no longer have a virtual monopoly on writting. It is now for everyone. And of course, we are getting better at it. Much of the communication (like here) is done in public, and we can see which formulations get the point across and which doesn't. So while the writting may not become beautiful, it slowly becomes effective. At least for those who have anything at all to contribute.
The other part of it is that we become less impressed by the written word, now that it has become a daily tool of our own. We are much less likely to believe in something because it is written (in a a paper or book) than our parents were. Since we know no special skills are required to write and publish, we intuitively know that the written word is no more trsutworthy than the spoken word.
This also annoyes the professional writters, even if they don't know it.
I have heard the word "blog" for close to a year now, and I still don't know what it is.
Very few people I know would use the term "blog", it seems mostly in use by media people, talking about "them crazy internet kids".
"Blogs" are websites that are updated with material, periodically, I suppose. Lumping webpages that are updated regularly under one category is like lumping items made of wood under one category.
"Blogs" could include personal sites, like LiveJournal, that are mostly people's personal business, and aren't really meant to be taken seriously.
Is their some other type of blogs that I am not aware of?
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Correct. Everytime I hear the ignorant claim of "the liberal media" I politely ask the person who said this to tell my how Judith Miller got all those NYTimes (you know the big gay liberal paper) front page pieces about Iraq's WMD from anonymous sources. If they plead ignorance I then ask them to show me ANYWHERE in say, Harpers or The Nation, where those liberal stories intersect at all with what's presented on CNN et al. If they again plead ignorance then I ask them to debunk the propaganda model of media as described, with many examples, in Manufacturing Consent.
The "liberal media" is a nice meme that helps right-wing politicians get their way and keeps their supportoers from experiencing too much cognitive dissonance. its also completely and utterly false. Bias for all commercial media outlets can be traced to the ownership of that media outlet, profitability, nationalism, and fads.
...who saw that headline and thought that A List Apart was biting the hand that feeds it?
How much is the bush administration paying you to shill for them? Did they threaten to out you for as a gay prostitute if you did not help them spread their lies?
Random Paragraph: It takes the average seagull two years to learn how to successfully scavange at the local tip. To survive the learning curve it has the assistance of two devoted and well educated parents to guide it.
Hey look what I found at the tip
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
misplaced fear, but fear.
Gotta love that terror of something different than your own structure. Gets the heart pumping in the morning.
7. What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence.
Michael Gorman's frustration with the "blog people" is based on some bloggers' reactions to his criticism of Google's ambitious project to digitize millions of library books and make them available on the Internet. Clearly, Harvard University, Stanford University, Oxford University, the University of Michigan and the New York Public Library disagree with him, because they have chosen to let their books be digitized by Google. Years from now, Michael Gorman will be remembered more as a reactionary who opposes the technological advancement, and less as a man who is not fond of bloggers. By the way, I posted Gorman's biography on my all-news blog at: http://sundroid.blogspot.com/. There are some interesting facts you might want to know. And I invite slashdotters to visit my other blog, http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/, now that Mr. Gorman has questioned the quality of writing of the bloggers. You be the judge.
Sun and Fun
The previous link came from this one
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
>Go to http://www.foxnews.com/ and, outside of the opinion section, find me a story that is viciously partisan, or inaccurate.
Start here. You can thank me later.
The poor man has probably never had to watch sausage being made before, and is unfamiliar with Sturgeon's Law.
Further wisdom provided at moderation level 0.
Sometimes at night I imagine the darkness is filled with horrible things with too many teeth, like Julia Roberts.
This guy sounds like something from the 18th century!
My piece had the temerity to question the usefulness of Google digitizing millions of books and making bits of them available via its notoriously inefficient search engine. The Google phenomenon is a wonderfully modern manifestation of the triumph of hope and boosterism over reality. Hailed as the ultimate example of information retrieval, Google is, in fact, the device that gives you thousands of "hits" (which may or may not be relevant) in no very useful order.
Oh I see. This guy doesn't know shit. Nothing to see here, move along.
You have to live near a major urban center to have access to a decent physical library, if your needs go at all beyond the average. I once flew thousands of miles and spent weeks in NYC so that I could research a project at the NY Public Library, using materials I couldn't get anywhere near my home. This wasn't just a single book or journal that I could have had mailed to me -- I needed to track down cross-references, comb through original sources. Now I can get a signficant fraction of that material online, a fraction which increases every day.
That may be an extreme case, but it's just a scaled-up version of what every library-goer has to face -- you physically have to travel to the library, you have to deal with its constraints (quiet! don't eat in here! don't talk too loud!
Gorman is fighting a rearguard action along with every other member of a priest-like caste who made a career out of jealously guarding access to the world's books, music, movies, financial exchanges, etc. He, and others like him in the media and elsewhere, need to learn that the democratization of communication has both good and bad implications, just like the freedom of speech that makes it all possible. He should learn to stop generalizing about things that make him feel insecure. Until then, the opinions he's expressed are irrelevant and self-serving and should rightfully be ignored.
Typical arrogance. What is the the origin of the expression "anal retentive"? I've often wondered.
What amuses and annoys me about Michael Gorman's comments (and yes, I did read them and understand them) is how arrogant they are. Gorman, as President-Elect of the American Library Association, is not just proud enough to say how much smarter he is than other commentators about managing information. No, he's proud enough to dream of telling Google how to manage their money. He's proud enough to characterize a whole class of people intelligent enough to operate a computer as mouth-breathing idiots.
Best of all, he's very proud of how the Universal Bibliographic Control scheme he endorses will solve the world's information access problems. Now please understand: UBC doesn't actually give anyone access to source materials. In point of fact, it seems to be a scheme for trying to assemble a meta-bibliography---in other words, a list of what printed materials you could read if you could get your hands on them. This is unlike Google, an organization crass enough to actually digitize the text of books, to put you one click away from the primary source of the information it indexes, and to maintain backup copies of that information against the loss of the primary source. It is unlike Project Gutenberg, an organization that has already published a huge number of digitized texts that are now available to anyone with Internet access. It is unlike even the bloggers, who at least make their own work fully available online. Gorman apparently has the more limited goal of indexing materials without providing access to them, while mocking the efforts of these other organizations to provide access.
On the offhand chance that Michael Gorman is reading this, let me make my position as clear as possible. I am a scientific research and (if I do say so myself) a fairly literate writer. I use Google, Wikipedia, Citeseer, Project Gutenberg, and other online information resources on a daily basis, because I've found them to be quite effective for me. I read about five fiction novels a month. The last time I used a library card catalog was about 6 months ago. The reasons for this have nothing to do with the comprehensiveness of my University library's bibliography, and everything to do with the paucity of its actual content.
I support our American public libraries, because I think they're an important bulwark in our fight for free speech. In terms of effectiveness in serving my needs and the needs of my family and friends, they are so bad that I fear for their future. Mr. Gorman, please keep in mind that when public library funding comes up for public discussion, your comments, especially given your position, are extraordinarily unhelpful. So, in the jargon of the "blog people" you so despise, please STFU.
I'm almost finished after the subject line. I'm fully satiated with small thoughts. Long complex texts are for good readers not bloggers. This guy hasn't sen the ball since he earned his Phd. in horse shoe fabrication.
This is a good thing, really.
He's a dinosaur. I mean it seems more like a cry of desperation than anything. Why else be so ascerbic?
The thing is that the internet (webernets, internets, etc) excels at community - even though it may be one of the hardest business models to realize on the internet, it is one of the mainstays. People have been given a voice, and for the ALA president to condone this is shortsightedness and, as a certain Mr. Cleese put it, silliness.
Whether you 'blog' or post to your own craptastic website or email your friends about your latest 'moblog' postings, you all have a right to share. And no, you all don't have to be Tolstoys, Shakespeares, Dostoyevskys, Byrons, or Flemings.
This guy has just dated himself. 100 years from now it will be the journalists who embraced blogging as an advance who are revered as opposed to those who condemned it. After all, are we all still traipsing about in the horse and buggy? (although maybe we should be!). So who cares. Go eat pizza, drink beer, and get naked and cite Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure to your offspring. Like the 'library' will be around in ten years, anyway. Perhaps the elistism will be, however. Maybe by then he can get a job serving drinks at the next Trek convention?
Anyway, peace and love. I'm sure he didn't mean it as nasty as it sounded. Or did he? (pinky in mouth)
Blog about the non-blog!
Call it: Blog "news", fair and un-blogged
I don't see the two options as mutually exclusive. As things stand, traditional bound books still maintain a host of advantages over newer electronic delivery media (including portable e-book readers/tablet PCs) primarily in terms of superior resolution, lower power requirements, and a highly intuitive, tactile user interface which enables easier random-access than any software mechanism yet devised. On the other hand, digitized works offer other advantages, including complete-text searchability (though one might argue that a well-compiled index can sometimes provide more meaningful search capabilities than simple text-matching) and remote access to vast bodies of written material with minimal storage-space requirements. In a perfect world, I'd have equal access to both.
(And yes, people who "don't read classic literature" are, perforce, less completely educated -- or at the very least, less cultured. I make no claims regarding intelligence, however.)
SIERRA TANGO FOXTROT UNIFORM
Fritz Leiber's "Changewars" collection, James Morrow's trilogy "Towing Jehovah", "Blameless in Abaddon", and the third one, title slips my mind.
Christopher Hitchens' "Trial of Henry Kissinger".
Hunter Thompson's "Rum Diary" and the third volume of the Gonzo Papers, in observance of the great man's passing.
Isadore Twersky's Maimonides primer.
Stanislaw Lem's "His Master's Voice."
Brian Michael Bendis' comic book series "Powers" and "Alias". Other comics on the list: "Y The Last Man", "100 Bullets", "Ex Machina". "Transmetropolitan" is done with, unfortunately, but worth reading for the Slashdotter who hasn't read them yet.
I wanted to read C.S. Lewis' Narnia books again, since it's probably been 10 years since I read them and I don't remember them at all, but the library didn't have them when I stopped by.
God, I love the library. My reading habits would bankrupt me otherwise.
---
Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
(I read with sigs off.)
Obviously there are going to be shitty writers and good writers in any medium. Blogs simply make this more apparent in that (1) anyone can write one (sheer volume) and (2) there's no (external) editing.
The important thing-- in any medium-- is developing a set of mental filters to weed out the dross. Some of those are generalized (looking at spelling, logic, etc) and some are only available once you've spent some time with a particular subject (think about how many variations on "Learn C in 21 picoseconds" and so on get published.)
Gorman comes off as an elitist jackass. I'm sure he's very qualified in his own field, but he overgeneralizes to the point of absurdity: 'Blog People', my ass.
(My gut feeling, by the way, would be that weblogs (and the 'net in general) have had a net positive impact on the writing ability of the general populace, but I couldn't back that up.)
but this mocking, snobbish attitude isn't going to win anyone over to his side.
It won me over. At least, upon reading it I found that my personal view of blogs and bloggers was much closer to that of the ALA president than that held by many bloggers themselves, and that the ALA president had expressed his view in a way that both indicated he understood the situation and was in itself well stated.
So it comes down to what, exactly, the goal of this piece was. If the point was to express something, it was a success. If the point was to express something and have readers finding they agreed with it, it was a success in that at least one person (me) was "won over" by it.
If the point was to impress self-identified "bloggers", it probably failed, but then I personally begin to suspect it's impossible to impress anyone who self-identifies as a "blogger" except by directly stoking their ego.
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
*they are just online diaries!* There are hyperlinks, these are something you can't do on paper, but apart from that, they are just diaries...
Diaries have worthy history. But there's everything from the notable (Pepys) through to your average teenage girl's ramblings.
Never given blogs too much attention. Nothing more, nothing less than diaries. ALA President is disingenious for disregarding some of the worthy diaries kept through history, but bloggers are a bit self righteous sometimes as well. Truth lies somewhere in the middle, methinks.
"It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs."
Ohh like powerpoint slides?
Ohh like the Nasa department for Space Shuttles
He sounds like a spoilt kid that doesnt like the fact that he doesnt understand the internet, so hes lashing out at those who embrace is.
Just finished Prelude to Foundation (Asimov). Just starting on The Caves of Steel (Asimov). Damn it, I've read thick, tomey books---Le Ton Beau de Marot, Foucault's Pendulum---I'm just not reading them right now. I always feel a bit intimidated when I see what Slashdotters are reading.
For comics, I'm halfway through Sandman Mystery Theatre (Wagner, Seagle, Davis and others); I just finished The Sandman (Gaiman and a whole lotta artists).
Recent works I found and would recommend are Structures: Or, Why Things Don't Fall Down (wonderfully informative work---check out a random page about ballistae) for words and Zero Girl for words-and-pictures---Sam Kieth at his weird best.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
so the Bolshevik revolution is portrayed sympathetically by one book, for the first ten days of its existence. It's obvious to me that I am being blasted by propaganda
Hey 20M dead Russians can't be wrong. Oh wait, that's propaganda too. Perhaps the reasons you can't find anything good about the Soviet Union from 1917 onwards is that nothing good came out of it beyond dissatants.
I dunno; at least on TV, the right seems to have the edge (*cough* Bill "Shut Up" O'Reilly *cough*) on angry shouters. You can certainly find yammering harridans on both sides of the fence, but I don't remember any major CBS/ABC/NBC/CNN figures screaming at their guests to shut up.
Then again, I don't have TV, and I hear about these things second-hand through blogs.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Y'know, if you're going to be defending the shining light of conservative thought against the slings and arrows of outrageous Slashdot, the least you could do would be to try, try to act like you say the Right does.
You know, without resorting to ad hominem attacks or mindless vulgarity.
Come on---if you're going to be defending the honor of the Right, you may as well display some of your own.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
The difference between a dinner conversation & a web conversation is that here you can tune in whoever you want; it's not possible to drown someone out. A hundred thousand ignorant bloggers screaming at the top of their lungs won't stop you from reading whoever you want to read, exactly as if everyone else wasn't there.
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
The openly biased nature of blogs is a good antidote to the hidden bias of scholarly writing and journalism. Scholars who decide that everything can be explained through series of thesis, antithesis and catharsis have left extremely damaging legacy in their choice of theses and antitheses. Likewise journalists who consider themselves as unbiased for reporting the "two sides" of a story build in a bias by choosing just two facets of a multifaceted issue to be their "two sides."
