Jaeger, Paul T., John Carlo Bertot, Charles R. McClure, and Lesley A. Langa. “The Policy Implications of Internet Connectivity in Public Libraries.” Government Information Quarterly 23, (2006): 123-141.
In this article, the authors draw on data gathered in the Public Libraries and the Internet 2004 study and use that data as part of their analysis of government policies that affect Internet connectivity in public libraries.
The identify six key policy issues: (1) the nature of sufficient bandwidth, (2) the perpetuation of the digital divide regarding Internet access in libraries, (3) the role of public libraries as access points for e-government services, (4) funding of Internet access, (5) the impact of filtering, and (6) the effect of homeland security legislation.
What they found in 2004 was that policy issues included, but were not limited to “sufficiency of connectivity, levels of public access, the need for training, continuing gaps in access, sources of funding for technology, and questions of public policy” (124).
The authors examine changes from earlier studies in the series and discussed those changes in terms of policies that helped facilitate increase access to digital technology, particularly the Internet.
They go on to explore how policies are changing and discuss the impact of some of those changes. For example, they note that, “in recent years, government attention has shifted from the digital divide to a focus on ‘digital inclusion.’ This new focus on digital inclusion emphasizes how many people are currently online. By making this shift, the policy direction has moved from working to increase Internet usage among entire populations to viewing current levels of access as an accomplishment” (128).
To me, this shift signals a loss of interest in, and commitment to, communication disparities on the part of policy makers. As the authors note, “By adopting a ‘mission accomplished’ perspective, the policy has greatly reduced the urgency given to efforts promoting online participation…accompanied by a reduction in the funds available for many programs related to increasing access to the Internet among the underserved populations” (128).
However, the 2004 study showed that “there is still an identifiable digital divide in the United States” (128). In other words, policy makers have declared success too soon. The authors discuss three types of disparities: rural vs. other libraries in terms of number of access terminals and broadband connectivity, state-to-state disparities in terms of access and bandwidth, and times of day when there are an adequate number of workstations available.
The authors also discuss how the government and the public have come to expect public libraries to be universal access points to the Internet. What this means is that as government information and services have shifted to an online environment, agencies expect the public to be able to access that information and those services through the Internet. They further expect public libraries to provide the needed Internet connection for those who have no other access.
This increase in demand for access is coming at a time when “the level of technology in some libraries may be reaching a plateau” (130).
The next policy area the authors examine is funding and how current policies may not recognize the need for continuing funding for maintenance and upgrade of equipment and software. For example, “one of the main sources of technology funding for pubic libraries, the E-rate program, was actually temporarily suspended for several months in 2004 as a result of management and oversight issues” (132).
The last areas the authors examine are the effects of government legislation requiring filtering of Internet content and the implications of homeland security. Both sets of legislation create problems for libraries in terms of access to information and patron privacy.
Filtering is easier said than done, and existing filters tend to block large amounts of health information. In addition, complying with the law is costly and complex and some libraries are opting to forgo the funding attached to compliance for those reasons.
Homeland security, particularly The Patriot Act, presents the threat of invasion of privacy and affects the kinds of records that libraries keep. The Patriot Act increases the circumstances and the scope of surveillance and investigations in libraries, expands definitions of records that can be searched, allows for tracing and searching electronic communications, and places a gag order on investigations (125).
Concern for patron privacy has led many libraries to cease keeping many types of usage records, records that “have an number os extremely important uses in libraries, from collection development to justification of funding” (135).
Even though this article goes way beyond the scope my project, it includes a wealth of material related to the whole topic of public libraries and Internet access, all of which affects my perception of my topic and its importance.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
“The Role of Public Libraries in Providing Access to the Internet”
Henderson, Carol C. and Frederick D. King. “The Role of Public Libraries in Providing Access to the Internet.” In Public Access to the Internet, edited by Brian Kahin and James Keller, 154-171. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995.
This article, written in 1995, urged the use of public libraries as access points to the Internet at a point early in the Internet’s development. As such, it’s right on point for the project I’m working on and provides an interesting starting point for my discussion.
The authors did not gather original data, but rather made arguments and offered suggestions based on research data and public documents available at the time they were writing. Much of the data cited is 20 or more years old, but the article itself contains strong arguments in support of public libraries as access points, as well as a discussion of some of the obstacles to that access (e.g., cost). I expect to find that those same arguments still apply. I also expect to find answers to how libraries addressed the obstacles that existed in 1995, as well as information about current obstacles.
I recognized some of the names the authors cited (e.g., McClure), and believe those sources to be among the leaders in the push to make public libraries access points to the Internet.
This article, written in 1995, urged the use of public libraries as access points to the Internet at a point early in the Internet’s development. As such, it’s right on point for the project I’m working on and provides an interesting starting point for my discussion.
