ACRL News Issue (B) of College & Research Libraries 9 2 8 / C&RL N ew s ■ N o v em b er 2000 SCHOLARLY C O M M U N IC A T IO N Ivy Anderson, Gail McMillan & Ann Schaffner, editorsLibrarians as publishers Is the digital library an electronic publisher? by Gail McMillan D id y o u se e th e ad v e rtise m e n t in C&RL N e w s fo r th e d irecto r o f publishing? No? O f c o u rs e n o t. L ibrarians a re n o t u su th o u g h t o f as publishers, so these positions are n o t advertised in library journals. My job, how ever, is to m ak e journals, theses, disserta­ tions, images, a n d m ore original and deriva­ tive w o rk s available online. A m I a publisher? Prior to th e ad v e n t o f electro n ic th eses a n d dissertations (EDTs) o n th e Web five years ago, a sm all n u m b e r o f libraries that w ere p u ttin g ele c tro n ic jo u rn a ls o n th e In te rn e t w e re c o n s id e re d p u b lish e rs. T h e se in stitu ­ tions, o fte n lin k e d w ith u n iv ersity p re ss e s su c h as P roject M use at Jo h n s H o p k in s U ni­ versity a n d H ighW ire Press at S tanford Uni­ versity, w e re also in v o lv ed in m ost o f the tra d itio n a l activities o f p u b lis h e rs su c h as c o p y ed itin g , lay o u t/d e sig n , a n d m arketing. S o m e h a d , i n d e e d , r e p l a c e d p a p e r a n d p re ss e s w ith c o m p u te rs a n d file tran sfer p ro ­ tocols. But that is n o t w h a t I do. I w ish that I c o u ld find a n o th e r w o rd in o u r v o cab u lary o r c o in a w o rd to d e s c rib e th e p ro c e ss of storing original w o rk s o n a c o m p u te r se rv er a n d m ak in g th em av ailab le to library a n d In te rn e t users. This is w h e re I h av e th e h a rd ­ est tim e p u ttin g m y digital library reso u rces a n d services in th e sa m e categ o ry as p u b ­ lishers a n d university p resses. To m e it is the library o n the In tern et; it is n o t th e library as p u blisher. Libraries m a k e th e s e s a n d d isser­ tations m ore accessible; b efo re libraries stored a About the author a n d p ro v id e d access to th e m electronically, th ey re c e iv e d v ery little use. S hould in creas­ llyi ng availability b e c o n s id e re d publishing? Or is it just th at w e h a v e n ’t fo u n d a b e tte r w o rd yet? P erh ap s s o m e o n e w h o re a d s this co l­ u m n will p o in t o u t a m o re d escrip tiv e w o rd o r c reate a n e w o n e for us. Digital library vs. electronic publisher M ust th e digital library also b e a n electro n ic publisher? Can it c o n tin u e to b e a library p ro ­ vid in g u n iq u e o n lin e re so u rc e s to a h u g e c o m m u n ity o f p o ten tial u se rs w ith o u t b e in g a publisher? To g e t access to a library re so u rc e th at is digital re q u ire s th e u s e r to ta k e action, to co m e a n d g et it o n lin e th ro u g h th e Internet. This is an alo g o u s to p ulling a library reso u rce off the shelf. In th e case o f ETDs, w h a t the re a d e r gets is exactly w h a t th e a u th o r p re ­ p ared , J u s t b e c a u s e m o re re a d e rs c a n access th e reso u rce, sh o u ld w e c h a n g e th e n a m e of th e library service to publishing? As a public institution, my library resources are available to a n y citizen o f th e state, so m y u niversity library’s n o rm a l p o te n tia l u se r p o p u la tio n far e x c e e d s th e p o p u la tio n o f th e university co m m unity. If th e library d o e s n ’t tak e a n y ex trao rd in ary m e a s u re s to inform its co m m u n ity o f a n available title (i.e., d o e s n o t m a rk e t it; d o e s n o t ad v ertise it, d o e s no t p u b licize it), w h y is it c alled publishing? If th e digital library (w ith o u t established p resses like M use a n d H ighW ire) d o e s no t Gail M cM illan is director o f D igital Library and Archives a t Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, e-mail: gailm ac@ vt.edu mailto:gailmac@vt.edu C&RL News ■ November 2000 / 929 Editors’ introduction Librarians’ roles are changing, an d w e are su p ­ porting research a n d learning in new ways. The em ergence o f librarians as “publishers” is an im portant part o f this evolution in o u r roles. S in c e G ail M cM illan h a s b e e n a c tiv e in c h a n g in g a n d e x p a n d in g t h e ro le o f th e lib ra ry a t V irginia T e c h fo r m o r e t h a n te n y e a rs, w e d e c id e d th a t w e d i d n ’t n e e d to lo o k o u ts id e o u r r a n k s fo r a n a u th o r o f th is is s u e ’s “S c h o la rly C o m m u n ic a tio n ” c o l­ u m n . In thinking about the issue of librarians as pub­ lishers, Gail h as invited many of her colleagues in the Networked Digital Library o f Theses and Dis­ sertations (NDLTD) to share thek thoughts. ’There is a significant group o f librarians (the NDLTD has m ore than 100 institutional mem bers) that some might categorize as library publishers. We h o p e that y o u will find their thoughts as stim ulating as w e did in drinking a b o u t the changing roles o f librarians a n d publishers.