The things that I have directly witnessed in life tend to be dramatically different than the "objective" reports I've read in the paper the next day. I fidn the open bias of blogs refreshing as it provides a clearer view of the author's perspective.
A great example of this is the way journalists toss out the words "conservative" and "liberal" as being the two sides of an issue. When bloggers try tackling complex issues, they quickly find that there is no consensus on the meaning of conservative or liberal.
I really don't think blogs should be considered in isolation. Any idea can be proposed, but the process of linking determines which ideas will rise to the surface and be given merit.
The primary means for having things surface to the top is through the process of linking. My linking to an article is a vote for that article. One problem is that there is only positive links in the process. My pointing out a fallacy of Chomsky just adds to the incredible number of links to his work. The linking process seems to elevate things that are provocative to the surface over those that are insightful.
Making vague accusations about people's intelligence is intellectually equivalent to calling them idiots. The entire piece is the academic equivalent of an escalation of a "no, you're stupid" playground taunt. Frankly, he should be embarassed about the immaturity of the whole thing, and he likely will be when those who he considers to be his peers call him on it. You know you're an important troll when your trollish screeds get posted to the Slashdot front page.
If only he would learn how to use google to do a search he might get relevant results back instead of white noise. As for his lifetime work "Universal Bibliographic Control", it sounds like a failure to me since full-text searching does a much better job than simple indexing - and we can use indexes too where we think they might be faster.
Really, if stuffy old coots like this could get their head out of the sand, and the information tied up in paper volumes into the digital world then maybe he *could* find the results he's looking for in google. Until then, you may well have to read the entire book, just to glean that one paragraph of information you really required.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
Publishing local news on your blog and working in the White House press pool are different things. The word "journalist" has different connotations in those instances, though it might apply to both. Pretending that getting a human-interest story published in my local community newsletter puts me on par with Wolf Blitzer is... disingenuous.
The proprietor of warblogging.com wasn't flouncing about the White House. Guckert was. Do you really need this stuff spelled out for you?
And more important than Guckert getting into the White House after being about as qualified as, well, me, is his appearing as a plant in the press pool---asking softball questions and delivering mysterious scoops via his agency, "Talon News" that implied he was somehow connected to the administration.
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Wasn't this a "zippy the pinhead" strip a few years back?
YOW!
honestly though. this is a huge generalization to make. "all bloggers are stupid". however, i guess since he runs all the libraries in the country, that he's inherently right. and pretentiously so!
everybody's IQ just dropped 10 points!
It's innacurate because a "bomber" is out to kill people. If I leave a bomb under a subway seat and waltz away so that I'm sipping a latte eight blocks away when an explosion decimates a city block, I'm a bomber. I'm a "homicide bomber", I suppose, because I've murdered people with my bombs, but that seems mightily redundant.
"Suicide bomber" implies that the bomber died in the attack. This is tacitly left out of the unwieldy construction "homicide bomber". I'm not sure what agenda it's supposed to be pushing, but the former sounds more intuitive to me. There's no real compelling reason to change it. So why say 'homicide bomber'?
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
There are a lot of EDUCATED people (nationality is not important) that just like to think they are right.
Like just about everyone. The 'Confirmation Bias' is a characteristic of human psychology.
That said, my problem w/Fox "news" isn't that I disagree with the politics, it's the cheap pandering to the masses.
Example: Just before the invasion of Iraq, most news channels were, reasonably enough (given that most americans at the time, when polled, were against an invasion) discussing the 'should we/shouldn't we' issue. I flipped over to fox news and every commercial break ended with a big animated flag / F-16 / eagle montage and big shiny "Freedom on the March!" banner. C'mon guys... let's try for a semblance of restaint.
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
"What the professional writters are really complaing about is that they no longer have a virtual monopoly on writting. It is now for everyone. And of course, we are getting better at it. Much of the communication (like here) is done in public, and we can see which formulations get the point across and which doesn't. So while the writting may not become beautiful, it slowly becomes effective. At least for those who have anything at all to contribute."
Ah yes, the Darwin argument. The panacea for whatever confronts man. You do realize that what makes one a professional writer has nothing to do with "lack of competition". Especially in the field of writing. Watch an episode of "American Idol" and you'll see plenty who believe they have talent. Reality however shows that it's much rarer. Doesn't stop people from "competing" though.
"The other part of it is that we become less impressed by the written word, now that it has become a daily tool of our own. We are much less likely to believe in something because it is written (in a a paper or book) than our parents were. Since we know no special skills are required to write and publish, we intuitively know that the written word is no more trsutworthy than the spoken word."
In other words, our standards have decreased to the point that we no longer remember what quality was. No wonder we've become cynical bastards to the word. Try reading some of the older stuff out there, and maybe you'll remember exactly why the written word was once trusted.
To be random, something has to be variable in a way that is not predictable. In other words, there is no consistancy, even in the inconsistancy.
So a random paragraph must be only sometimes writing and someties only look like it. Which describes 99.9% of all books in an American library.
If libraries only stocked definitively, universally-agreed quality works, you could fit them in a single wall-sized bookshelf or less. I'm sure librarians in the Stone Age bemoaned the practice of cave painting, where random pictures were being drawn by intellectuals of the time. Probably a few ancient Cretian librarians objected to the proliferation of Linear A tablets.
That's not to say that blogs aren't vastly overrated by some, just that blogging is not a new phenomina. People have diarized for tens of thousands of years, and other people have undoubtably objected. However, many of these diaries are now all we have of those civilizations.
True, I'm scared to think of what an archaeologist 1000 years in the future will think of 31337 hax0r d1ar13s, but to fight against something that has always been is about as useful as fighting against the atom or gravity.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
"Those characteristics are ignored and excused by those who think that Google is the creation of "God's mind," because it gives the searcher its heaps of irrelevance in nanoseconds. Speed is of the essence to the Google boosters, just as it is to consumers of fast "food," but, as with fast food, rubbish is rubbish, no matter how speedily it is delivered."
And perhaps you have a better idea to search thousands of books in a matter of seconds other than digitising it and using the best search algorithm in this world! May be he wants us to search the catalogue and browse through thousands of books to find that one paragraph about something I wish to know for my paper. Talk about wastage of time. Even ancient manuscripts in India are being digitised with optical scanners by NIC so that it becomes accessible to scholars in the quickest manner possible. Also these pieces of history can be preserved for longer periods if kept away from the hassle of observation every other day. I believe the same goes with books too.
"If a fraction of the latter were devoted to buying books and providing librarians for the library-starved children of California, the effort would be of far more use to humanity and society."
Same might have been done in case of Iraq and Afghanistan too. But considering that the threats were true, if the wars were not waged, then another building would have collapsed or a nuclear bomb would have hit LA. My point is if we want to preserve our books and history and learn in the quickest manner possible, we have to bring technology into consideration. The only thing static in any field is change.
"It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs."
... like journalists?
You mean
There is much more to librarians and scholarly writing than card catalogs. I suspect that many librarians see the class of librarians as social structure charged with selecting filtering that ideas that will seep into the culture at large.
A great example of this filtering can be seen at University Libraries. A researcher pointed out to me that my local universities had almost two full bookcases dedicated to studies of Marx, and not a full shelve concerned with Benjamin Franklin. The researcher thought this odd for a library in the United States. Librarians take their filtering responsibilities seriously. Blogs, forums, online bookstores and whatnot pose the threat of democratizing the great filters librarians put in place.
The librarian article seems concerned with blogs v. the press. I never had the illusion that blogs would lead to the elimination of main stream press. Hell, a good third of all the blog posts in this world reference published article. Very few mainstream press articles point to blogs. This assymetry will always favor the press.
Blogs pose no threat to the press. They do pose a great threat to the cultural filters put in place by librarians.
If the President of the ALA has such a low opinion of bloggers, perhaps his organization should stop giving so many major awards to them.
I think what he actually meant to say was something along the lines of:
"Blogging proposes a very democratic model of information evaluation that any intelligent person given access to the information will be able to derive the correct conclusions quickly and easily."
Something Slashdot proves wrong every day.
"The classic approach argues that a guided program of study is highly advisable prior deviling into raw sources of information. In feeds in which you are an expert which approach do you think is more correct?"
The latter. Knowing what you're talking about is something that's even more important, not less in the digital domain, for correct and incorrect spread with equal efficiency, but unequal consequences.
Carol Brey Casiano is the current President. This guy is the boob in waiting, and should shut his piehole until he's the actual President. Not to mention that most of the librarians I know have all but given up on ALA as a national organisation.
Well, the vast majority of them anyway. But that's not the point. The point is that someone can write whatever they want and potentially have it read by a world-wide audience. That's what the web is all about.
Hard-boiled wonderland and the end of the world (Sekai no owari to hard-boiled wonderland) by Haruki Murakami.
Before that, I finished the Hyperion and Endymion books by Dan Simmons, and was quite surprised people seem to consider these "classics of sci-fi literature"; I didn't find it as big a disappointment than Larry Niven's Ringworld though. Before that came Mad Sheep Chase by (again) Haruki Murakami, and before that Illium by (again) Dan Simmons, which I consider more worthy of the "classic of literature" title than his Hyperion saga. Seems last year has been quite Murakami & Simmons intensive for me...
Next on my list is Battle Royale; seen the movie, now I figure I want to read the book and get the *real* story. When I'm done with that, it's back to the sci-fi classics to see which of the ones I haven't read yet are actually good, and which ones I'd rather like to donate to George Lucas in the hopes that he will someday film another trash compactor scene for one of his movies...
Install windows on my workstation? You crazy? Got any idea how much I paid for the damn thing?
We have lives , and bills, and cant spend 15hrs a weekend reading with a pipe in our hand in our 5000 book personal library.
Welcome to real life.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
I hate to admit it when the Republicans are right but damn, what an elitist attitude!
Hailed as the ultimate example of information retrieval, Google is, in fact, the device that gives you thousands of "hits" (which may or may not be relevant) in no very useful order.
Yeah, because we all know how effective the Dewey Decimal System is. Get over yourself asshole. If you can't even coax results out of Google then your time is done.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
I can understand why people have trouble groking this. It's hard to wrap your mind around. But the internet is VERY VERY large. By even the most conservative estimates, there are many millions of blogs, with many more starting by the second.
There are numerous blogs about any subject imaginable. There are at least three dozen blogs written by emergency medics. Are these "good"? They're just "what [they] do for a living," it's true, but what they do for a living is emergency medicine.
(Come on, you know you're curious.)
There are blogs by Senators, blogs by censored Nepali reporters, blogs by angsty teenagers in countries that you know little about.
Reading a few blogs at random & then dissing the whole concept is like skimming a cereal box, a drug store receipt, a toothpaste ad & a bookjacket blurb & then pronouncing: This "written word" stuff is useless crap!
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
Talking about the content of "blogs" is as ridiculous as talking about the content of "books"-- as if there is something meaningful that can be generalized about the group. There's a boatload of bad writing on blogs just as there are in the pages of the journals in Gorman's hallowed halls of periodicals. There's also a lot of great writing to be found in both places.
Gorman is responding to a select group of bloggers who chose to attack him because he doesn't think Google should be nominated for sainthood. I think he underestimates the power of searching and random access...
But the real sadness here for those of us who love libraries (I do, and I support them by using them and contributing financially) is that he unfortunately represents a very real and powerful part of the administrative apparatus of most libraries. These people don't understand that the roles of libraries, repositories, and librarians are radically changing. I don't mind the whining of the fossils-- I even appreciate a bit of the productive tension between the white-gloved, shhhh-ing blue-hairs and the stinking rabble of the Internet-- but I feel for the younger set getting their relatively useless Library Science education at institutions run by the traditionalists. They might as well get a degree in phrenology or alchemy...
Screw him. Its the "marketplace of ideas" not the Neiman Marcus of ideas.
99% of everything is crap. Blog are no different. This is their only problem. Could everyone please now shut the fuck up about blogs? Thanks.
Who the fuck is this guy? He's the head of "quiet please" at U Cal Fresno.
I have 1000 scanned books relating to my profession on my hard drive and I don't need his library. I am comfortably working out of my home via the web.
What an asshole!
We aren't too fond of him either!
Your skill in reading has increased by one point!
To quote his rationale:
Blogging can spread the word, but references to printed material carry a lot more weight [no pun] than an html page full of supportive links.
Anyone interested in how this free speach thing corrupts society on a wider scale through disinformation, should go to Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park in London.
There you will see the Evangelicals preaching to their convverted congregation who turn up to support and cry Hallelulejah at the orchestrated time. You will also see a drunkard with a small footladder arguing that "G-d is a Lesbian". There are people listening. Ruin of society does not result.
Note, actual Speakers' Corner content may vary.
[% slash_sig_val.text %]
This antidigital windbag doesn't have a clue what he's talin' about. Clearly he's only concerned with the job of stupid librarians who can be easily replaced by Google vast array of Linux boxes running perl and python. If this jerk had ever been root on a box he'd understand the situation he and the rest of his library sissy friends find themselves in. He'd soil his trowsers if he had a clue about what a beowulf cluster could do to him. I'm so sickandtired of people blasting my blog, the blog subculture, the fact that blooggers are the new digerati, the new press, the new way to a free open and open society. I wouldn't be surprised if he's a affilliatted with the RIAA, MPAA, SCO or Microsoft. He even contradicts himself in his own rambling babble saying "If a fraction of the [Blog People] were devoted to buying books and providing librarians for the library-starved children of California, the effort would be of far more use to humanity and society." Idiot! Everyone knows the only thing kids go to library's for are the open access to computers which means pr0n and war3z.
Bottom line, just because my blog isn't censored by the neocon right wing fascist fox & friends loving librarians doesn't mean everything I've said about Bush, the RIAA, my water cooling, Open Source as a way of life, and why Paris Hilton is too hot to hate, but too dumb to love. Editors, libraries, congresscritters, all of that is meant to eliminate free speach by a society bent on taking over other cuntries' oil so they can destroy the world with toxic air polluttents (join the Kyoto protocol or I'm moving!) I for one say no.
