Googlization of Libraries

Citation

Parry, F. (2009), "Googlization of Libraries", The Electronic Library, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 1046-1047. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640470911004138

Ask librarians what they think of Google and you will probably get almost as many views as there are librarians. Chances are that responses will include a little (grudging) admiration, some wariness or outright hostility. This book looks into the reasons behind our love/hate relationship and attempts to come to some conclusions as to how we can learn to live together. The assertion in the introduction that “scepticism is healthy and normal, but wholesale rejectionism is counterproductive and unworthy of the best in librarianship” seems to be the guiding principle behind this collection of essays, although some chapters are more sceptical than others. For instance, Mark Y Herring begins his superbly acerbic look at the internet in his chapter “Fool's gold” by stating that he is not a Luddite while very nearly delivering proof to the contrary. In amongst the barbs and witticisms are several well made points including some fine observations on Lancaster's 30‐year‐old thesis on the paperless society and the reliability of Internet information. His analysis of “linkrot” – disappearing footnotes and links in scholarly works on the internet – is particularly readworthy. Kay Cahill, on the other hand, firmly believes that Google and the Internet represent “an opportunity, not a crisis” and that the real question concerning librarians, their users and the Internet is how to deal with the change brought about by Google.

Five of the 13 essays cover various aspects of Google Scholar and dominates much of the discussion. Charlie Potter's opening chapter sets the scene quite nicely and is worthy of detailed analysis. Entitled “Standing on the shoulders of libraries” it underlines the point that Scholar would not be able to function without the existence and cooperation of libraries and their resources. Potter is quick to spot the dangers in using this hugely popular search engine: people who only use Google Scholar and come to believe that ‘that is all there is’; an advanced search which does not recognise variant search behaviour patterns in different researcher groups; privacy and censorship concerns; an inability to adequately link information retrieved to holdings in libraries which may lead to researchers paying for information unnecessarily; the unresolved question of advertising links. And yet these criticisms are not intended to deter people from using the tool – far from it. Potter ends by saying that libraries need to help their users not only evaluate the information they receive but the technology which assists them to receive it. Further chapters include: an interview with one of Scholar's designers; a survey from 2007 on attitudes to Google Scholar and it's use in teaching and library web sites by OhioLINK librarians; a case study of using Google Scholar on a reference desk; and finally, a thoroughly well‐researched survey from 2006 concerning the journal coverage by Google Scholar which concludes that it is useful as a supplement to abstracting and indexing databases but falls short in many key areas.

There are four chapters on Google Book Search concerning such issues as digitization, open access material, copyright and one very good chapter on a comparison between Google Book Search and other projects such as Early English Books Online. There is also a chapter which includes a comparative analysis of search techniques and results between databases such as WorldCat and Google Book Search. As with most of the contributors on Google Scholar, the author concludes that Google Book Search can be recommended so long as it is not the sole tool used. After a chapter on Google Video the book ends with a look at how Google is attempting to reach out to librarians and teachers with such sites as Librarian Central and Google for Educators.

This is an excellent collection of essays with something for everyone: controversy, state of the art detailed research, considered opinion. You may be challenged or have your views confirmed, but you won't be bored.