New Library: The People′s Network

Citation

James, S. (1999), "New Library: The People′s Network", Library Review, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 43-44. https://doi.org/10.1108/lr.1999.48.1.43.1

Defining moments in the history of our profession have, appropriately, often been signalled by a printed publication. That is now true even of a defining moment which formally signals a digital future for public libraries. UK university libraries had the Follett Report, now public libraries have this. It is set to chart the future of the public library service for the foreseeable future and has already indicated a course the Government seems prepared (if not exactly willing given the investment required) to pursue. Whether sufficient investment will follow remains a worringly open question. Money did follow the Follett Report, hence the success of many of its initiatives (especially, although not exclusively, the building programme and parts of the E‐Lib programme).

The true importance of this report lies in its political timeliness and clout. Much of what it says has been said often enough within the profession, and had become our new orthodoxy before the report was compiled, but the source, timing and direction of the report give it all a significant impetus and some hope of success. First impressions of the document, ironically enough in a virtual age, are of a very attractively designed physical production. It has a non‐traditional layout with no title page and exiguous publication data near the end (cataloguers beware) and no ISBN; since it is also available as a Web site this is presumably the kind of document′′′ we can expect to deal with in future. It features good typography, layout and graphic design with restrained and effective use of colour. There are quotations and scenarios′′ a‐plenty from the opening page to the last: many of the quotations are the kind of thing one gets out of a decent dictionary of quotations, but they say nice things about us so we must not carp. And how many reports to the Government are prefaced by a poem specially commissioned from the Poet Laureate? This could be a significant and most welcome innovation in official publishing, one to be emulated more widely. In this case Ted Hughes′s poem does highlight the cultural point at the heart of the argument of the report.

The field is covered widely and broad issues are addressed:

1. 1.

   access to knowledge;

2. 2.

   imagination and learning;

3. 3.

   listening to the people;

4. 4.

   skills for the new librarian;

5. 5.

   the network infrastructure;

6. 6.

   investment and income;

7. 7.

   copyright and licensing issues (the whole grand venture could yet founder on these alone);

8. 8.

   performance evaluation; and

9. 9.

   implementation ‐‐ creating the momentum.

The report reveals wide consultation and broadly‐based committees, but a clear focus in line with Labour Government thinking emerges. Issues are identified which will take a whole raft of further projects and reports to consider in detail (a strategic route for research is outlined in the separate Prospects document), so that much is taken on trust or reported in generalisations here. Short paragraphs do get at key issues and put them clearly in front of the reader, in terms the non‐librarian reader can grasp, but at the expense of any narrative flow; this is a document to take and refer to paragraph by paragraph.

All this is interspersed with scenarios′′. As a librarian I am very unsure about these: they read (and indeed are presented in three colours) like chapters from a children′s textbook. But I suppose that, bearing in mind the intended (or hoped for) readership, one should not be too critical: the public and politicians do need to be told what we are doing, and can do, its value and relevance. There is also some indication of the underlying technical complexity in a range of tasks and applications. It is certainly fair to say that throughout the report is wide‐ranging in the issues it tackles, and is widely informed from both references and consultations.

Arising out of all this, the recommendations are obviously the vital feature. Some relate to policy rather than resource issues, but resources must underwrite the implementation of a policy. Even so, some of the recommendations were almost overtaken by events even before the report was completed, others subsequently. Has Project Earl become de facto the proposed Public Library Networking Agency? Partnerships have been developing fairly widely, if also fairly haphazardly (public/private, academic/public, etc.) and the LIP concept seems to be coming back into its own. Public libraries have always been repositories and providers of a wide range of information materials (even before community information became the vogue), including official, semi‐official and completely unofficial publications. Many librarians, especially younger ones, have been voting with their feet (or with their organisations′ training budgets) and acquiring new ICT skills, while LIS schools are busy imparting them to the new generation. A word of caution is due here, however, concerning throwing out still highly‐relevant traditional core professional skills in favour of new fads which might, or might not, prove appropriate to our profession in the long run.

The contents and messages of this report are hardly new′′ to our profession, but perhaps some of them are to the public, and it is politically timely to be new′′ to our Government. The report does not shy away from the costs of its proposals: these are clearly stated, as they must be, and a gauntlet is thrown down. The Government has responded reasonably positively, as have various stakeholders in the proposals. There is a great deal of work to be done, and quickly, but the overall success of the Follett proposals shows what can be done. The accompanying report Prospects outlines a research strategy to help carry all this forward.

So, a brave new world beckons, encapsulated in a report that is fundamental to the future direction of public libraries, of information strategy and the information society, and so of democracy itself if society is to be based on free availability of information. This is a defining moment ‐‐ and opportunity ‐‐ for UK public libraries and it is now up to the Government to keep its promises, but above all up to our profession to make them a reality. Our role in a democratic society has been reaffirmed; more than our professional credibility rests on our willingness and ability to grasp the opportunity.