Bottom line, What he doesn't understand is that blogs aren't about being right or wrong, that doesn't matter in the slightest bit. The point of blogs is to expand the minds and thought namespace of the readers of the blogs, to incense them and give them a sense of holy ignorance and anger that they can use as fuel for seeming important, informed, educated, and as if they've got all the right answers. My blog is like a gas stations for your ego. Stop by, fill up, and contribute back to and open society that will take what they like and what is useful to them and add it to their own thoughts, and ideas, and then give it back. It's the GPL for your mind! But this guy can't see himself as anything but the gate keeper to information, there must be hard copy books stored in his library so he can "sssssshhhhhhhhh!" you when your IPod is up too loud.
In the the end, you can't burn 1s and 0s, but paper and librarians burn like a mutherf***er.
Fine if you only want one side of a story.
Don't look at the finger, or you will miss all of that heavenly glory.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
... arrogant, pseudo-academic assholes aswell. I guess you find them everywhere.
Coming to think of it, this reaction isn't suprising. The Bloggersphere is the toughest competitor to this kind of people in the world of new media. This is nothing but yet another display of the standard defense of pseudo-intellectuals of the opinion-sovereignty they claim over society.
Luckly nowadays we don't have to put up with this crap 'cause that monopoly is slowly dimishing. Thanks to the bloggersphere - the nuisance it can be aside.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
In the US they have the Republicans, which are just like our Tories, and they also have the Democrats, which are just like our Tories. For those outside the UK, the Tories are our right wing party.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
hole
cos you couldn't stand a successful nigger.
Ok then 1 or 2 I have seen. When I go to a blog-search site (sort of blog Deathstar) (can't remember the names sorry) I am usually confronted with vacuous fluff blogs about people's cats and the like. This stuff gives blogs a bad name as empty, trashy and not worth reading.
I say this is in all honesty, I thought that was what blogging was about. Empty, vacuous fluff. I didn't even know until relatively recently that there were indeed more worthwhile blogs like those you describe.
Still, it doesn't change the fact that the concept of blogs has been largely hijacked by airbrained teeny boppers and 1337 kiddies with absolutely nothing to say worth reading. No doubt it is to the detriment of more serious blogs.
Google basically tracks the relevance of a page by the amount of links that refer to it and what links it refers to. Blogs express mainly the views of those who write them, there's nothing wrong about that. Because blogers usually refer each other on their blogs, and these references tend to cluster in narrow groups where the same views are shared, this increases the 'google relevance' of the blog and other satellite blogs that tag along. These blogs with high 'google relevance' can be taken as genuine relevance, by this I say, they're considered truthful and a reference source for other writings. But, what he is trying to say is high 'google relevance' can mean high noise output. And if you're trying to search about a subject you shouldn't trust google to point you to the most relevant references. There are those who can't be critical when someone writes a post that panders to their prejudices and biases, so some blogs can be intoxicating them even more. Although it can be said that some blogs can be a very relevant source of information about niche interests where motivated people can write about. And when there are very few outlets that cater these niches, blogs can fill the void by forming communities of shared interest.
His job, and career, are built upon fragments of literacy without any measurable basis for comparison from one book to the other.
Therefore, by that technically, and being that he (obviously) hasn't read every single book in every single library, he isn't remotely qualified to be a library director.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Gorman's not from the States.
No way the Brontosaurus could have made a reference to monkeys. Monkeys didn't exist during the Cretaceous period. Monkeys' purported ancestor was a tree shrew of the Insectivora order. All we need now is an expert in carbon-13 dating to validate the forgery. Bloggers, our work is done...
I think it's time for a "blog" meta-tag so search engines can filter blogs separately from results from accepted news sources. Blog software writers can put the meta tag in the default templates and search engines like news.google.com can have a "blog" checkbox so you can search for news with or without showing results from blogs.
I'm willing to bet that the person responsible for collection development at that library is no good at Russian as a topic. Have you offered to help as a subject specialist and given them an idea of your educational background in the area? I know that I'd kill for that.
Second, remember that libraries are public for the most part and rely on tax dollars. There was a wee bit of time where it wasn't exactly politick to include books sympathetic to the USSR. A good librarian is meant to say "The heck with you folks, I'm going to collect neutrally anyway" but some don't. This climate also made it harsh on publishers. Even now, books are being banned over the whole Iraq issue.
Third, there may be other factors you're not aware of. For instance, the Russian collection at my library was *decimated* by mould. I had to weed everything that was infested.
I work at a college and the librarians are an odd bunch but thank god none of them talk like this.
I don't really understand his concern. He writes in reference to what an average person might do after doing a google print search:
If speed isn't essential to scholarly research in "the real world," why won't scholars continue to use his and other librarian's services? Google Print will cater to those people who won't go to the trouble of requesting books from other libraries and would, in the absence of a service like Google Print, would otherwise miss out on the information completely instead of getting it in at least in snippets.In any case, Google's service isn't positioned as an information gathering resource anyway. It's supposed to be used to find books you might be interested in, and it works quite well at that. I've personally gone out and acquired copies of three books (at a library no less!) as a direct result of google print searches.
He *should* be concerned about digitization.
A great example of this filtering can be seen at University Libraries. A researcher pointed out to me that my local universities had almost two full bookcases dedicated to studies of Marx, and not a full shelve concerned with Benjamin Franklin.
Gasp! Even worse, I bet they didn't have a full shelf on Josiah Bartlett! The point is despite your political beliefs, the more minor founding fathers of the US aren't even particularly important to world, or even US history.
Not even Thomas Jefferson is as important to history as Marx, although the Declaration of Independence, much like the Communist Manifesto, is indeed a great historical document. Franklin's "Poor Richard's Almanac" isn't. I doubt few people outside of the US even know who Benjamin Franklin is.
It isn't a case of "cultural filters", but simply a reflection on the significance of a major political thinker vs. a pedlar of tired maxims like "a penny saved is a penny earned"
See:
"Perhaps that latter thought will reinforce the opinion of the Blog Person who included "Michael Gorman is an idiot" in his reasoned critique, because no opinion that comes from someone who is "antidigital" (in the words of another Blog Person) could possibly be correct. For the record, though I may have associated with Antidigitalists, I am not and have never been a member of the Antidigitalist party and would be willing to testify to that under oath. I doubt even that would save me from being burned at the virtual stake, or, at best, being placed in a virtual pillory to be pelted with blogs. Ugh!"
Also, if one were to check the catalogue and come up with relevant titles, also in seconds, one could then use the index usually included in non fiction works to find something relevant for your paper. The whole process only takes a couple of minutes. He's arguing that it's more reliable to do what I just described than it is to just Google something in. In other words, Google is a great starting place, but a bad only resource.
All that aside, I love google. A lot of librarians love google. This is what got him in this mess in the first place. He dissed google. He got dissed for dissing google. This is his response to the librarian bloggers that dissed him dissing google. So unless you're a librarian blogger, he's not really talking to you.
Sounds a bit like me.
;))
"Ritterburg und Fürstenschloss" - Excavation-report from the Oberveste Passau (mainly 15th up to some some 18th century). It's a bit dry, but it has a lot of nice pictures
"The Medieval Horse" - Excavations from London. Same style as above, hundreds of pictures and descriptions of finds.
And then of course, "Ensel und Kretel" from Walter Moers. A Fairy Tale.
"The more prohibitions there are, The poorer the people will be" -- Lao Tse
There are at least three classes of blogs:
1) Bloggers who blog because they think it's a new medium which will change the world: the "professional bloggers". scripting.com, Doc Searls, Scoble etc. I don't have much time for these guys.
2) Blogs which are essentially self-published syndicated opinion columns: Tom Barnett, gapingvoid, certain slices of the msdn blogs (Old New Thing, Larry Osterman, Mike Stall, Brad Abrams), Larry Lessig, etc. These are the best, and aren't necessarily blogs-for-the-sake-of-blogs, but simply online thought dumps from people on the front line of their area of expertise.
3) Everything else. I haven't read any of these blogs, but I keep hearing about them, in a sort of random way.
first of all, a library has to filter. thats the wohle point. u cant store everything thats ever been written everywhere. even if you could, what you store, you have to organize and make it searchable. in doing that, you are filtering it.
google is filtering. slashdot is filtering. everything is filtering.
throwing your garbage in the trash can is 'filtering'.
second of all, not everyone in the library thinks they are gods gift to protecting 'important ideas'. many of them would rather have more input from the public. but guess what? the public is intellectually lazy. they are perfectly happy leaving the autocratic bureaucracy of libraries unchallenged. sure bring democracy to iraq for 80 billion. but god forbid someone say that educational regents should be elected by the people.
third of all, your local university library might have had a department that just studies 20th century russian politics or 19th century european philosophy. there are other reasons to explain a shelf full of marx besides 'librarians are a bunch of unamerican commies'.
your statements are bigoted and ignorant. something that libraries strive to eradicate every day within our populace.
You can't have a denominator of zero, as you can not devide by zero.
Otherwise I see your point, but once you start nitpicking where does it end!
Do not underestimate the real fear the internet and all its fallout applications engenders in the traditional media, content-providers and politicians.
It is more a force for freedom, good and the rights of man than anything since the printing press, and subsequently the photo-copier.
there is more democracy at a library than there is at slashdot.
at least in a library you can find statements that say 'linux sucks' and they arent given any sort of backhanded hide-away treatment, like such comments are given on slashdot. nobody screams you down in a library if you go look up a book that says linux sucks.
Much better that "literature" is left unread by the great unwashed masses. He probably doesn't like "popular music" either.
While his tone is dripping with condescension, not everyone who writes a blog is worthy to have their thoughts read. I write my blog for the sake of friends and relatives, and some people find my words either interesting or infuriating. I wouldn't deign to assume that I am at the vanguard of a new type of media content distribution paradigm as some people do. Over at K5 there's a hack piece on the blogosphere just about every week, and they all have the same conceited notion that blogs will revolutionize the world. I think that often we, the technorati, get so wrapped up in the splendor of what technology can do, that we tend to overestimate what it will do. Todays predictions of a new media format through wikis and blogs are analagous to the flying cars and domed cities of the 50's.
While this reflects the prevailing so called 'wisdom', I find (for example), slashdot to be a treasure chest compendium for things computational. While one does still need to sift the comments, it isn't hard to gleen much gold, especially when branching into something new or trying to polish a fine point on something old.
I think there is a world market for maybe five computers. - IBM Chairman Thomas Watson, 1943
Like the comment above... His words will be remembered in the annals of nonsense computer quotations.
Free Web based FTP
I find it very odd that Michael Gorman, the ALA president, is complaining about Bloggers/Blogging to the world through and online medium which resembles a "blog".
The Complete Idiot's Guide To Creating A Web Page And Blog by Paul McFedries
Buzz Marketing with Blogs For Dummies by Susannah Gardner
Blog : Understanding the Information Reformation That's Changing Your World by Hugh Hewitt
The Weblog Handbook: Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog by Rebecca Blood
Blogging: Genius Strategies for Instant Web Content by Biz Stone
Blog On: Building Online Communities with Web Logs
by Todd Stauffer
Essential Blogging by Shelley Powers, Cory Doctorow, J. Scott Johnson, Mena G. Trott, Benjamin Trott, Rael Dornfest
Personally, I never trust any publisher. Not The Economist, and certainly not the NYTimes. I've been on the inside of enough news stories to know how badly they all distort. Between that and learning to filter, I filter. They're good for pointing potentially interesting items out (miss a lot) but I still have to dig on anything important.
They become fractious and ultimately divided forums that are the 21st century's version of the 18th century op-ed in that high-tech medium of the day... the printing press.
they filter the noise.
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
The point of Gorham's article is that while it's impossible to find web pages without a search engine, published books are required to have listed titles, authors, subject classifications, and descriptions, which can help you find them in a much more direct way without having to search through full text. You can't really browse the web the way that you can browse a library: if you really have no idea where to start, you won't find anything.
I think it's pretty clear he has a point. When I'm looking for something on the Internet, I will always check Wikipedia and About.com before a general Google search, because I know that those two human-categorized sites are better-written and more reliable than the vast array of personal pages. When I actually do have to search Google for some obscure page, by far the majority of hits I get are complete bogus, not even tangentially related to what I wanted.
On the Web, it's probably fair to say that this is inevitable; as long as anyone who wants to can set up a page, maintaining any organized index is impossible. The publishing world is not so open, however, which means that not everyone's voice can be heard, but also that the voices that can are clearer. If you find one book on Marx in the library, all of the other books on the same topic will be on the same shelf, and probably, other books that are on a related topic will be nearby. Not only do you not need a search engine to help you find books, it would be counterproductive.
But what about if you want to find as many references to Marx as you can, whether or not those books are about Marx? Only a search engine could let you do this. But Gorham's question, and the only really controversial point in his article, is... why would you? Most libraries have dozens, if not hundreds, of books that are specifically about Marx, so why would you want to find books that mention him for a paragraph but aren't really about him at all? Well, you would if you only wanted to read assorted paragraphs about Marx, not whole books. You would if you were writing a paper and needed to cite as many sources as you can, but you didn't have time to read the books. Gorham thinks that that's a shame, and I have to agree.
"Google is, in fact, the device that gives you thousands of "hits" (which may or may not be relevant) in no very useful order."
Not quite.
Excepting the missing proximity-range operator, it's very useful if one understands a bit of boolean logic. To someone as adept at using google as our librarian friend should be at using traditional research tools the above assertation is likely to evoke calls of luddite.
The fact is that google is a useful reference tool. While not a replacement for the usual bag of tricks, it's a significant addition once it's use is learned.
IMO, the dudes just trolling because he can't be this obtuse on one hand and a skilled librarian on the other.
I don't think this Gorman will be going on a googlewhack adventure.
Fuck him, geeks don't like libraries.
"The piece (LJ, February 15th 2005) was intended to be satirical, though I am certainly no fan of "blogs," having an old fashioned belief that, if one wishes to air one's views and be taken seriously, one should go through the publishing/editing process." - Michael Gorman
Some comments from librarian bloggers to this piece include this, this, this this, and this ... we're not all like Gorman in our views.
the diary of samuel pepys
And that is what most high profile blogs are, just OP/ED. I have seen very few blogs that are sources of original information and most of the ones that are, are highly technical. The vast majority of OP/ED writing, whether it appears in a Newspaper or on the internet just isn't worth long term archiving.