The authors did not gather original data, but rather made arguments and offered suggestions based on research data and public documents available at the time they were writing. Much of the data cited is 20 or more years old, but the article itself contains strong arguments in support of public libraries as access points, as well as a discussion of some of the obstacles to that access (e.g., cost). I expect to find that those same arguments still apply. I also expect to find answers to how libraries addressed the obstacles that existed in 1995, as well as information about current obstacles.
I recognized some of the names the authors cited (e.g., McClure), and believe those sources to be among the leaders in the push to make public libraries access points to the Internet.
“Computer and Technical Communication in the 21st Century”
Carliner, Saul. “Computer and Technical Communication in the 21st Century.” In Digital Literacy for Technical Communication, edited by Rachel Spilka, 21-50. New York: Routledge, 2010.
In this article, Carliner describes how digital technology affects technical communicators, especially how technology has changed the job titles and roles of technical communicators in organizations. The author also includes a history of technology and how it has changed, starting in the 1970s.
My interest in this reading is the history of technology, especially the author’s discussion of the coming-of-age of the Internet. His discussion will be useful when I address some of the obstacles to early efforts to make public libraries points of access to the Internet. As part of the background information on my topic, I will be looking at how libraries dealt with those obstacles and which ones remain.
In addition, the section of Carliner’s article dealing with the Internet, within the larger context of the history of technology, contains useful information and interesting quotations.
In this article, Carliner describes how digital technology affects technical communicators, especially how technology has changed the job titles and roles of technical communicators in organizations. The author also includes a history of technology and how it has changed, starting in the 1970s.
My interest in this reading is the history of technology, especially the author’s discussion of the coming-of-age of the Internet. His discussion will be useful when I address some of the obstacles to early efforts to make public libraries points of access to the Internet. As part of the background information on my topic, I will be looking at how libraries dealt with those obstacles and which ones remain.
In addition, the section of Carliner’s article dealing with the Internet, within the larger context of the history of technology, contains useful information and interesting quotations.
“The Impacts of Free Public Internet Access on Public Library Patrons and Communities”
Bertot, John Carlo, Charles R. McClure, and Paul T. Jaeger. “The Impacts of Free Public Internet Access on Public Library Patrons and Communities.” Library Quarterly 78, no. 3 (2008): 285-301.
This article presents findings from the 2007 Public Libraries and the Internet Study, which continues the research started in 1994. The authors are the co-principal investigators in this study and have written a large number of articles about various aspects of the data gathered using surveys of librarians across the United States.
In this particular article, the authors examine some of the challenges facing today’s libraries, especially in light of changing technology and public expectations about access to that technology. They write, “libraries are beginning to face a ‘disconnect’ between what their communities expect and the levels of Internet access that they are able to provide to their communities” (287).
The authors go on to discuss the impact of Internet access on communities. The impacts elaborated are technology training and assistance, e-government service delivery, education resources, services for job seekers and disaster/emergency roles and services, among others” (287).
They also present interesting data that show the trends in public access to the Internet and the roles that public libraries play in those trends. For example, virtually every library in the United States now offers public access to the Internet. As a result, the roles of libraries have evolved, with more emphasis on the support services that go with providing that access, particularly training.
One thing I found disturbing in this article is a shift in tone from that of other articles by these same authors. The authors seem to have adopted an assumption that people are entitled to free Internet access. I agree that the access is important—even crucial—in today’s world. I also agree that those without access are at a serious cultural disadvantage, and that it is in society’s best interest to narrow the Digital Divide. However, I find it troubling when the element of entitlement is included. It is my opinion that too many people believe that “Someone” else must take care of their needs, and when we do that for them, we relegate them to the role of children.
I also found that some of the authors’ data didn’t track. Specifically, at one point they combine statistics incorrectly. They write that, “in 2007 wireless access was available in 54.2 percent of libraries, with an additional 17.4 percent of libraries that do not currently have wireless access planning to add it in the next year. Thus, if libraries follow through with their plans to add wireless access, 71.6 percent of public libraries will have it within a year” (292).
They merely added the percentages, rather than 17.4 percent of those without wireless. The total is actually closer to 62.2 percent—still a dramatic increase, but not the 71.6 percent the authors presented.
As a continuation of the study that was started in 1994, the information in this article is extremely valuable to me and my research question, in spite of the discrepancy with the specific numbers.
This article presents findings from the 2007 Public Libraries and the Internet Study, which continues the research started in 1994. The authors are the co-principal investigators in this study and have written a large number of articles about various aspects of the data gathered using surveys of librarians across the United States.
In this particular article, the authors examine some of the challenges facing today’s libraries, especially in light of changing technology and public expectations about access to that technology. They write, “libraries are beginning to face a ‘disconnect’ between what their communities expect and the levels of Internet access that they are able to provide to their communities” (287).
