What libraries are spending is not the issue, nor whether they are
well managed.
The issue is that publishers have outlived their economic
usefulness, at least where publication of scientific papers (how
quaint!) is concerned.
Hence there is no reason any money should be spent on them.
PERIOD
Bernard Lang
On Thu, Jun 28, 2001 at 04:20:39PM -0400, Albert Henderson wrote:
> on Thu, 28 Jun 2001 Stevan Harnad <harnad_at_COGPRINTS.SOTON.AC.UK> wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, Albert Henderson's suggestions are so repetitive and
> > predictable that they can be responded to by number. These responses
> > are themselves equally predictable (and a fortiori, repetitive), but
> > they differ from the points to which they are responses in that they
> > take the point into account, and advance the analysis one step further,
> > whereas alas Albert simply takes a step back every time, and simply
> > reiterates, without processing or reflecting on the substantive
> > responses he has received repeatedly -- indeed, without giving any sign
> > of their having entered his sensorium at all.
> >
> > Two algorithms will generate just about every point Albert keeps
> > making in this Forum (and the points both keep generating are just
> > plain incorrect):
> >
> > (1) The serials crisis is an artifact of (conspiratorial)
> > underfunding of libraries, and would be solved if this underfunding
> > were terminated. [Fallacy: No conspiracy; no underfunding; no funds
> > available or deliberately withheld.]
>
> Don't take my word for the underfunding of libraries.
> There is considerable literature documenting the underfunding
> of libraries after 1970: The Fry-White study (1975), National
> Enquiry on Scholarly Communication (1979); Richard Talbot (1984),
> ARL Serials Prices Project (1989); A M Cummings et al (1992);
> Okerson & Stubbs (1992) -- just to cite a few studies not
> including my own. [I will gladly provide full cites to anyone
> wishing for a depressing afternoon.]
>
> My own comparison of declining library spending with
> increased profitability -- well documented statistically
> -- suggests funds have been deliberately withheld. [I will
> gladly share my sources -- all published.]
>
> Who said "conspiracy?" Please give us your source. If
> I were to choose a word, it would be "culture." Ironically,
> the "culture" of university administrators places a higher
> value on hoarding financial assets than it does on library
> collections. Here is a "culture," like the management
> culture pre-workers' compensation and fire safety laws, that
> relies on workers to take care of themselves. University
> managers are failing to meet their obligation to excellence
> in research and education.
>
>
> (2) Nothing relevant has changed since the Gutenberg [print on-paper
> dissemination] Era. [Fallacy: everything has changed; authors can now
> disseminate their REFEREED {sic} research for free for all, online, by
> self-archiving {sic}]
>
> Technology gave us another new tool a decade ago. No revolution
> need follow. The essentials of copyright and the social
> construction of science have not toppled. Nor will they.
>
> [snip]
>
> Have a nice weekend.
>
> Albert Henderson
> Former Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000
> <70244.1532_at_compuserve.com>
>
> .
> .
> .
--
Non aux Brevets Logiciels - No to Software Patents
SIGNEZ http://petition.eurolinux.org/ SIGN
Bernard.Lang_at_inria.fr ,_ /\o \o/ Tel +33 1 3963 5644
http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Fax +33 1 3963 5469
INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France
Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion
CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX
Received on Wed Jan 03 2001 - 19:17:43 GMT