'[The] Newspapermen (or their subclass who are interested in dailies and the glorification of information) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of yellow journalism and a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... Given the quality of the writing in the newspapers I have seen, I doubt that many of the newspapermen are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'
How wrong that sounds today.
Some of the last three months:
first 5 foundation books (in order of publication)
Washington: The Indispensable Man (very interesting)
All of Horatio Hornblower except the West Indies one (the local library doesn't have that one)
All the Honor Harrington books by David Weber (Horatio Hornblower is better, I think)
Several Keith Laumer and Murray Leinster books (from the Baen Free Library at baen.com)
Edenborn (Nick Sagan)
A Man Called Intrepid by William Stephenson (part)
A couple of Louis L'amour
A couple of Georgette Heyer
Several years of BOFH
A few Roger Zelazny
The Tripod Trilogy, and a couple of others by the same author
All of User Friendly, up to end of Jan 05
The Darksword Trilogy (Weis and Hickman)
David Copperfield (the one by Dickens)
I've been trying, but that's all I can remember
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
Sounds like Elitist Claptrap to me.
Speaking as a trained librarian and blogger. Certain segments of the library community are closed to new ideas, especially if they involve new technology.
It really is backward looking comment for a president of the ala. Wake up it's the 21st century now not the 19th...
It's the sort of article you expect from the church while they were losing control when printing was invented
This is just further proof that the academic establishment is afraid that they will lose their status as keepers of knowledge. It's no surprise to me that they feel they must publicly respond to blogging, wikipedia etc. since NOBODY CARES what they think...they are just bitter that they cannot control it and they don't get credit for any ideas which come out of it.
http://chrono.posterous.com/
I can only guess that either they thought that being a rude author/philosopher is worse than being a sociopathic murderer/orator...
or they think she might be just a little bit right about something, and the thought of that terrified them.
Then again, who knows?
- Yndrd 1984
nt
...then there aren't any.
Those people attacking Mr. Gorman are certainly stripped of any reasonable credibility by their name-calling. However, Mr. Gorman's credibility on the topic is just as damaged by his use of the exact same tactics to strike back at his detractors.
I do not disagree with his assessments of Google and the "blogosphere" as being not very useful to dedicated researchers. For the sake of reference, I avoid web logs for the same reasons I avoid online discussion forums...they are a waste of my time. Yes, Slashdot is a waste of my time, but everyone can use a good vice or two.
I do disagree with him failing to take his own advice, and contributing to the "polluting" the databases of the publicly available search engines with the same kind of drivel he accuses the blogosphere of joyfully producing. Your command of the English language, your reading list, and your personal research habits do make your "article" any less worthless.
This comment is from the leader of an institution that coerces writers into providing essentially free copies of their works for anyone to read without purchasing it or paying royalty or copyright.
Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.
a flame baiter
Given the low stylistic quality of the prose sample provided for the gentleman, I'm surprised he's throwing bricks.
I think a preference for Marx represents thinly veiled anti-Americanism, or at least American liberal guilt.
Franklin conceived the federal government. He established the first library. He established a university. He ran and owned one of the first American newspapers. He single handedly negotiated the entire separation from England and was integral to the forming of the US Constitution, a document which would go on to guide the most influential country in the history of the world. He invented the bifocal. He wrote Almanacs. He counseled kings. He discovered freaking ELECTRICITY. I could go on. Ben Frankin invented things you use which you do not even know Ben Franklin invented.
Honestly, screw Marx and his failed utopian lie.
To compare him to Benjamin Franklin is laughable.
Blog are important because there's no barrier to entry. People get to cut their teeth on them and get feedback. And they get to go around the conventional publishing houses, who need to make a profit and therefore won't publish unpopular ideas. And since they're available to everyone from just about everywhere, you get behind-the-scenes reporting on daily life, like the stuff from Riverbend
You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
I was going to post that very thing, but I was feeling extra wise today.
Discourage people from writing! Maybe by discouraging individuals from daily journal-like writing posted for the world to criticize, we can improve the quality of the general public's writing skills!
- Have you ever noticed that the more you learn about technology, the more stupid you sound trying to explain it?
Blogs are very nearly the ultimate in free speech! Each of us (Mr. Gorman included) have the right to their opinion and the right to share and express that opinion. It is my personal opinion that Mr. Gorman is wrong, in the sense that he just doesn't get it, or perhaps he gets it and is afraid of it. Maybe, if he had a blog I could get inside his head and understand him a little bit better!
Libraries are brick and mortar buildings that organize and categorize people's knowlege, observations, imaginations, and opinions. In a sense, blogs do much of the same thing although they are virtual and they are far less structured (there is no Dewey Decimal System for blogs). While libraries have traditionally been a cornerstone of a certain type of freedom in our country, blogs are becomming a different type of cornerstone of freedom. Blogs don't require editors nor do they require fact-checkers, they are less accurate and unedited. That doesn't make them dangerous, or wrong - but it does set them apart from the print world - it makes them "affordable" to the common man - who is free to publish whatever it is he desires. It also gives the reader a little more responsibility, they aren't reading information that has been filtered by editors, checked by fact-checkers, and approved by some sort of review board.
In a very real sense, filtering by anyone is a form of censorship. I have a brain and I can decide for myself if the information I am reading is valid and worthwhile. I especially appreciate forums like Slashdot where I can read comments from others who can put their two cents worth in. Between the story, my own opinions, and other people's comments I come up with something better than I can find in a library (on a narrow subject).
Try changing "Blog" people to anyone this guy may have an opinion about. You will see that his opinion is utterly worthless to anyone, as far as I can see:
American Library Association president Michael Gorman is not too fond of drinkers and drinking. '[The] Drunk People (or their subclass who are interested in pubs and the glorification of alcohol) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of alcohol and a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... Given the quality of the discussions in the pubs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Drunk People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random bullshit and sports trivia.
Heh. This guy is an ass. Why do we really care what he thinks? Personally, I don't rely on blogs to educate me in the slightest. You always have to read between the lines when people are writing for an audience. That includes many of the beloved books housed in the fine institutions he oversees.
Of the "more than 40 years of working in libraries," I wonder how many Mr. Gorman spent answering silly questions on the telephone. Now "who was Henry VIII's second wife?" can be fielded by McGoogle, freeing Mr. Gorman to draft more vitriolic treatises against the digital age.
I read this gentleman's article and was a little put out. He seems like the same type of myopic literary scholar that I generally refer to as a grammar nazi. Why can't most reasonably intelligent and educated individuals understand that grammar, spelling, writing style, and careful composition are largely demonstrations of a trade skill. They have very little to do with successful communication. I work with dozens of very effective and well respected scientists. Many of them send me mail, white papers, and other communications that contain misspelled words and grammar mistakes. For some reason both I, and everyone else can still understand their meaning.
I truly wish that "professional" writers and communicators would spend a little more time on content and a little less on demonstrating their scholarly credentials. I had a professor in school who had received a PhD in communications. She sent me an e-mail message that closed with "If you don't get this message, please let me know."
In my mind, that summarizes the whole, sad debacle. Content is king on the internet, and in my personal reading. I may admire style or a clever turn of phrase, but if the content is not useful, then the reading is not useful. I read Slashdot because their are a number of very intelligent and well informed people here. I could not care less about their spelling if they have useful or interesting opinions or knowledge. I pity this librarian who seems to have the opposite view.
I would also note, that for someone who proclaims ignorance about "blogs," he certainly sounds like a skilled troll.
Boston Public Library's Bernie Margolis should set up blogging for BPLers and BPLusers. Librarians' and curators' expertise needs to be shared more effectively and efficiently. BPLPSA Boston Public Library Professional Staff Association and other library unions need to encourage blogging. By blogging librarians will make more clear their value to our communities' constituencies and be in a better position to negotiate for more benefits and more remuneration.
Blogging by BPLers would assemble more information about BPL collections in greater depth according to the expertise and interests of librarians and curators who blog. Then a navigational type of blog would bring together better information for wayfinders around the BPL campus of two buildings, many floors of different departments, services and collections.
Freedom of speech is important, but it is being squandered by blog authors.
The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
They consider themselves as some sacred order of information keepers, to be doled out to those who follow thier rules and are worthy.
At least from the Librarians I've met. Now Mister Gorman reenforces my stereotype of Librarians.
"A blog is a species of interactive electronic diary by means of which the unpublishable, untrammeled by editors or the rules of grammar, can communicate their thoughts via the web."
Alright, what about those who blog who do publish? Be it at a magazine like the New Republic or National Review or literary authors?
"My piece had the temerity to question the usefulness of Google digitizing millions of books and making bits of them available via its notoriously inefficient search engine."
Google is a bit easier to use than the Library of Congress or Dewey Decimal system, but that comment again shows that Mister Gorman thinks the Library is the holy church of knowledge and something like a Google digitalization effort takes you from the true path.
"The Luddite label is because my mild remarks have been portrayed as those of someone worried about the job security of librarians (I am not) rather than one who has a different point of view on the usefulness of this latest expression of Google hubris and vast expenditure of money involved. If a fraction of the latter were devoted to buying books and providing librarians for the library-starved children of California, the effort would be of far more use to humanity and society."
Yea. Well, the library-starved children of California will likely get a bigger bang for thier parent's tax dollar by getting a dedicated search terminal than a staff member with a Masters.
ALA American Library Association gets a failing grade for years of ignoring FOI freedom of information with regard to local and state government. Our cities' public libraries need to get their respective Mayors and City Councils to set up more routine transmittal of municipal departments public documents to our public libraries that citizens can learn more about local government. Mayoral directives and City Council orders are needed to effect more routine transmittal of local public documents to their public libraries.
y -blogs.net/
In Boston Boston Public Library's Bernie Margolis and BPL Government Documents' G. Fithian resist doing what would benefit our communities constituencies by not asking Mayor Tom Menino and City Council President Michael F. Flaherty to arrange for more routine transmittal.
See also
http://foi.library-blogs.net
http://greyliteratureatbostonpubliclibrary.librar
(I always thought this was one of the greatest sketches ever on that show..)
The McLaughlin Group
John McLaughlin.....Dana Carvey
Jack Germonde.....John Goodman
Pat Buchanan.....Phil Hartman
Eleanor Clift.....Jan Hooks
Morton Kondracke.....Kevin Nealon
Announcer: From the nation's capital, "The McLaughlin Group", an unrehearsed, hastily assembled program presenting inside opinions and forecasts on major issues of today. With Jack Germonde of the Baltimore Sun, syndicated columnists Pat Buchanan and Eleanor Clift, and Morton Kondracke of the New Republic. Now, here's the moderator, John McLaughlin.
John McLaughlin: Issue number 1: the commander-in-chief in Mexico. Bush wants a free trade agreement, what does President Salinas want? Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: John, Salinas is playing up his recent economic success and steering his..
John McLaughlin: Jack Germonde!
Jack Germonde: I don't think it's so much what Salinas wants, it's what..
John McLaughlin: Eleanor Clift!
Eleanor Clift: John, this is just another case of President Bush trying to push a policy..
Pat Buchanan: I'm not sure Bush has a policy..
John McLaughlin: Excuse me Pat, I believe Eleanor has the floor.
Eleanor Clift: Thanks, John. The hard truth is that Bush needs Salinas more than Salinas..
John McLaughlin: Morton Kondracke!
Morton Kondracke: I think this agreement talk is basically a..
John McLaughlin: Wrong! There will be a free trade agreement; it will take place within one year. Issue number 2: Maggie out, Major in. The new British prime minister, some believe he's a Thatcher clone. Will he carry out her policies? Jack Germonde!
Jack Germonde: Well, Thatcherites are privately rejoicing..
John McLaughlin: Wrong Mortone.
Morton Kondracke: See, Thatcher endorsed..
John McLaughlin: Wrong! On a scale of 1 to 14, 1 being lowest degree of unlikelihood, 14 being absolute metaphysical certitude, what are the chances of Major continuing Thatcher's alliance with Bush, vis-a-vis the Iraqis? Eleanor Clift!
Eleanor Clift: I'd say about a 12.
John McLaughlin: Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: Hold it, 14 is most likely?
John McLaughlin: Yes.
Pat Buchanan: I would have to say about a 9.
John McLaughlin: Jack Germonde!
Jack Germonde: Lower, like 5.
John McLaughlin: Mortone!
Morton Kondracke: 8!
John McLaughlin: Wrong! The actual degree of likelihood is 6.5. Issue number 3: life after death. Some pundits say it doesn't exist. Theologians disagree. Is there an afterlife? Jack Germonde!
Jack Germonde: I.. uh.. really don't know.
John McLaughlin: Mortone!
Morton Kondracke: Well, it's not my field..
John McLaughlin: Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: I'd like to believe, but it's not..
John McLaughlin: Wrong! There is life after death. The soul does not ascend to heaven but rather rests in a limbo state that varies depending on the karma of the spirit. Issue number 4: Intellegent beings on other planets, yes or no? Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: I would think so.
John McLaughlin: Eleanor Clift!
Eleanor Clift: Don't know.
John McLaughlin: Jack Germonde!
Jack Germonde: Me, either.
John McLaughlin: Mortontown!
Morton Kondracke: Well, no one really knows..
John McLaughlin: Wrong! There is intellegent life in the 11th galaxy on the planet Neptar, which will conquer Earth in the year 5482, utilizing us for slave labor in their Chellonian salt mines. Issue number 5: what number am I thinking of? Pat Buchanan!
Pat Buchanan: Geez, uh, 82?
John McLaughlin: Wrong! Eleanor Clift!
Eleanor Clift: Is it between 1 and..
John McLaughlin: Don't skirt the issue!
Eleanor Clift: Uh.. 40!
John McLaughlin: Wrong! Mortontyne!
Morton Kondracke: 212?
John McLaughlin: Wrong! Jackareeno!
Jack Germonde: 2?
