Is the Line Between Librarianship and Journalism Blurring?

By Barbara Jones

Posted Wed, 07/27/2011 - 12:32

What do journalists and librarians have in common? How can collaboration on their common ground make libraries and the media better for our democracy? More than 125 attendees worked on these questions for two days in April at the first-ever conference of its kind—“Beyond Books: News, Literacy, Democracy, and America’s Libraries”—immediately preceding the National Conference for Media Reform in Boston. The group was convened by Journalism That Matters, a Seattle-based organization dedicated to making the media more accessible, diverse, and conducive to civic engagement.

Protecting sources

Both the library and journalism professions are undergoing profound transformations essential to their survival. Both depend on, disseminate, and create information for a living, and provide it in multiple formats— from paper to Twitter. In the United States, both professions also share the values of transparency and freedom of speech as enshrined in the First Amendment.

Newsrooms and libraries produce information essential to the healthy functioning of democracy. Ironically, they are also threatened by the same social media that help them thrive: It is harder to verify “facts” and to provide “objectivity”—if there ever was such a thing. And the definitions of who is a “real” reporter or a “real” librarian are getting murkier every day.

David Weinberger, senior fellow at Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, presented a provocative model of “Knowledge as Transitional.” The coauthor of Cluetrain Manifesto, Weinberger believes that 21st-century knowledge is not obtained in a linear fashion but in a more random process involving a variety of sources building on each other (such as the web). As a result, libraries and journalists are gathering information in ways that demand new skills and organization of services.

Weinberger’s remarks inspired participants to think beyond the traditional boundaries of our respective professions and to consider creative new ways to serve the public. Of course, some librarians and journalists are already doing just that:

  • Some public libraries house community newsrooms or public access television studios;
  • A Brooklyn project is putting cameras into the hands of young people to create news in underserved communities;
  • A thriving community information portal about suburban Chicago is sponsored by Skokie (Ill.) Public Library and was created by Northwestern University’s journalism school.

These enterprising civic-engagement experiments underscore the challenge of energizing young people to become citizen journalists and frequent library users.

While the conference provided us with a rare opportunity to think deeply about our professions and how they can be more instrumental and relevant to the 21st-century democratic process, the danger of such conversations is that they don’t lead to actual projects. To avert that, the conference held a planning session at Cambridge (Mass.) Public Library in which we were challenged to join a future or ongoing project that intrigued us. The consensus was to look at existing success stories and try to replicate and publicize them; a subsequent consensus statement aims to keep up the momentum and mark the beginning of an important collaboration between the two professions.

Two months later, two journalists who participated in the “Beyond Books” conference, Mike Fancher and Bill Densmore, brought the message to a panel on civic engagement at the 2011 American Library Association Annual Conference in New Orleans. Program attendees were particularly enthusiastic about the potential for librarians and journalists to collaborate on meeting information and civic needs through LibrariUS, a partnership between ALA’s Public Library Association and American Public Media’s Public Insight Network. Fancher blogged about the ALA panel on the Beyond Books blog hosted by Journalism That Matters.

BARBARA JONES is director of ALA’s Office for Intellectual Freedom.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Librarian journalists

I ama retired Chartered Librarian from the UK. I began a local newspaper for the square mile of Christchurch Harbour bordered by Mudeford Sandbank and Hengistbury Head.
All popular sites and my printed papers never ran out of material. A local beach hut neighbour who was a Councillor also owned an expanding Alice in Wonderland theme park. Expecting to find some mildly embarrassing alternative background to the usual supine press release type material I googled those 5 words. Five weeks later I had got my head around “Monarch Priogramming”…well known to conspiracy types. Theme parks reinforce motifs that are used in hypnotic programming, then, and now the traffic has grown into the mainstream media. Just google Monarch Programming and Ruby for the naughty bits. And, as I delved into the span of the web, I touched some nerves(possibly my original and novel co-location of John Mad Jack Klawitter as shadow warrior and a former VP of Disney…a usual suspect for those in the know?….Should this float your boat google this “How tall was Mengele?” A journalist thought my research scissors and paste, victims of experiments said my articles were very good. Someone in the intel community thought they needed some sort of appraisal, by a programmer apparently risen from the grave for the occasion. Never think that being a librarian, hapless blogger or or a journalist is an easy ride. I remain powerless and clueless, and news organs or historians reside in a hived mind excluding the clot that might slow the flow of celebrity nutrients to the rest of us. See if you can guess who was my challenger in 2002 to what I thought was just scissors and paste.

