Hey, reference is kinda cool

Reference is difficult. After receiving numerous sets of reference questions to answer in our 605 class, I have a newfound appreciation and respect for reference librarians. These librarians need to know a little bit about everything, and most importantly, they need to know how to find answers to questions that patrons have.

Questions can come in any shape or form. They may be simple, or they may involve in-depth research. Reference librarians may automatically know where to find the answer to these questions, but at times, they may have to dig through databases.

Before my reference class, I did not use databases or reference books if I needed to find answers to questions. Instead, I would Google everything. But, Google does not always provide a reliable or credible answer, so it is important to know what databases or books provide correct answers. After spending a semester in this class learning about different ways to search databases, directories, book and catalogues, I am more confident in my need to not use Google all the time.

Since October, I have been able to gain experience as an intern reference librarian for the Onondaga Historical Association. I literally get to man the reference desk for 5 hours every Saturday, waiting for members to come up and ask for help to questions. I was terrified my first day, hoping no one would come into the research center to ask me questions. Now, I want people to ask me questions. After helping members find answers they were looking for, I am comfortable conducting research and showing members how to find information.

One of the hidden treasures of reference is the fact that I’m learning along with the members. Reference librarians can add to their knowledge base and learn countless trivia. I’ve learn to expect the unexpected, and this makes each day unpredictable and exciting.

One, two, three, four-time to start a library war

Because of economic hardships, libraries have been one of the numerous public services that have fallen victim to countless and heavy budget cuts. Some libraries have had to cut staff positions, reduce hours and limit collection development. But, could it get worse than that? Yes, it can.

According to an article on NRP.org, there are currently more than 100 public schools in the Chicago district that do not have in-school libraries because administrators have allocated funds toward other resources and programs in schools. Parents, teachers and ordinary citizens are staging sit-ins and protests for the opening of school libraries. These protestors claim that administrators and policy makers are overlooking the need for libraries, instead favoring renovations to schools that include new science labs, bigger cafeteria space and new athletic complexes.

Albeit, these renovations and additions are beneficial to schools and students, libraries should be one of the chief items on the budget agenda. If there are no libraries in schools, how are students supposed to find books to read and conduct research for projects? In regard to education and the intelligence of the average student, the United States is no longer a contender in the global race. We are lagging behind more advanced countries like Japan and China.

If the United States wants to continue to be a worthy opponent to other countries, it is vital it continues to provide resources and places for children and young adults to learn. By having no libraries available in schools, of all places, it shows that the country is not putting a great effort to promote the education of its citizens. Instead, school budgets go toward increased administrator salaries and new athletic complexes, once again, proving personal agenda and athletics at times take precedence over academics.

If students do not have access to resources and research, how are they supposed to pass countless tests the state requires them to take? How are they supposed to prepare for life after high school? How are they supposed to develop a love for learning and books? Where can they go after school to feel safe and build a sense of community?

There has to be some satisfying medium between administrators and protestors. All monies do not have to go toward the funding of school libraries, but they should not be left out of the discussion when it comes time to discuss agendas and budgets.

To listen and view the article, click here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=131208982.

The customer is always right

You might think the library is one of the few places where items are censored. Information and books with questionable material are subject to review and criticism by people only in a library setting. WRONG.

Amazon.com recently pulled a book from its e-book collection, entitled The Pedophile's Guide to Love and Pleasure: A Child-lover's Code of Conduct. The company was faced with pressure from social networks, who wanted the book banned and not sold.

Initially, Amazon.com advocated the right to sell the e-book, not for its content, but for the right to produce it for people who wished to purchase it. The company claimed it would be censorship to dictate what people could and could not buy at the site.

However, after being challenged by social networks that were openly against the book for its objectionable content, Amazon.com took it off the shelves. Not wanting to lose its customer base, Amazon.com caved to their demands.

I was surprised to read that Amazon.com did not stick to its original statement of keeping the e-book on the virtual shelf. As a private company, it does not have to adhere to government regulation or policy regarding censorship; instead, officials within the corporation set their own policy and agendas.

However, Amazon.com has a reputation to protect, and to stay competitive, it relies on sales from books and other products. If tens of thousands of customers began to openly boycott items from the site, other people would wonder why and questions Amazon.com’s credibility. With the boycott, sales and incoming revenue would decrease because nothing would circulate out of warehouses.

No matter what the customer thought, I think Amazon.com should have fought to keep that book on its virtual shelf. Though the subject of the book is not popular and thought to be heinous by many, it’s the principle of access to information that should be fought for. If one book is taken off the virtual shelf, what will the next one be? A book about suicide? History of terrorisim? Same-sex marriages? The possibilities are endless.

I can now understand why Amazon.com, a private company, would choose to censor its books in this situation. Private organizations rely on consumers to make a profit, and if the consumer is not happy, the private entity rights the wrong. In this case, I guess the customer is always right (even if he or she is wrong).

Don't chain the books, torch the policy!

In Connecticut, there is talk of creating a policy that censors specific books and magazines in prison libraries. Republican Sen. John Kissel is firmly advocating the removal of violent and questionable books from prison libraries, only allowing inmates to read books approved by a committee and that follow policy guidelines. Kissel claims that sadistic novels and fiction will promote brutal behaviors and thoughts among inmates; this idea is a reaction to a recent Connecticut court decision.

According to the Americans Libraries Magazine, promotion of this policy was put into motion “after jurors returned a guilty verdict for the first of two defendants in the murder of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her two daughters Hayley and Michaela in their Chesire, Connecticut, home, and the brutal beating of their husband and father William Petit.” The article continues to say that this suspect read books of a violent nature, while serving a sentence for a prior conviction.

Books like In Cold Blood by Truman Capote have the possibility to provide ideas as how to kill people and evade capture. But, not every inmate wants to continue murdering people or has thoughts of murder. True, there are some criminally insane and cruel people in prisons, but not every individual is a cold-blooded killer. Kissel is defining the future all prison inmates’ intellectual freedom based upon the actions of one man, which I think itself is cruel and unusual punishment.

In a recent podcast by NPR, prison librarian Avi Steinberg gave an interview about what books prisoners at Suffolk County House of Correction read. One man read all classics during his sentence, claiming he finally obtained the education he never had. His teachers were authors like Machiavelli and Homer. Female book clubs were popular, and another inmate wanted to read books about how to start his own business. The prison library also provided creative-writing classes and GED courses.

The Suffolk County House of Correction library provided a place where inmates received information and read book of their own choosing. Though a prison library, this library advocated circulation of materials and education.

If this current policy is passed in Connecticut, it’s another library that has bitten the dust to censorship. Who is this senator to say that prison inmates do not deserve the chance for education and ability to read any books he or she wants?

If approved, this will become an issue for the American Library Association and librarians who believe in intellectual freedom. According to the Prisoners Right to Read, it is most likely that they will uphold this strong argument if compelled to provide a defense: “When the prison gates slam behind an inmate, he does not lose his human quality; his mind does not become closed to ideas; his intellect does not cease to feed on a free and open interchange of opinions; his yearning for self-respect does not end; nor is his quest for self-realization concluded. If anything, the needs for identity and self-respect are more compelling in the dehumanizing prison environment.”