John McLaughlin: Wrong! The correct answer is 134. 134. Issue number 6: what did you have for breakfast today? Eleanor!
Eleanor Clift: Some cantaloupe.
John McLaughlin: Mortontown, USA!
Morton Kondracke: I had poached e
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Damn, Outed.
Must develop new
psuedonym.
can't maintain identity...
man, I feel like mold.
The world as it is today is much because of America, and America is as it is today, much because of Benjamin Franklin. Marx has more name recognition, but Franklin blows Marx away 10 times over in real impact.
I read a quote from someone who sounded like a real idiot. At least he reads a lot of complex texts. He likes to criticize other forms of communication. I'd suggest he get a blog and write about it.
1. Ol' boy must have a full inbox this morning
2. This will no doubt be the most popular story ever on LJ.com
3. From what I was told this piece was meant as humor. I do see evidence of that, regardless, I'd be willing to bet he'll be using the "I was kidding" defense.
From the first paragraph he comes out swinging calling what we do unpalatable, and untrammeled by editors. This was meant to be an insult? In some ways I suppose these are legitimate complaints, but in other ways these are some of our greatest strengths. It's no doubt an ugly neologism, but I don't think I've ever pulled anything out of the drain resembling a blog.
Though he provides no reason why it's absurd to give us press credentials, is it so hard for us to believe that someone would think this way? Especially someone who believes a computer that is able to search well over 8billion documents in less than a second is notoriously inefficient. This no doubt is meant to be humor, right? His response to Google is nothing more than typical librarian thinking that leaves us shackled to vendors that provide us with what we want, and leave out users hanging. This line of thinking continues to make us less relevant and expose the ugly curmudgeonly underbelly of our profession we've all seen in meetings. That's not to say we should be rushing into every crazy new idea out there. But not being able to see the value in what Google does now, and what it'll be capable of in a few years is not just short sighted, it's dangerous for our profession.
Going on to attack the quality of writing on blogs is like shooting fish in a barrel. No kiddin', we ain't got mad skillz when it comes to gramer and spelinng. Speed kills. The funniest lines I must just quote:
That is simply a classic quote. For my money, probably one of the funniest things I've seen written about bloggers, ever.
Something tells me this did little to stem the tide of email and comments that say "Michael Gorman is an idiot" Worse yet, this will work to alienate more of us from the ALA at a time when they probably don't need to push more people away. This coming from the president is simply terrible PR at the very least, and I'd guess will lead to people calling for him to resign.
You know that thing where someone, off to the edge, says that they don't like what you're doing--but you don't care because their opinion carrys no weight whatsoever? This is that.
So some guy from the ALA (didn't even know what that was until the article told me) doesn't like bloggers or blogging, huh? Wooptie f*ckin' doo.
I mean--blogging... gee, wow. I guess the reason I don't care is I neither love nor loath blogging. It's a thing. People do it. It has its place. Probably some people overestimate its importance just as Mr. ALA-guy is probably underestimating the new possibilities blogging opens up. (yawn)
Kinda reminds me of Katz.
Furry cows moo and decompress.
Ok, I know that there are a lot of "angst-blogs" out there written by pimple-faced 15-year olds who just want to get laid and pretend that they know more about "what music really is," than anyone else out there, but, such crap is only one form that a blog can take.
I think the key to a weblog is that it can take any form that you can imagine. You can have sites that are straight news and others that aren't. I've seen blogs where people post literary works and other "academic" endeavors.
My weblog, which I don't feel I need to mention (because its right under my username...), isn't about the high level thinking that this guy is on about. My blog is about hating guys like this, actually.
I mean, guys like this are blind academics. They just don't get that there's life outside of books and research. He sees something that isn't intellectual and immediately turns his nose up at it.
Don't get me wrong, I mean, smart people rock and all, but not everything has to be an intellectual pursuit. Sometimes Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll can really just be about Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll, you know?
Ahh... Oh well, the academic world hates me, and I hate the academic world.
*BTW, Please pardon any spelling or puctuation errors as I am not used to typing on a non-US keyboard (and I'm in a hurry).
Opinionated Law Student Strikes Again!
For every book rejected, a 95 more should be rejected if being "published" should be a guarentee of quality. Even though I claimed we were becomming more critical, I still have to spend a lot of time explaining programmer wanabies that just becauase they read something in a book that claims to teach C++, it is not necessarily right.
Conventional media and new media are *both* full of crap, and you have to learn how to distinguish insight with junk.
Your last analogy is on spot, there are plenty of amateurs who can cook better than plenty of professionals. Some people actually believe that McDonald make good food, while everyone can learn to make better tasting food than that in less than a day if they put their mind to it.
Yes, very few are able to make as good food as you get on a gourmet restaurant, but this includes most professionals. There is no sharp dividing line in cooking skills, just like there isn't in writting.
Actually the driver analogy works as well, there are plenty of professional drivers who shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a public road, and plenty of amateurs who can drive safely and considerately.
Most professional drivers aren't NASCAR drivers. Most professional cooks aren't gourmet chefs.
And most professional writers are a waste of time.
The fact that most people know how to drive a car, and most people (at least outside the US) know how to cook a meal, and most people today are able to publish on the new media, take away the mystery from the many mediocre professionals.
I think most librarians consider themselves archivists. Part of archiving is filtering, but that is simply to boost the signal/noise ratio. Librarians today are given grants to, say, put online all of the collected historic documents from the local German immigrants. This is extremely valuable to the world. It might sound totally boring to you (and me), but they are trying daily to make as much information freely available as possible. Any decisions about how the information is presented involves filtering, but the librarians are doing a valuable service by that very filtering. Part historians, they are trying to impose a framework on a heap of undesigned coincidences. This is not because they have a god-given right to frame the data they recieve, but because the simple act of presentation has, inherent in the act, some sort of framing/filtering.
/. crowd. Librarians are the most vocal voice for fair use and against restrictive DRM laws. The idea of fair use is their whole reason for existence.
They have a truly Sisyphian task, by the way, since the amount of available information is growing far faster then the ranks of librarians.
This ALA President guy sounds like a dink, but I think librarians on the whole are good people. They are natural allies to the whole
For one who bemoans the quality of others' writing, Mr. Gorman is a surprisingly poor writer -- phrases such as "absurd icing on absurd cakes" would never make it past a competent editor, or even to the front page of most blogs. And that's not even counting his needlessly tautological "I am not against it, and ... am rather for it," or the grammatically questionable "The luddite label is because... " (This construction is technically correct if you believe that it's an existential clause -- i.e. if the word "is" means "exists" in this context, rather than functioning as a linking verb. Feel free to insert your own Monicagate joke here.) Most jarringly, however, are the pathetic attempts at humor scattered throughout which reveal that in this area Mr. Gorman really hasn't, to pardon the expression, done his research. I would reccomend he read at least some amount of witty intellectual discourse before attempting to write in this style again. He has very little excuse not to -- presumably he can find books by Swift, Voltaire, Mark Twain, Oscar Wilde, and many other great authors on the shelves of his own library!
I used to read Caltizzle. I was a lot cooler than you.
It is obvious that the Blog People read what they want to read rather than what is in front of them and judge me to be wrong on the basis of what they think rather than what I actually wrote.
On the subject of "the quality of writing," I must say that I've parsed this sentence several times, I've reread its context, reread all the referenced articles, and I still can barely guess what this sentence is supposed to mean.
Does he mean that bloggers self-select their reading materials to such a degree that they insulate themselves from opposing viewpoints and broader context, both of which are necessary for good scholarship? Maybe.
Perhaps he is complaining that many bloggers fail to RTFA? That could be it. If so, we welcome him to our party.
No, it seems to me that what he's really on about is the old debater's complaint, "But that's not what I said -- you're twisting my words and not listening to me." So, welcome to the public stage Mr. Gorman, where knee-jerk reaction and ill-considered opinion are the order of the day. Practice your sound bites. If you want to persuade this audience, it's going to take more than erudition.
. . . And now, I'm off to try to find some one who judges based on something other than what he thinks and who reads things that he doesn't, as some level, want to read.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
Here are a few leading library blogs
m
http://librarian.net
http://librarystuff.net
http://lisnews.com
http://libr.org/juice
http://marylaine.com/neatnew.html
http://marylaine.com/exlibris/index.html
a collaborative blog, a guide to problematical library use
http://GuideToProblematicalLibraryUse.buzzword.co
Of interest, at Boston Public Library some BPLers are unable or unwilling to use plain ASCII text when sending email, when replying to reference desk enquiries from BPLusers!
Most of my reading time is spent maintain skills, or learning new ones, so I don't get to read outside of carreer material as much as I used to. I've seen more pages of "Oracle 9i on Linux and Unix" or one of many "HP OpenView Solutions" guides than anything else recently.
The rest of my down time is spent being daddy. So I do get to re-read some of my favorite kid's books with my daughter. But when I do get the time... =) I suspect my reading list will explain some of my Slashdot posts.
I'm presently reading The Physics of Immortality, by Frank Tipler.
On my list (which is my bookshelf, chock full of things I've not had the time to read):
-The Fabric of the Cosmos (Brian Greene)
-On Being Black: Essays In Honor of W. E. B. DuBois
-Woman Warrior (Maxine Hong Kingston)
-Through A Glass, Darkly (Jostein Gaarder)
-Nation of Rebels : Why Counterculture Became Consumer Culture (Joseph Heath, Andrew Potter)
Things I've recently read or re-read:
-V for Vendetta (Alan Moore)
-The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy At Home And Abroad (Fareed Zakaria)
-Shadow: Five Presidents and the Legacy of Watergate (Bob Woodard)
Blacker than my baby girl's stare. Black like the veil that the muslimina wear. Black like the planet that they fear...
... but Gorman didn't make it because he clearly doesn't know the first thing about how Google search works.
The flaw in Google's plan to digitize lots of books is not "too much information". It's too much information without links generated by people. Without those links, PageRank doesn't work, and Google search degenerates to keyword search.
This digital library could be as useful as the rest of Google if people who are experts at reading and classifying texts (like librarians, maybe) could go through it and make meaningful links. Google could get partway to this if they digitized the texts and used the card catalog information to start the linking process.
Gorman and the membership of his orgainzation could then be viewed as contributing to the solution, rather than as Luddites trying to preserve their jobs and old habits.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
The REAL problem with political blogging is many-fold. The first is that they do not attempt anything like a NPOV in selecting stories.
...That is to say, most political idealogs believe in the incompetence of everyone but their side
True... but this is a problem with ANY news source. People have points of view and this comes out even whey they attempt(!) to be neutral. The multiplicity of news sources & commentary from many points of view is a positive development in this regard. True, many readers limit their sources to those they agree with, but by and large even stories that contradict their assumptions tend to bleed into those sources because their ideological opponents have the same ability to publish and popularize their views. It is effectively impossible for stories to be buried anymore. "The truth will out" is more true today (and much quicker) than when there were only a handful of news sources.
Another thing that is REALLY wrong with blogs is that they are at best tertiary sources of information.
Directly linked to the secondary sources we had before in the news media, and pretty often linked to primary sources as well.
The more interesting blogs to me are those by actual experts in whatever field they are blogging on, the people that otherwise would have been quoted briefly (often innacurately) in a news article. Or blogs by actual witnesses to events in the news (i.e. iraqi blogs, soldiers blogs) These people have the same problems of bias compounded by being passionate participants but that is typical of *primary* sources, which these blogs are. Views and opinions of participants which in a news article would be reduced to a one line summary (or caricature) are given in full.
You think this is limited to political ideologues? It is implicit in having an opinion, any opinion, that you believe any and all contrary opinions are wrong. Now how you react to those contrary opinions can be respectful, can be open-minded or can be dismissive or insulting. Bloggers are individuals, some are obnoxious in their opinions some are open-minded and participate in intelligent debate. This librarian is an example of someone who is somewhat obnoxious in his opinions - "the absurd idea.." The breezily presentation of his opinions as something "everybody knows" (i.e. Google's "notoriously inefficient search engine.") when in fact "everybody" knows no such thing. It's a tactic to shut down debate and "win" without actually having to present evidence supporting your contention. He's very dismissive of his opponents "I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts." without providing any evidence to support this view. Contrary to his contention many of the most popularly read bloggers are academics themselves, Glen Reynolds for instance is a professor of constitutional law. He may write Instapundit in the casual manner typical of blogs but I suspect he does plenty of "sustained reading of complex texts" probably more so than Michael Gorman (have you ever read books on constitutional law? The field is pretty damn close to the the sine qua non of "complex texts").
This rant is better written that the average blog post but as logical argumentation and respectful debate it is down there with the worst. Professionals are by necessity threatened by the democratization and commoditization of their professions, that is all this rant amounts to.
Blogs are a good place to nurture the next generation of writers. The writing styles of bloggers may be of lower quality in a classical sense at present. However this does not mean that bloggers will never adopt such styles or techniques. Nor does it mean bloggers will not improve their writing with time. I'm sure Shakespeare did not start blurting out poetry as soon as he was born. Similarly I doubt the Bronte sisters could have become good writers without writing for fun when they were young. I think we will start seeing some exceptional writers emerging as a result of blogging.
Michael Gorman says in TFA that he doubts many bloggers are "in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts." To me this is an unfair comment. Gorman attributes the poor writing skills and undisciplined techniques of bloggers to poor reading skills. I differ on this point. Poor writing skills does not equate to poor reading skills nor intellectual capacity as shown by postings on Slashdot! Blogs aren't a formal medium for communication. As a result there is no requirement for a blogger to adhere to a disciplined style of writing. Also as consumers most of us are brought up to be readers but not necessarily writers. So it will take some time before bloggers adjust to being writers.
The best way to be a good writer is to actually practice writing something. Blogs are a fun way for people to do just that.
The best librarians do not join ALA American Library Association. ALA exorbitant membership rates overly tax professionals considering the remuneration librarians get for their work.
l
Most library schools curricula are mostly indoctrination than encouraging new ways of looking at our libraries. For example, in Massachusetts, Simmons College has prevented the establishing of affordable public programs in library and information studies at our University of Massachusetts at Boston. Simmons tuition is high and lacking in financial assistance. Compare SUNY Albany State University of New York at Albany's more theoretical curricula in information policy that inspires students and faculty to look at our libraries and technology in more innovative ways http://www.albany.edu/sisp/level3/SISPHistory.htm
These comments sound very much like the comments made by the president of the "Union of Scribes and Text Copiers" when people started using Gutenberg's new fangled device.