Journalist in process of becoming a librarian

As an editor, I curate information that is submitted to my newsroom: I subject it to copyediting to conform with industry style, I verify its accuracy when I have reasons for doubt and I foll0w-up to supplement information that was submitted to our newsroom incomplete.

I presently volunteer as administrator of a small church library and also volunteer for 90 minutes to two hours every week helping shelve returned materials at the local branch of my public library. I am presently pursuing certification and a degree in Library and Information Technology.

Both fields face similar

Both fields face similar pressures/challenges/opportunities in terms of technology affecting the collection, organization and dissemination of information, and also the expectations of our “clients.” I’m getting an MLIS and find reading about trends in journalism really helping in getting another perspective on issues in librarianship.

oops

My apologies. I meant to say like epynephrin, not Barbara. Sometimes I miss copy editors! LOL

Journalist turned librarian

Journalism and library science go hand in hand, especially now that both fields are changing due, in most part, by technology. My bachelor’s degree is in journalism, so getting an MLS seemed quite apt—they’re both part of the information transfer cycle. Another interesting point of comparison is that in both journalism and library science, degrees are frequently not required (and sometimes looked down upon) by employers in rural areas. I live in a rural area and worked in several libraries—including being a library director at a public library—prior to getting my MLS. My current position, at a community college library, did require it; none of the daily or weekly newspapers I worked on (all in rural areas) required a journalism degree. Perhaps someone should do a survey on how many previous journalists are now working in the library field, or, like Barbara, vice versa.

Another journalist turned librarian

Interesting article. I’m glad to see these kinds of collaborations, especially since, as Ms. Jones notes, both professions are undergoing dramatic transformation. Picture a reporter or librarian from, say 1975, somehow getting an opportunity to visit a 2011 newsroom or public library. Yes, they would be astounded by the technology, the speed of information retrieval and delivery, and the sheer strangeness of the environment. (Why are there more computers than books in the entrance area? What’s up with those gaming consoles? Where are the rip-and-read teletype machines? When did you start emailing instead of calling our sources?) Many tasks are certainly much easier and speedier than they used to be. The fact that both institutions have become far more interactive, inclusive, and user-friendly should also be celebrated. Who could have imagined open catalogs, Twitter campaigns, or video ‘letters to the editor’ 35 years ago?

I suspect, however, that our 1975 journalists and librarians might also find some of the changes somewhat dismaying. So much has become so commercialized, and I don’t just mean advertising now being given a large chunk of most newspapers’ front pages, or the picture books published by Nickelodeon and Disney on our Youth Department shelves. We now think nothing of stuffing Pizza Hut and Target gift certificates in our Summer Library Program tote bags (which often include a corporate logo). We take it as a given that tonight’s weather report was sponsored by the local car dealership. We spend hours writing grants to the Gates Foundation to finance a few new computers. We don’t mind, or try not to notice, the fact that many of the stories in our local newspapers or on our nightly newscasts are thinly veiled promotions of some business or other.

Both institutions are now so beholden to their corporate benefactors that few spend much time anymore debating the merits of these commercial encroachments. It would be counter-productive to do so anyway, in this age of anti-government rhetoric and tightening municipal budgets, since we’re all scrambling for whatever funding we can find. We rely on these public-private partnerships. We aggressively chase them.

Through it all, the most thoughtful among us try very hard to keep the content and services we provide separate from their sponsorships. We insist on our objectivity in covering stories and developing collections. We tell ourselves that the needs of our patrons and our readers/listeners/viewers come first. We do what we have to do to keep the revenue coming in, but we still haven’t sold our souls.

But would those visitors from 1975 agree? Probably not, but that’s irrelevant because this is just how things are done now.

Yes, let’s keep the conversation going. We must do what we can to ensure open access to information, diversity of viewpoints, and objectivity. Information wants to be free, and we’re still in the best position to make it so.

Content Managers

This poses a really interesting question, and it winds up being good for me. I recently got a job as a local editor on a Patch.com site. When I began with them, I had little to no experience as a journalist, but a lot of experience working on a content management system—which I occasionally described as a digital library—at an insurance company. That experience has served me well, and I’ve learned journalism the hard way.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.