The authors go on to discuss the impact of Internet access on communities. The impacts elaborated are technology training and assistance, e-government service delivery, education resources, services for job seekers and disaster/emergency roles and services, among others” (287).
They also present interesting data that show the trends in public access to the Internet and the roles that public libraries play in those trends. For example, virtually every library in the United States now offers public access to the Internet. As a result, the roles of libraries have evolved, with more emphasis on the support services that go with providing that access, particularly training.
One thing I found disturbing in this article is a shift in tone from that of other articles by these same authors. The authors seem to have adopted an assumption that people are entitled to free Internet access. I agree that the access is important—even crucial—in today’s world. I also agree that those without access are at a serious cultural disadvantage, and that it is in society’s best interest to narrow the Digital Divide. However, I find it troubling when the element of entitlement is included. It is my opinion that too many people believe that “Someone” else must take care of their needs, and when we do that for them, we relegate them to the role of children.
I also found that some of the authors’ data didn’t track. Specifically, at one point they combine statistics incorrectly. They write that, “in 2007 wireless access was available in 54.2 percent of libraries, with an additional 17.4 percent of libraries that do not currently have wireless access planning to add it in the next year. Thus, if libraries follow through with their plans to add wireless access, 71.6 percent of public libraries will have it within a year” (292).
They merely added the percentages, rather than 17.4 percent of those without wireless. The total is actually closer to 62.2 percent—still a dramatic increase, but not the 71.6 percent the authors presented.
As a continuation of the study that was started in 1994, the information in this article is extremely valuable to me and my research question, in spite of the discrepancy with the specific numbers.
“Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: Effects and Implications”
Bertot, John Carlo. “Public Access Technologies in Public Libraries: Effects and Implications.” Information Technologies and Libraries 28, no. 2 (Jun 2009): 81-92.
For this article, the author draws on the data collected in the Public Libraries and the Internet Studies with which the author has been involved since 1994. The focus here is on the implications of public libraries providing public-access technology (PAT). He summarizes changes in Internet connectivity and number of workstations available for public use, then discusses how providing these services is straining public libraries in terms of maintenance and management, staff, finances, and building.
In addition to the data from the Public Libraries and the Internet Studies, the author collected data from site interviews conducted separately from the Public Library studies.
Although this article is interesting, it addresses issues outside the scope of my project and is more useful as a source of ideas for further research, such as whether or not public libraries can continue to provide free access to the Internet in the face of the public’s growing appetite for more and faster access.
For this article, the author draws on the data collected in the Public Libraries and the Internet Studies with which the author has been involved since 1994. The focus here is on the implications of public libraries providing public-access technology (PAT). He summarizes changes in Internet connectivity and number of workstations available for public use, then discusses how providing these services is straining public libraries in terms of maintenance and management, staff, finances, and building.
In addition to the data from the Public Libraries and the Internet Studies, the author collected data from site interviews conducted separately from the Public Library studies.
Although this article is interesting, it addresses issues outside the scope of my project and is more useful as a source of ideas for further research, such as whether or not public libraries can continue to provide free access to the Internet in the face of the public’s growing appetite for more and faster access.
“The Digital Divide & Public Libraries: a First-Hand View”
Agosto, Denise E. “The Digital Divide & Public Libraries: a First-Hand View.” Progressive Librarian, no.25 (Summer 2005): 23-27.
In this fascinating article, the author compares the resources and services of three branch libraries within the same library system. In particular, she looked at the computer and Internet capabilities and found vast inequities.
After comparing the resources, the author identified three factors that contributed to the inequities. The first was an uneven distribution of resources such as computer workstations within the same library system. The second was a difference the amount of support private residents provided to augment the libraries’ resources. The third was a difference in the amount of support from local commercial entities (25).
Because the author was comparing specific branches, the data were more detailed, as in workstations per patron, and made the findings of larger studies more real to me. This was a short, but very powerful article that highlighted the differences in access to the Internet between communities. It also included specific examples of how the lack of access had a negative impact on particular people, such as the man who was going for a job interview but couldn’t get his resume together in time because of lack of access to a computer.
In this fascinating article, the author compares the resources and services of three branch libraries within the same library system. In particular, she looked at the computer and Internet capabilities and found vast inequities.
After comparing the resources, the author identified three factors that contributed to the inequities. The first was an uneven distribution of resources such as computer workstations within the same library system. The second was a difference the amount of support private residents provided to augment the libraries’ resources. The third was a difference in the amount of support from local commercial entities (25).
Because the author was comparing specific branches, the data were more detailed, as in workstations per patron, and made the findings of larger studies more real to me. This was a short, but very powerful article that highlighted the differences in access to the Internet between communities. It also included specific examples of how the lack of access had a negative impact on particular people, such as the man who was going for a job interview but couldn’t get his resume together in time because of lack of access to a computer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)