Gorman's Blog
My wife (a librarian) pointed me to http://lp-web.ala.org:8000/guest/archives/ALACOUN/ log0502/msg00188.html
"Dear Colleagues
I am sorry that Councillors Hartman and Schneider feel like that. The piece (LJ, February 15th 2005) was intended to be satirical, though I am certainly no fan of "blogs," having an old fashioned belief that, if one wishes to air one's views and be taken seriously, one should go through the publishing/editing process. I am surprised that people who attack an article as mine (LAtimes, Dec. 17th 2004) has been attacked should be as thin-skinned as some appear to be.
Rest assure that my views on "blogs" have nothing to do with my activities as ALA president-elect or president. I merely air my views and believe that everyone (including me) has a right to speak in any way they wish and that others have a right to respond.
Best wishes, Michael"
Bloggers seem to think information distribution is a new paradigm...people have been taping screeds to lamp posts for a couple centuries now.
Sure, there's some good stuff in there. But for the most part, you can classify blogs thusly:
* "Bush is an idiot" vs. "Stupid moonbats!!!"
* "I can't get laid" vs. "pay $10 to watch me get laid LIVE ON CAM!!!"
* "Check out my l33t b@sh scripting SKILLZ!!!" vs. "Here's the latest VB.NET component module scripting wizard for Enterprise Monkeybusiness 2005!!!"
What?! Am I supposed to have an intellectual need for entire paragraphs? What's wrong with disjointed sentence fragments? And I think that slashdotting should count as 'sustained reading of complex texts.'
I'm sure Mr. Gorman is quite familiar with Boswell's Life of Johnson.
It's on paper, and it's centuries old, but a blog is a blog is a blog.
Too many librarians expend more effort and energies with regard to rules and limitations than they do in inspiring library users to make more robust use of library collections and services. ALA president Michael Gorman represents that.
h tml
Compare former ALA president Mitch Friedman http://www.mjfreedman.org/mediaappearances/media.
Sunt eu, Picasso!
I personally don't empathize with Mr. Gorman. I am an IT consultant, and I always visit Google first when searching for information. In the span of a few short years, Google has revolutionized the way many of us search for information.
It appears that Mr. Gorman is jealous of Google, because they are receiving so much funding for their book digitizing project. My guess is that Mr. Gorman fears that Google will render librarians such as himself largely obsolete.
Sadly, I'd have to say I agree with his overall premise.
Most of the people I know that are 'fanatical' to any degree are outright idiots - liberal, conservative, or otherwise. Much of the slashdot-type croud consists of such people of the liberal persuasion with strong beliefs that are pro-First Amendment, anti-2nd Amendment, and very socialist. It's my experience that many of these people (at least in my real-life dealings) result to nothing more than pure emotionalist appeals, often having little comprehension of actual facts or statistics. They're a mob of sound-byte fanatics that feed on their own fear.
Sorry if this comes across as flamebait. It's really quite unfortunate, and something I try to help change daily.
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
Todays predictions of a new media format through wikis and blogs are analagous to the flying cars and domed cities of the 50's.
The difference is, blogs and wikis are here, today, and not some sf prediction of the future.
Our ability to use them effectively might be a bit overrated, though. Like all the hype surrounding the Segway ("it'll transform cities!"), I think we underestimate the uselessness of the blog.
That last paragraph is just my opinion, of course. I could be really, really wrong.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Our current U.S. political climate bears this out.
In other words, you're unhappy with the current situation because the uninformed arrogant haven't managed to see things your way and vote accordingly. The unintentional irony of this couplet is astounding.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
> a serious conversation starts up .....
Shit, you just described *every* meeting I've been in.....
you said it
Why would a person his "position" judge blogs as if they were trying to push away books from its shelves? Someone explain to him that these personal weB LOGS are mostly (some are indeed trying to be e-Shakespeare) from people's impulsive minds and are not as well-thought-of as his isolation-induced/inspired grocery list is.
It's a Web Log. Every time I hear Blog on the news, it makes me want to hurt a kitten so much. Which sort of explains the smell coming out of my basement.
Oh no, the bishop in the cathedral doesn't like the unwashed masses ignoring him.
Some of the most insightful, life changing works that I have read are among some of the essays that I have found on blogs. The bishop is irrelevant.
Blogs brought down the lies of 60 minutes. That's good enough for me.
As they say, information wants to be free. How much more free can you get? So what if 99% is crap. I'll read and decide what to keep. I don't need the ALA to do that for me...
Or maybe, he's pulling an Eminem on us. You know, pull a certain group's head off for publicity.
While I have a blog, doesn't everybody, my thoughts are that it simply refers to external events, topics, and provides my thoughts at the time. It is also searchable through external search services. I get a lot of hits on topics, which when I was looking for the same information, there was little if any. This IMHO is exactly the purpose of blogs.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0405,hentoff,5066 4,6.html - by Nat Hentoff
Karen Schneider's amendment ( to request the release of imprisoned Cuban librarians ) was overwhelmingly voted down by the 182-member ALA council. Only about five hands were raised to support it. Next week, I will report on praise from a high Cuban official for the ALA's rejection of the Schneider amendment.
The ALA has been overtaken by hard-left idealogues.
The stakeholders in older technology ALWAYS dis the upstart newcomers. We've already heard the same bitching about blogs from journalists. It was only a matter of time before we heard from the librarians.
Just look to history...
When the Internet came in, the TV people said, "It's not as good as TV".
When TV came in, the movie people said, "It's not as good as movies".
When movies came in, the book people said, "It's not as good as books".
When books came in, the epic poem people said, "It's not as good as epic poems".
When epic poems came in, the sitting-around-the-fire-and-grunting people said, "It's not as good as sitting around the fire and grunting".
Etc.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Serving your airship needs since 1995.
typical of a paper zealot... someone should email him some ebooks and a link to the blogger.com howto...
Get your torrents...
Someone doesn't get the point doo daa doo daa
Someone is a crabby fart oh da do da daaay
It is far too late in this post for anyone to read this, but if they do i hope it encourages some thought...
I am on the same plain as many bloggers and bloggees, in that i see it primarily as an electronic diary of sorts, but often time published with the sense that an unknown audience may read it.
The case in point is that in many cases there are private blogs, where more than likely just your friends and family will take a gander, and other cases where we have professional blogs of sorts. When people actually go to get your opinion or references to other information sources. Kind of like an expert opinion being referenced as "factual" in a court. Anyways - i am wondering how long it will be until there are blogs that are not even written by people, but written by their secretaries (excuse me - administrators) or subordinates - assistant content managers - whatever! For example, in many cases, i know people that do not have enough time to get out all of their emails. This is pretty common, things like meetings and logistical stuff are handled by someone else.
At some point blogs are going to be written by someone else, and then signed off by owner of the the blog as if it were their own, just b/c of the way in which blogs are becoming as necessary as a company having their own
I am not pundit, but i predict this!
Hope someone reads this, and perhaps knows of an example or can see some simliarities in the trend?
Thanks!
The era of approved information is over. I'm happy about that. Apparently snobs like Gorman aren't. Too bad for him.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
*cues scene of librarians dropping out of black helicopters to deny you access to information that the Illuminati have deemed not safe for consumption*
Give me a break. Just because some nutcase found that one historical figure had more books written about them than another historical figure, doesn't mean that the librarians are out to control who gets access to what information.
I've seen some pretty hair-brained theories on Slashdot before but this takes the cake.
He's incensed because the world isn't waiting for his Perfect Solution. Somehow I can cry no tears for a Perfect Solution that isn't actually functional yet.
-----------------------
You are what you think.
Ever been to a public library in America? There are plenty of book-cases full of trashy romance novels, teen novels, popular interest magazines, and books that never made it to the Harvard Great Classics collection. The blogosphere is no different. There are tons of blogs that are trashy, not very interesting, examples of poor writing, but in their midst there are gems of blogs that are paragons of excellent thinking, writing and exemplify the best in journalistic practice and ethics. The criticism meted out was unfair, as that was judging the work of all bloggers by the worst among them. Would it be appropriate to judge the literary taste of librarians by all the Harlequin romance novels most of them keep on library shelves?
"They seemed to label anything to the "right" as right-wing or conservative. Things to the "left" generally escaped the left-wing or liberal labels."
This is exactly what I mean. None of these news agencies is going to out and out SAY what their bias is. No, it takes something like Dan Rather's National Guard BS on Bush to really bring it out. That didn't happen because of a 'mistake' - it was proven that it happened out of desparation.
Since I posted I've been labeled as a 'baboon' and other nice names and again, it shows why the Left in this country can't get a grip. Name calling isn't going to change the facts - whatever your point of view. But it DOES make others compare you to immature children. It didn't work making faces at Bush during the last election, and your childishness probably won't help you on the next one either.
GROW UP. Learn what civil discourse means, and then come back and argue from a more educated point of view.
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
If anyone deserves a bump up this guy (gal?) does. Adding to the factual debate without an argument is rare and should be rewarded.
Does it matter what this guy thinks?
Has the Académie Francaise really prevented the French language from evolving?
Maybe it's true that certain kinds of written expression makes it easier to present and reflect upon sustained, complex arguments.
Maybe nalogously, classical music might be viewed as ordinary popular music with denser, sustained, complex, interrelated information. This is no way diminishes Tuvan throat singing or Final Fantasy soundtracks or Bob Dylan's "I'll Be Your Baby Tonight"
I still like my single shots of Metallica -- and Slashdot (my favorite circle-blog).
Despite his claim to the contrary, what Michael Gorman is unhappy about is that Google allows ordinary people to bypass the librarian as a gatekeeper who knows how to access various pricey and difficult to use databases. Most librarians aren't bothered by that. The few who are, like Gorman, feel themselves better than the general 'muck' of humanity and dislike any evidence that we are capable of running out own lives. That's why he turns bloggers, a quite varied group, into the unthinking 'blog people' of a 1950s-era horror movie. We're not like him, therefore we can't think or understand what we ought to be reading, a dig at Google's plans for an enormous digital library.
We also need to remember that, whatever the politics of most librarians, politicized librarians such as this Michael Gorman, lean very heavily left. And the establishment left is very unhappy about blogging and the general leveling and democratization of political discussion created by the Internet. Their hostility lies in how differently blogging has impacted politics.
While bloggers exist on both the left and right, blogging in general has been good for conservatives and bad for the liberal establishment. Conservatives have always been rebels against the biases of the MSM (mainstream media). But because they can take on CBS and CNN and remain solidly conservative, the rebellion of conservative bloggers is constructive.
On the other hand, when liberal bloggers rebel against that same MSM, they're rebelling against the liberal establishment itself. The result is a Dean-inspired mass movement that's so nutty and filled with conspiracy theories, it stands little chance of improving liberalism's declining influence.
In the 1960s, it was said that what was news in America was decided by what Walter Cronkite found interesting when he read the NY Times. That's no longer true. A much more varied mix of people now decide what is news and where information is obtained. The few are no longer our gatekeepers. The effects are both good and bad, but the overall trend is good.
--Mike Perry, Inkling Books, Seattle
effete intellectual snob.
Our great peace loving French leader. Wasn't he the one who - against the nuclear test ban treaty - fired off a few down New Zealand way in the 90's?
My point here is that this fact was little reported here and in fact, it was totally glossed over. Chirac is not a 'monkey' as you say. He is a terrorist and responsible for spewing radioactive contaminants far and wide. If there's a war in the Middle East, it won't be because of the U.S., it will be because this one man started a chain of events that cannot be undone.
The next time Bush pulls out of an agreement like the ABM treaty, remember that our friends the French started the ball rolling again. Once they did it, Pakistan and India decided it must be safe to do it. This in turn has accellerated Iran's nuclear program as well.
Where were our wonderful news organizations when this happened? Right... Clinton was in office - everything must've been fine after all...
"...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
today i read this horrible article by this horrible little man / he said that bloggers were going to ruin the world becuz of our poor speeling and capitiliziziaiation / what do ppl like him no n e wayz?
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
A hundred thousand ignorant bloggers screaming at the top of their lungs won't stop you from reading whoever you want to read, exactly as if everyone else wasn't there.
On the contray, those bloggers pollute the indexes of search engines, making it that much harder to find information that is relevant to your search. The vast knowledge resources of the Internet are useful only so long as you can find what you're looking for after all.
This article covers two particular issues: that of the usefulness of blogs (this part seems to be a backlash against the 'angry masses' who apparently pummeled him about some other article) and the usefulness of Google as a method for finding valuable information. More precisely, the second part is a simple remark that Google is not a good tool for studying information, and that those who infer otherwise are, in essence, fooling themselves. Hardly any reasoning is presented in the article at all, just opinion.
However, I do find myself wondering why it is important if someone reads information from a hard copy rather than an electronic screen. It seems to me that it is the ideas that are important, not the method of conveyance.
The trouble is, no one I know who does or ever did run such a site has ever done this. I did it whenever I posted a link to something I wrote on USENET, and people I knew (hardcore geeks, most of em) thought I was a little weird for doing it (and some of them thought that about me posting to USENET too).
Nowadays you can't do that with most blogs, which are hosted on servers not owned by the "blogger". And "blog" has become so broadly applied that people now call any page written in a first-person singular tone that allows feedback a "blog". Sorry, your LiveJournal page is NOT A BLOG. It's not anything particularly special or worthy of a special name, unless maybe you're Linus Torvalds or John Carmack or somebody else whose every word people hang on with bated* breath.
It's time to face the facts. The term "weblog" was nonsensically conceived to begin with, even more nonsensical in later application, and is now so diluted as to be essentially meaning-free anyway. It denotes no useful categorization. The only thing in its favor is that it was the first term to come into existence to denote what was, at the time, a usefully-demarcated subset of online content. Simple inertia should not rule the day and I for one move that we begin the hunt for a new, more-appropriate term.
* Not a typo. "Baited breath" is incorrect and in fact nonsensical usage.
