Professional Reading Shelf
Libraries
Source: The New York Times
Old Search Engine, the Library, Tries to Fit Into a Google World
I chatted for some time with the writer of this article but didn’t make the final cut. Oh well, that’s the way it goes. A few comments:
+ From the article, “We can’t pretend people will go back to walking into a library and talking to a reference librarian,” said Kate Wittenberg, director of the Electronic Publishing Initiative at Columbia University.” I agree, but simply adding material to a general-purpose web database doesn’t mean people will find what they’re looking for. Why not also work to promote other REMOTELY ACCESSIBLE resources? Why can’t our community work together to show people that the REACH of the library and LIBRARIAN extends beyond the four walls of the building.
+ The article gives the impression that “online information retrieval” began with web search engines. What a joke! It’s been around for almost 40 years, and librarians have been users and developers of these tools since day one. Web engines didn’t invent the idea. Don’t take my word for it; here’s a wonderful seven-part series of interviews from Searcher magazine with several online pioneers. More in this compilation of materials.
+ Several well-known librarian types have asked me where the profession was in 1998, 1999, 2000? Why weren’t we out there from the beginning — leading the charge by teaching, training, explaining as web search began to skyrocket? This is a great question. We know we’re still relevant, but do the masses? What have we done to show them?
+ The presence of content in a general web database and finding that content in a timely manner are two totally separate things.
+ Here we go again with another headline about how libraries are search engines. One of the people quoted in the article, Dr. Joseph Janes, recently wrote an article in AL about how librarians ARE NOT search engines. ResourceShelf agreed with Dr. Janes’ comments and argued that libraries are also not search engines. In an email message, Joe agreed with our comment.
+ For a recent presentation, I prepared this page. It contains search strategies that people used to query various general web engines and they ended up clicking on ResourceShelf. You’ll see lots of wasted time, bad search strategies, and clicking to a page (this one) that has nothing to do with what they appeared to have been looking for. Sure, ResourceShelf contained all of the search terms on a single page, but just because all of the terms were there doesn’t mean the page has anything to do with the query. I wonder if sometimes returning no results would be better than returning something of no value? I think these examples also illustrate the potential power of clustering and other mechanisms that would bring more “subject-like” access to web materials. Clustering would help with what Vivisimo calls “selective ignorance.”
+ Just what business are Google and Yahoo in? Are they in business to meet the specific needs of the info and library communities? Please don’t misunderstand — they’re good corporate citizens and do great work, but they have many constituencies to please. They also have to make money for their shareholders.
+ What is the library community doing to make people better searchers? Increasing database size increases recall and reduces precision.
From the article, “We’ll see the current generation we accuse of doing research in their pajamas develop highly sophisticated searching strategies to find high quality information on the Web,” Dr. Smith said. “It’s this transition period we’re in, when not all high-quality information is available on the Web. That’s what we lament.” Perhaps only time will tell. But what about TODAY and the high-quality information that IS available electronically without requiring a visit the library? Who is telling the public and the academic community what is already available digitally and how best to use it? Are we helping people save time accessing it? Should companies like ProQuest, Factiva, and LexisNexis just pack it in and simply dump all of their content into Google and Yahoo? Nope, I still believe that the need for specialized databases, both free and fee, will grow.
+ To be honest, I see a day when digital material (of course, as Dr. Janes points out, it’s not all going to be digitized) will be searched with meta/federated search technologies. The user will pick from a variety of databases (just as we currently buy and select books), and have the technology search them, remove duplicate materials and merge the results into a set with links to the full text. This, coupled with improving personalization, will make for a powerful tool.
+ For certain types of “ready reference queries,” search tools will become more “answer engines” than search engines. The library community should be working with companies like Google, Jeeves and Yahoo to help build these products.
+ The definition of the deep web/invisible web are a bit “off” in the article. Some of what was once invisible is now being crawled, including static web pages served from databases. Of course, massive amounts of deep/invisible material still exisit. However, someone once said to me after a presentation that the invisible/deep web is everything not on the first page of results. And you know what? That person is correct. A very perceptive comment.
Finally, I’ll share a few interesting comments from well-known tech writer Walt Mossberg, in a review of an “answer engine,” Gurunet, about 15 months ago. Although his comments are specifically about Google, the limitations he’s talking about apply to most general web engines. Mossberg writes:
+ “But as brilliant as Google is, this process has several limitations. First of all, in most cases Google doesn’t actually provide you an answer, just a list of links to Web pages where information might be found. So getting the exact information you want requires more steps: You have to browse through the links Google offers, pick out one that looks good, then go to it and look for the relevant material.”
+ “Second, you’re doing all this in a general, undifferentiated piece of software called a Web browser that isn’t designed to help you drill down into information.”
+ “Third, neither the browser nor Google gives you a good sense of the credibility of the sources that turn up, just their popularity*.”
* As we’ve seen on numerous occasions, this can be manipulated.
See also: Make sure to read Peter Jacso’s review of the new Google/Cross Ref Project
Peter has also made available the tool he used when comparing results.
–
Libraries
Source: TBO.com, Tampa Tribune
Librarians Play Important Role In Newspapers
Yes, librarians still play a valuable role! From the article, “Let’s just say they’re not your mama’s librarians anymore. At the News Center, we have a department of journalists – with 153 years of experience among them – who work hand-in-hand with reporters, editors and news producers researching and gathering information to help make our daily news reports and newscasts as strong as possible. The Archive & Research Department, directed by Jody Habayeb, is an unsung group whose contributions are crucial to the daily news process.”
–
Digital Libararies
The June 2004 Issue of D-Lib Magazine is Now Online
Articles Include:
+ Search Engine Technology and Digital Libraries: Libraries Need to Discover the Academic Internet
+ (Opinion) Should Commercial Publishers Be Included in the Model for Open Access through Author Payment?
+ (Opinion) Comparing the Impact of Open Access (OA) vs. Non-OA Articles in the Same Journals
–
Books
Source: AP
New study shows big drop in books sold
From the article: “Not even Harry Potter could prevent a big drop in book sales in 2003. With a struggling economy and competition for time from other media, 23 million fewer books were sold last year than in 2002, according to a report issued Wednesday by the Book Industry Study Group, a non-for-profit research organization. Sales fell to 2.222 billion books, down from 2.245 billion in 2002. The decline was in both hardcovers and paperbacks, in children’s books and general trade releases. Even sales of religious titles, often cited as a growing part of the publishing industry, were flat. ‘We believe this is due to a variety of factors, the biggest being the used book market,’ said Albert N. Greco, an industry consultant and a professor of business at the graduate school of Fordham University.”
See Also: U.S. Book Production Soars to 175,000 New Titles in 2003
–
Maps
Source: Information Sciences Institute, USC Viterbi School of Engineering
A Super Map for Soldiers — or Business Travelers
“Decades worth of detailed, accumulated geographical information is now available to front-line special operations troops in a concentrated, portable, easy-to-use laptop package created by the University of Southern California…. HeraclesMaps can instantly solve life-and-death tactical questions like, ‘Help us find a route from point A to B where we cannot be observed (or shot at) by someone at point C.’ It can instantly dissect the geography of a city, showing users the electrical power grid, all rail, roads, pathways, and and other man-made features, plus much more both in map and photographic form.”
See: HeraclesMaps Demonstration Site