-- Old Man Kensey
I'm a little late in seeing this, and I'm sure I'll repeat things others have said, but Blogs are not the great literary works. Nor do we have time these days to know everything, as there is too much to know, nor is there time to head to the library every time I want to need to know the distance conversion from Kilometers to Miles. My boss wants the data yesterday, so I need it now. And yes, if he does not promote new and technology advanced methods for just about anything, he is borderline Antitechnologist. One of those who thinks we should not explore space, reinvent the toaster, or have a computer in every room connected to the net. Where we could digitally download any book we wanted to read.
.. it because Ari Fleischer told the press to use the term, so use of the term pretty much shows you are a whore for the White House.
Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
This is an outrage!
I'm gonna be complaining in my blog about THIS one!
I think we're dealing with two extreme opinions, neither of which are entirely correct.
First, there's the literary purist... in this case, a library professional. You have to have a lot of respect for these folks, who were very good at the information retrieval game before many of us showed up. I can understand resentment that these people have when they hear silly claims about how the Internet will make physical libraries irrelevant and contain "all the world's knowledge," etc. I can also understand how that resentment can lead these purists to identify the many faults of the online community -- not just the bloggers that don't take much care in what they post, but also well-established and highly-respected members of the online community, such as Google.
I'm not sure if his description of Google's "notoriously inefficient search engine" referred to their main web search engine, or just the engine that searches the books. If referring to Google as a whole, I respectfully disagree with his description, as I have found Google's efficiency to be incredibly high.
He goes on to say that "Google is, in fact, the device that gives you thousands of 'hits' (which may or may not be relevant) in no very useful order". Well, as is the case with library research, it depends on the person doing the searching. If you walk into a library with no knowledge of how to use it, all you see is shelves and shelves of books, with no way of finding what you need. But when you know how to use the tools in the library, such as the card catalog and the periodals guide, and now, yes, even electronic search engines, finding what you need becomes very efficient.
By the same token, and uninformed or undermotivated user will not be tremendously successful in finding information that they need on Google. Yes, there are other search engines, but I'll stick to Google, since it's the current gold standard. But the more you learn about it, the better at it you become.
It's also important when dealing with Google to realize that it does not contain all the world's knowledge or all the world's books. Nothing does. Not even libraries. And there are some things that you're much better off looking for in a library. But let's realize that there is value to full-text searching of books, which is something that libraries can't provide.
Mr Gorman seems to discount speed entirely, stopping short of describing it as the opposite of accuracy. The balance between speed and accuracy is important and always has been. It is very useful to be able to use the internet to find infomation VERY quickly. But if speed was my ONLY criterion, I would always use Google's "I'm Feeling Lucky" button, which takes you directly to the first result. That would give Google the only and final responsibility in determining what I'm looking for, and I can't turn that responsibility over to Google, because I am the searcher. It is very common for the first result to be what I want, because I put in very good search criteria in most cases. It is also quite common for me to skip over many, many Google search results because I know they're not what I'm looking for.
And yes, it's also common for me to read books, and to visit libraries and book stores. I would never consider any formal research work to be complete before checking in actual books.
The bottom line is that the well-informed researcher uses all of the tools at their disposal, and the Internet (and Google) are incredibly useful tools.
Then there are the bloggers. The good thing about blogging is that you can post whatever is on your mind without delay or editing. The bad thing about blogging is also that you can post whatever is on your mind without delay or editing. It's shortsighted to criticize the entire blogging community because some (many, actually) bloggers post a neverending stream of useless drivel. There is very useful and entertaining blogging done and just because it's kind of hard to find doesn't make it nonexistent.
The only natural language I know is english. I stink at useing it properly. I remember during grade school our english grammer teacher required us to keep a notebook for a "creative writing" exercise. For half an hour every few days or couple of weeks we were instructed to, just write. I do recall being given a grade on the notebook, I don't recall what the grade was based off of. Again I was never good at english composition, spelling, or creativity as others might see in my writings. However this particular assignment was the only in english/grammar that I was extremly comfortable doing and graded the best in. I I "finished" HS with a D in english, I don't blog.
I do however still spill my guts in creative writing sessions for my own relaxation. And find it helpful tward my attempt at becoming better at english.
Ca cest bon!
I would have modded that Informative. I guess that's just another way people who bother to create an account are different from me.
Google is "notoriously inefficient" because the results are not sorted in a sufficiently orderly way?
Is it just me, or does this guy sound anal retentive in the classical sense?
I bet he has a very clean desk, always reads the table of contents and preface, and can recite excerpts of the dewey decimal system. He must really hate wikipedia.
Many or most librarians are behind the times regarding Internet and online resources. Sure most have their catalog online and perhaps have cabinets of microfilm or microfiche.
I find many are unaware of Gutenburg or other online resources and are even hostile to my posting their books and materials online. Special Collections Librarians typically want a royalty fee of $50 or $100 a page to use public domain materials (they can do this as they have physical possession of the books). Sometimes I can find a book not in Special Collections in some another library, or can buy a cheap used copy, but it's frustrating that I have to work around these "temple keepers" to provide wider access of books to the public.
I really think it's funny how quick people are to utterly debase another viewpoint if they feel threatened. That goes for both sides, but especially anyone in a traditionally stable situation, such as a proponent of hard libraries.
Did anybody see the Back in Black on last night's Daily Show? It was a really funny dissertation on how FOX has regular FOX with all the horrible, immoral programs, and FOX news, where they get upset about them.
To paraphrase:
"I hope the fine upstanding people at FOX really stick it to the morally bankrupt people at FOX!"
Please stop stalking me, bro.
This from a guy who says "...I believe passionately in the transforming power of libraries and in the core values of our profession--service, preservation of the human record, intellectual freedom, equity of access, and the advancement of literacy."
-and-
"I would like to be remembered as an ALA leader who had a vision of libraries and librarianship that reconciled our traditional core values and services with the enthusiastic embrace of innovation--technological and otherwise--and gave all librarians and ALA members reason to be hopeful about their individual and our collective future."
Quotes from: http://www.ala.org/ala/acrl/acrlpubs/crlnews/backi ssues2004/march04/candidates04.htm
Moron.
I agree that the blogging community does seen focused on random factoids, but this is an element of the new media, which uses technology to assemble and organize all these random bits. Maybe with analog library technology, it was imperative to be much more focused, but computers make it easy to compile small chunks of information from disparate sources efficiently. We see systems like Wikipedia which are designed to turn this otherwise noise-filled data into even more comprehensive and well-rounded references.
Beyond this, bloggers and independent online entities are fast becoming the new media, challenging the traditional institutions that have controlled the nature of how and what information people can access. These new systems have new ways of doing things. The fact that an obsolete librarian doesn't appreciate this is validation of the new movement's usefulness and innovative approach. Some sites are even keeping track of the inroads bloggers are making in changing the way information is distributed. Welcome to the new world, new media.
You're conflating the label with thing. I could just as easily show you a series of rooms with chairs and tables in them. Some of the chairs are labeled "table" and some of the tables are labeled "chair." If you count the labels, how accurate is your count of the tables and chairs?
To perceive the world accurately you need to engage your own brain. Counting un-defined labels that others have imposed leads only to confusion.
Typical intellectual egocentrism.
Criticize cultures and subcultures that are not like your own...
Some people never catch on to this human being stuff...
Gorman is still using the "God's Mind" hype as a straw man to attack. Does he think that they mean those claims literally? Ironically, he seems to need a lesson in reading comprehension.
Careful, you're doing the same sort of dangerous generalizing that Gorman is doing. The fact that most individual bloggers might not express their attitude to this issue in the most cogent, concise, and perfectly correct way isn't particularly relevant. Gorman has the same problem -- he's all over the map, attacking straw men and missing the real points.
One important point Gorman is missing is that Google's Pagerank system will have an amazing synergy with Google Scholar - already, you can use Google to easily identify works you might be interested in. All Google Scholar will do will make those works available online. Gorman is missing the big picture.
Further, it's not just about Google, but about the aggregation and interconnection of online resources, including digital libraries, specialist blogs and other online communities, all of which Gorman entirely ignores.
Gorman is essentially looking at a large ecosystem, but focusing only on particular parts of it -- as though he looked at the Earth and decided that most insects were useless and dangerous - ants get into people's picnic food, bees sting you. But in conjunction with the rest of the ecosystem, both end up creating something of significant value.
Phil Shapiro writes "American Library Association president Michael Gorman is not too fond of bloggers and blogging. '[The] Blog People (or their subclass who are interested in computers and the glorification of information) have a fanatical belief in the transforming power of digitization and a consequent horror of, and contempt for, heretics who do not share that belief... Given the quality of the writing in the blogs I have seen, I doubt that many of the Blog People are in the habit of sustained reading of complex texts. It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'"
First of all, let's see how well Mr. Gorman and his ilk do solving a quadratic equation.
Try this:
Given the quality of the mathematics used by your cronies, it is unlikely that many of the Gorman Gang are in the habit of sustained computation. It is entirely possible that your analytic needs are met by an accumulation of sloppy analysis and poor numbers.
Interesting, isn't it?
Blogs are not a threat. Gorman's elitism is. Expecting all people to write like Heinlan, Joyce, Homer, etc. is illogical. Furthermore, many grammatical errors do not affect meaning of the words (not a excuse for bad writing). This is because the English language is 50% redundant. You'd know this if you'd step outside your narrow view. Of course, this (50% English language redundancy) was discovered by Claude Shannon, the daddy of information theory. One of those infotech fanatics!
I wander what would happen if the Gorman Gang's math and programming skills were held to the same level as Slashdot members. I can hear it now:
It's fascinating to hear from a man who's been doing all his life what Google now claims to do - make all (or at least some) of humanity's written word available to everyone.
I've heard stories of academics having very superior search technologies, and I think that's what he must be referring to when he calls Google a mediocre search engine.
Too bad that the search technologies that are so much better than Google aren't available to everyone, but only to a few whose institution can afford the high fees.
I'm sure he's right - Google would do a less than perfect job, but at least it would be accessible by anyone, and that would be an improvement.
Finally, he refers about working on a project with the same goals. I suspect he feels a little bit of professional envy that his project is getting passed by Google!
On the whole, I think he made reasonable points about bloggers, it's astounding how introspective they have managed to become in such a short time, with the petty wars.
But I for one am happy to get access to huge libraries of texts, whether it's through Google, or some academic project that he works on.
Wessel
"that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs."
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go warm up a bagel and have sex with it.
Something that Mr. Gorman said in his "Google and God's Mind" article, and I quote:
So, you abandon that line of inquiry or resolve to read the book. Are you going to do that online, assuming it's out of
copyright? (In the Google scheme, hundreds of thousands of books in copyright will not be available to be read as a whole.)
Not many would choose to stare at a screen long enough to do that.
His last assumption doesn't hold up. I know tons of people who read books on screen. I myself read 95% of the books in electronic form, and I usually read a hundred or more books a year. There are so many advantages. You can search the text regardless of the format (except for pdfs of books scanned as images), which is great for anything from scientific texts to George R.R. Martin epics. The texts are either available online from anywhere (to the dismay of many bosses and managers) or can be made available from anywhere if you email yourself a copy, ftp yourself a copy, carry a copy on your TravelStick or iPod or whatever. You can even read it on the bus on your PDA. Pictures, tables and graphs can be copied directly and inserted into powerpoint if you need to give a presentation on the book. And, uhh, a friend of mine tells me that many copyrighted works are available via P2P. And many, many more features of electronic media are missing from paper books, not to mention the virtually nonexistent cost of distribution. The point that Mr. Gorman is missing is that in the current publishing climate, Google's book search is not very useful. However, by the time Google indexes all of the English literature and starts work on other languages (beginning with French, just to shut them up), hopefully electronic distribution will become the prevailing form of publishing. So that looking for a book and getting a paragraph from Google book search will allow one to do exactly what he claims "not many would choose to do." You would be able to either download it from Project Gutenberg, or buy this book from Apple's iText(or Bookster, whatever) for $.99, or get your local library email it to you for free, or snag it off eDonkey. And then read it on your Chinese-manufactured $99 plasma screen to your heart's content. A couple of years, it will happen. I have a dream!
Novels:
Baroque Cycle by Neal Stephenson (finished Quicksilver, need to start Confusion)
Johnathan Strange & Mr Norrell by Susanna Clarke
The Diamond Age by Neal Stephenson
Attempts to gain knowledge/familiarity in various useful and/or interesting coding/computing sectors:
Programming PHP (O'Reilly)
PHP and MySQL for something-or-other (the Visual Quckpro one)
ASP.NET (one of those SAMS "Teach youself [technology] in [deceptively short time frame]" books)
Java 2 for Dummies
Linux Pocket Guide (O'Reilly -- I love how the Linux books are the only O'Reilly books with people on them; this one has a cowboy)
Comics:
The Goon
Several varieties of Spider-Man
Rising Stars (concludes next week)
Supreme Power
The Punisher
New Avengers
Captain America
The Incredible Hulk
Savage Dragon
Concrete
Fantastic Four
Gotham Central
Human Target
Fallen Angel
Green Lantern: Rebirth
Several others that escape me at the moment
I should probably exercise some focus so I can get more done.
Honor Among Slackers. A veri
A bit of attitude adjustment seems in order.
I'm very surprised to see such opinions expressed by the president of the ALA. I have a lot of respect for those in the field of library science (dry as it may sound, most programmers would probably love it), but Mr. Gorman's comments suggest that he has somehow failed to keep up-to-date on advances in his own field.
Regardless of his opinion of blogs -- which, like books, have both their chaff and their grain -- his criticisms of Google, and by extension digital information, are misinformed and myopic. Google hardly gives access to "random bits of information", but rather does a good job of giving access to specific bits of information. His suggestion that money be spent on books and librarians for California schoolchildren instead of digital information and search engines ignores the fact the latter benefit far more people than just a relatively few American youths.
Books and libraries are wonderful, but as far as accessibility and searchability, digital information on the Internet is infinitely superior. The finest book in the finest library in the world does me no good if someone else has signed it out, or if I can't travel to the library, or if I can't find it because whatever keywords or categories under which it may be indexed don't match the ones I have in mind. The ALA would better pursue its mission of "promot[ing] the highest quality library and information services and public access to information" by embracing digital information than by treating it with the contempt shown by its President.
Please donate your spare CPU cycles to help fight cancer and other diseases
Ok, you consider Fox and Friends to be 'hard news coverage'. Its on right now. Everything is slanted to the republican point of view. For instance, it was just outed a few weeks ago that the White House was employing a 'reporter'...
Please provide evidence that Gannon was in the "employ" of the whitehouse.
that wasn't reporting for a legitimate newspaper,
Please define what constitutes a "legitimate newspaper". Also please provide reference to the laws that prohibit online newsservices from calling their staff "journalists".
had been using a false name that was ok'd by the secret service
please cite relevant laws that make it illegal to use a pen name, stage name or similar. and had questions vetted personally by their press secretary to softball back to him during the press conferences
Please provide evidence that the press secretary treated Gannon differently from other journalists. Testimony from the journalists themselves would be nice.
-- sometimes getting secret information that normally took a 3 month background check by standard White House employees, but they skipped most of it to ensure that he could ask the right questions.
Please provide evidence that Gannon received secret information.
In conclusion, put up or shut up, buddy-boy. In particular, I want to hear you make the case that we should have special standards or laws restricting who is - or is not - allowed to call themselves a journalist.
Clear, Dark Skies
Personally, I welcome this sort of setup; take out the middle man and let people write. Teamed up with google and the popularity of good blogs, those who write well will be read, those who write badly won't.
Still, there is another aspect to this; if you ever go on livejournal or any of these other blogs, you'll randomly search and find a few good blogs, which have lots of friends, a few really good blogs that have almost no friends (because they're too wordy, or something), and a great amount of blogs that simply have a few random google pictures and a nice layout. Ironically, it seems the latter blog seem to collect the most people. Oh, and blogs that feature sex, naturally.
"The internet is really a great pornography distribution system."
Notorious?
Who besides this guy thinks Google is "notoriously inefficient?"
Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?
Insert witty sig here.
The library-crats, edu-crats, university-crats, and the MainStreamMedia are all up in arms that useful information is no longer locked up in big elitist institutions hidden in big cities, libraries that are only open 3 days a week, piles of forms, boxes of microfilm, and in drawers guarded by grouchy, clueless middle aged biddies who take 2 hour lunch breaks. Nor do we have to pad their salaries with rediculous royalties, late fees, course fees, and ever-increasing tuitions. The middle men are being cut out, and they lash out at us stupid consumers with grammatically correct contempt. Grrrr, indeed! My heart just bleeds for them.
You know what's amazing about educating yourself without the aid of chauvinistic professors, loser high school teachers, preening celebrity idiots like Dan Rather? It's easy, and it's becoming easier by the day. No need to go through your life being the teacher's pet. Just do what you set out to do.
Here's library director Francis DiMenno's blog
http://www.dimenno.blog-city.com
Consider the statement "Classical music is better than modern [name your genre] music."
To "prove" this, people go to a music store, grab some random stuff from two categories and compare. And you know what? The classical turns out to be better. Almost always. Why? Because it's the best music selected from centuries of composing. While the modern stuff is whatever some bozo recorded last week.
In reality, there were plenty of worthless classical composers, and many fine composers still had their off days. But no one records and sells the bad stuff from the old days.
Now replace "modern music" with "blogs".
To do a fair comparison with the content of a random blog with a book (say), compare it with the content of a random book submitted to a publisher for consideration. Not a random published book, certainly not a random book from a library, and absolutely not your favorite books.
Now notice that
- no one makes you read bad blogs, and
- plenty of people go to a lot of work to point out good blogs.
So you don't have to waste your time with the trashTed Nelson paper on Xanadu:
We believe that *recommendations of links*, a new way of effectively creating moderated newsgroups of content, will become an important genre.
this phrasing comes from 1999, but it's evident if you know much about Nelson's work that it comes from his earlier ideas.
i'm not saying he invented blogs, but rather that blogs were pretty much an enevitible consequence of technology.
OK, that was funny.
Franklin did more than affect the United States. He affected the entire world in more than one way. In more than one field. And in many countries.
The scientist-philosopher-burgeoning industrialists of the late 18th century England looked towards Franklin's experiments with awe (much as he might've some of their's). It's actually pretty amazing how connected those guys were. This was a time when science, philosophy and business were inextricably linked.
As well as all this, Franklin was also an extremely popular diplomat in France. Depending upon your view of the importance of French assistance to the American Revolution, Franklin may have had an enduring impact on the global balance of power that exists today.
Comparing him to Marx is interesting. I think the main contrast is that while Marx was an outsider to the system, Franklin was a large part *of* the system.
Perhaps the revolutionary ideas of Marx may make him more written about, but I think the evolutionary contributions of Franklin will prove to be more enduring contributions.
I do not particulary like blogs myself but this charecter sounds a righ pompus old git that needs to wake up and notice the world it is a changing fast just like SCO are dying and hot on there tails will be that bunch from Redmond M$ Corp ..
.
Pete
The word establishment is closer to what I was thinking about when referring to librarians. Librarians, bookstores, publishers and critics are all part of a system which has influences on what gets read. Many people take great pride in the amount of influence that they have on the climate of opinion of the day.
The author of today's article probably feels part of this great cultural filter than is challenged by the democratizing effects of blogs.
My point was that blogs are NOT a challenge to journalism. They ARE a challenge to the established filters that are in place. Blogs help determine which books and magazines people read, etc.. They do not replace journalism, but will affect the amount of public attention given to journalistic works. Blogs are a threat to the establishment. They are not a threat to scholarly research or journalism.
I suspect that the ideas of the young Franklin are much more in tune with the minds of today's bloggers than Marx. Marx is the hero of the centrallized intelligensia. Franklin is hero to independent thinkers.
"We're not actually the fab 5 from Queer Eye - we're actually BLOG PEOPLE!!"
/end obscure South Park reference
... he can't think of a better name than "Blog People"?
But come on
Find Escorts, Strippers, Massage Parlours, Swingers
Fuck you, Gorman. I am blogging this.
Wow. I stand corrected, with the caveat that I've never heard of Lawrence O'Donnell, and don't know who the heck he is. He didn't seem to be the host of whatever that was. I really was curious about what John O'Neill was trying to say; hell, I was curious about what O'Donnell was trying to say, but I couldn't make heads or tails of the whole mess. Ick.
Perhaps I was fuzzy in stating this, but the right seems to have the edge on angry shouters in positions of authority. It looked to me like both of those guys were guests on the show---am I right?
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
Dun Malg has it right -- to add a bit to his comment about Marxist commentators running on -- just the fact that Franklin is from a different, earlier century. There's just less original material due to attrition and printing technology, and he's not a controversial figure. Ergo, less scholarship, less running-off-at-the-mouth, less books to buy for libraries.
Also, librarians aren't totally on their own. They buy books because PROFESSORS tell them to. It's called collection development budgets, usually allocated by academic department in academic libraries. If one single professor has a specific jones for socialist/communist history/research, and his dept. has the budget, guess what gets bought. If your researcher was at the University of Virginia, where they have huge collections on the birth of our country, Franklin could probably beat out Marx hands down. Collections are local, and are affected by many other people librarians with a penchant for something.
Lastly, libraries are short on shelf space, so they buy online databases for stuff -- so looking only at shelves in a library doesn't tell you much these days.
Feh, I'm done now. Here's the soapbox. Next!
Gorman has run for president of ALA several times before. He's a cataloger, the most antisocial category of librarian. His non-cataloging works are mostly extended trolls; he's basically been a glorified cheerleader for Luddite librarians for years now.
I guess that it's fitting that he's finally got elected to a figurehead position at a useless organization. ALA has only one useful function, and that's the Office of Intellectual Freedom, which has been under constant attack not only from without the organization but also from within by conservative librarians who constantly threaten to walk, but unfortunately don't. The rest of ALA is a bloated bureaucracy that can't figure out how to put on a decent conference to save its life. Most of its members belong to it only because membership is required in order to belong to one of its sections, such as the Public Library Association or ACRL, that would have been decent stand-alone associations if they hadn't been swallowed up by ALA. Gorman and his ilk are dinosaurs, and the Internet is their meteorite.
I looked into the abyss, and the abyss looked into me--and we both winked.
"what ends up happening is that the folks with the least informed opinions do much of the talking, whereas the ones with a more enlightened view say very little?"
That's because the people doing all the talking have their ego firmly married to their opinions and opening your mouth in order to contradict them in any way, shape or form will do nothing more than draw fire. It's actually easier to grin and bear it and vent later, when you won't be the catalyst to a "scene."
Bloggers are people who can't speak forthrightly to the people around them and instead vent to the great unknown of the Internet. They may be expressing themselves, but shouldn't they be doing that to the people around them, to whom this expression should matter? What then is the point of expressing oneself publicly in writing if it is not done with style and craft? Careful writing is art, the kind of pedestrian, everyday art we've forgotten how to appreciate. Blogging is just typing.
"It is entirely possible that their intellectual needs are met by an accumulation of random facts and paragraphs.'" Well, so much for Slashdot, greeting cards, newspapers, etc.!
I was reading about how people satisfy their intellectual needs through random paragraphs, and at that ery moment I was satisfying my intellectual needs from a random paragraph. Who is this guy...
> The unintentional irony of this couplet is astounding.
OK, I'll bite. Where, precisely, is the irony? I honestly don't see it. I agree with you, I am "unhappy with the current situation because the uninformed arrogant haven't managed to see things your way and vote accordingly", but where's the irony?
It's late and I'm tired. Not feeling too ironic at the moment.
Back when the web itself was new, few useful filters existed, & lots of jokes were made about how the web had nothing except "homepages" with BLINK tags & pictures of people's cats. Just as many of those crappy homepages are around today-- what's changed is that there are many new ways of getting around the internet that skip you over all the junk (even PageRank does so to some extent).
Blogs will become a much more orderly affair in the near future. For the time being, it's a treasure hunt-- & there is some stuff worth searching for.
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
Information filtering isn't over, & it isn't even a bad idea. What is changing is that the population of Approvers is getting much larger & more varied. If slashdot doesn't dig what we write, we can hitch on over to any of thousands of other forums moderated by various systems & populations.
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
If you don't want to be tossed about by the rabble, you can make a nice safe whitelist. Of course, there aren't any whitelists that are quite as "vast" as the unfiltered truth-- but that's an inherent equation, now isn't it?
<3
If you were my sig, you'd be reading yourself right now.
By your own post, the wise would be holding their tongues; yet you're dismissing the opinions of others as "uninformed" - thereby placing yourself into the "arrogant and uninformed" category of your own definition.
That was the irony.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
A blog is something you expect people to read a published article, a comment on slashdot is written under time pressure because IRL I am 10% keeping my head above water with recent events, 90% working. For a 10 hour day that works out.
/. comment post, do so, but if you want to say the same standard applies to what the word 'blog' has come to denote, then get yourself a pineapple and a tube of KY and have a great fucking time. Same for your child post.
So if you want to bitch and moan about my writing style in the context of a
From the 'oh look at me Farquad, my English is so superior' department.
Thought of the day - pressure sensitive optical mouse... shaped like a pen... pressure sensitive optical pen. Less precise than a tablet pen? of course the whole 'trace' or relative aspects are diminished. still a handy portable input device. Wireless of course. Bluetooth perhaps.
#hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
It's not news for nerds, it's not news to nerds and it certainly doesn't matter but here it is on the Slashdot front page. What it is, however, is a bloody good troll. Only a trolling genius could inspire massive threads of comments on librarians' purchasing and maintenance habits. I wonder if the editor has considered joining the GNAA?
Quis Dipsos Custodiets
Fugue for Aaron Swartz
... the vast majority of librarians I've encountered are extremely fanatical (yes - fanatical) about unbiased presentation of all available information to users.
Unbiased like Fox and CNN?
After reading your comment I wrote down the titles of the first four books I could think of, two from each side of the political spectrum. Then I looked up how many copies of each were at local libraries:
Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distorts the News by Bernard Goldberg
Library A: 8 copies
Library B: 53
Bushwhacked: Life in George W. Bush's America by Molly Ivins
Library A: 12
Library B: 53
Dude, Where's My Country? by Michael Moore
Library A: 18
Library B: 68
The Way Things Ought To Be by Rush Limbaugh
Library A: 3
Library B: 5
Now this is anecdotal evidence, and there are a number reasons the collections are unbalanced. Maybe people donated large numbers of books, or maybe the book by Limbaugh I chose is too old. But I didn't doctor my sample to get the conclusion I wanted.
My point is: did anyone reading this expect there to be as many copies of Limbaugh as there were of Moore? No, or course not. Depending on where you live, say Berkley, California or Cape Girardeau, Missouri, you would expect there to be more copies of one or the other. And it's not the patrons of the library that have the final decision on what books are purchased.
By the way, Library A had seven copies of Marx's Communist Manifesto and not a single copy of the Federalist Papers. I'd say that speaks volumes.
OK I'm slightly less tired than yesterday, so here goes:
I said that ignorance breeds arrogance and wisdom breeds restraint. I did *not* say that arrogance breeds ignorance and restraint breeds wisdom. You're trying to imply that because I spoke out I must therefore be ignorant. Which is an illogical assumption.
By your own logic your own reply is in itself an expression of arrogance. So we're making no progress.
I most certainly am not assuming that "everyone else is uninformed and making poor decisions", although I'm playing loose with generalizations, sure. What I'm exposing is a trend. There are certainly exceptions to the whole "ignorance breeds arrogance" maxim. My wise and articulate post being one of them! (As was your reply, of course!)
I don't agree with his anti-digital positions, including his unsupported belief Google is "inefficient" and somehow "random". Nor does he appreciate the value of posting books, previously inaccessible in library archives, online--thereby making them available to millions.
I'm glad the president of the ALA has noticed blogging...finally. Meanwhile everyone is moving on to podcasting.
Actually one of the blogs I read regularly is by a librarian, The Shifted Librarian, and she has a very different view of blogs and how libraries should be using them.
Chance favors the prepared mind.