— Ivy A n d erso n a n d A n n Sch a ffn er p ro v id e se rv ices s u c h as ed itin g , d o e s n o t cri­ tiq u e th e c o n te n t, d o e s n o t fix spelling, d o e s n o t co rre c t gram m ar, a n d d o e s n o t e stab lish a n d im p o se a certa in la y o u t o r d e sig n , h o w is it like a p u b lish er? A n d a re w e p r e p a r e d to tak e o n th e role o f p ro v id in g this “a d d e d v a lu e ”? Feedback from colleagues I a s k e d m y co lle a g u e s in th e N e tw o rk e d Digi­ tal Library o f T h eses a n d Dissertations (NDLTD) to sh a re th e ir th o u g h ts o n this topic. S o m e sa w a clear d istin ctio n b e tw e e n th e ro le o f libraries a n d p u b lish e rs . A c o lle a g u e in N e w Y ork, S. Y. H w ang, c o m m e n te d that librarians lack train­ in g in editing. “W h e n it c o m e s to playlingl th e ro le o f p u b lish e rs , w e d o n ’t h a v e th e tim e a n d skills to m a in ta in th e [content] q u ality o f th e c o lle c te d d o c u m e n ts . B ut so m e th e s e s a u th o rs d o e x p e c t u s to rev ise th eir th e s e s as trad i­ tio n al p u b lish e rs d o .” Publishers also provide advice a b o u t co n ten t a n d review th e w o rk s b ein g published. Libraries d o n o t d o this. As Christine Jew ell w rote from Canada, “I d o absolutely nothing to th e theses ex c e p t pro cess th em for access. I d o n ’t proof­ read, edit, evaluate, o r co rre sp o n d w ith th e au ­ thor. I d o n ’t e v e n re a d th em (som etim es I read the abstracts!). It’s true that th e g rad office d o es so m e checking for form atting standards, a n d the supervisors a n d exam ining com m ittee evaluate, etc. But th ey d o this in a n y case, regardless o f h o w th e library m ak es th e theses accessible” (i.e., w h e th e r in p a p e r o r online). J e w e ll a ls o p o in te d o u t th a t th e v a lu e - a d d e d c o m p o n e n t o f p u b lis h in g is n o t p a rt o f th e [library’s] p ro c e d u re . A n o th e r co lleag u e, J a n e K le in e r w r o te fro m L o u isian a, “P u b lis h ­ e rs a re u s u a lly in v o lv e d in th e p r e p a r a tio n o f m a te ria l as w e ll as th e d istrib u tio n . Librar­ ies, o n th e o th e r h a n d , c o lle c t in fo rm a tio n p r o d u c ts a n d m a k e th e m a c c e ss ib le . T o m y w a y o f th in k in g , h o s tin g EDTs d o e s n o t m e a n th a t lib ra rie s a r e p u b lis h e r s a n y m o re th a n m icro film v e n d o r s a re p u b lis h e r s .” (B ell & H o w e ll, fo rm e rly UMI, m ig h t d is a g re e .) At th e V irginia T e c h D igital L ibrary a n d A rch iv es, th e e d ito r o f th e jo u rn a l o r th e a u ­ th o r o f th e ETD (w ith s o m e in flu e n c e b y th e c o m m itte e , n o d o u b t) is re s p o n s ib le fo r th e read ab ility , th e lo o k , a n d th e feel o f th e w o rk . T h e lib ra ry h a s n o p a r t in th e s e activities, so w h y s h o u ld th e lib ra ry b e c r e d ite d w ith p u b ­ lish in g th e s e w o rk s? U n lik e p u b lis h e rs , lib ra rie s th a t p ro v id e a c c e s s to th e u n iq u e w o rk s o f th e ir a u th o rs a n d s tu d e n ts a ls o d o n o t a s k fo r tra n sfe r o f c o p y rig h t fro m a u th o r to lib ra ry o r to th e u n i­ versity, a s m a n y u n iv e rsity p re s s e s d o. At V irginia T e c h , ETD a u th o rs s h a re th e ir c o p y rig h ts w ith th e lib ra ry so th a t th e ir w o rk s c a n b e s to r e d a n d m a d e av a ila b le . E -jo u rn al e d ito rs a n d th e ir s p o n s o r s d e c id e w h e th e r th e a u th o r o r th e jo u rn a l w ill g e t th e a u t h o r ’s c o p y rig h t, o r if th e a u th o r w ill s h a re c o p y ­ rig h t w ith th e jo u rn a l. D o e s th is s o u n d lik e a ty p ic a l p u b lish e r? About the editors Ivy Anderson is coordinator fo r D ig ita l Acquisitions a t Harvard University, e-mail: ivy_anderson@harvard.edu; A n n Schaffner has been an academic librarian fo r m ore th a n 20 years a n d is curre ntly a f u ll tim e M B A s tu d e n t a t Simmons College, e-mail: ann.schaffner@simmons.edu mailto:ivy_anderson@harvard.edu mailto:ann.schaffner@simmons.edu 9 3 0 C&RL News ■ Novem ber 2000 Another way that libraries and publishers differ is that academic libraries promise to make ETDs available permanently, that is, they archive and preserve them. Conservation is part of the mission of many libraries. This is not what publishers typically promise to do. In fact, the commercial motivation of publish­ ers makes it difficult to believe those who tell us that they are archiving their publications. Are publishers storing their publications? Of course, but only for as long as there is a com­ mercial, that is, a profitable, reason for doing so. Juxtaposed to this is the library, providing long-term access to information for the poten­ tial intellectual profitability of our clients. Making scholarly information "public" But other colleagues are finding these roles less distinct as the very definition of what it means to publish is changing. My colleague in Perth, Australia, Peter Green, pointed out, “We have a role in edu­ cating the academic community through pro­ viding access and information to new forms of publishing.” Felix Ubogu wrote from South Africa, “The library would become the natural place for people to turn to for advice, support, and prac­ tical training. This is happening here infre­ quently, but could become more frequent if the campus becomes aware that the library has the capability. “I agree with the view that the library has to be equipped to assist with the processing of electronic materials, help academics pub­ lish and archive electronic documents, and produce original electronic publications that improve information. Libraries will thus be seizing the opportunity to participate in the creation of knowledge. The library will be play­ ing a significant role in training and retraining, and staff should be equipped for this.” From the other side of Australia, Kate Sex­ ton at the University of Sydney pointed out that “Teaching staff look to the library quite naturally as a source for advice on issues such as file organisation [sic], presentation, and archiving.” She continued, “Librarians should take an active role in raising consciousness of the is­ sues associated with electronic publishing and in providing training and guidance to the uni­ versity community.” Like Ubogu, many of the comments that I received suggested that the future of libraries is not in publishing per se but in working within our communities in the full information cycle, from creating to accessing and archiving. Green also pointed out that libraries might be able to have a role in adding value to university pub­ lications by assisting with adherence to stan­ dards, indexing, and abstracting, etc. From Tennessee, Paul Gherman wrote, “I feel that increasingly the future of academic research libraries is to become the publishing arm of their university.” He said that libraries with university presses should become part­ ners, with the press offering editorial, market­ ing, and fulfillment services, and that “The li­ brary building has the technical infrastructure to both offer access and long-term preserva­ tion to the content.” Partners, yes; separate and different roles, yes. Libraries as publishers? I’m still not con­ vinced, but there are reasons libraries would benefit from closer cooperation with areas of the university that have publisher-like skills and services. If libraries could influence au­ thors to adhere to standards, it might improve libraries’ roles in archiving and the future mi­ gration to new online formats. However, in­ creased staffing is not likely at most libraries, so collaborating with other university units offers another strategy for fulfilling and expand­ ing our mission. My query got a few responses similar to that from Eric Van de Velde at Cal Tech, who wrote that two different groups had ap­ proached the library to start electronic jour­ nals. He envisions the library having the goal to create self-supporting organizations under a different business model. He suggested that “E-journals can be self- supporting organizations and provide low-cost access by charging authors a service [fee] for the administrative overhead of refereeing, copyediting, and formatting, and [charging] readers/institutions a small access fee to main­ tain the computers and databases.” Libraries charging for information access! He also wrote, “We want free unlimited dis­ tribution of journals. … The only crucial issue is to free the literature from artificial copyright restrictions.” The “traditional publisher is con­ trolling the copyright of creative works and what is needed instead is a service agent who provides a set o f services at reasonable rates. C&RL News ■ Novem ber 2000 / 931 Libraries should play a key role in causing this transition from publisher to service agent.” Librarian or publisher? Libraries are reconceptualizing what it is that they are, and they are pushing the bound­ aries of service. They question whether it is enough to assert that their role is to manage, maintain over the long term, and make ac­ cessible the digital content produced by schol­ arly communities. Has it become necessary to call the maintenance of digital collections “publishing” in order to enhance the value of the libraries? Several colleagues stated that the ques­ tion of whether libraries are publishers is more an issue of definition than practice. Sexton wrote, “Getting involved in publish­ ing also seems a useful self-preservation mea­ sure— we need to ensure that we remain a relevant profession, and getting in on the e- publishing ground floor seems a good way to ensure this.” And, from Florida, Monica Metz-Wiseman agreed with Green that “Publication allows li­ braries to control the process and delivery, raises awareness/visibility for libraries, deliv­ ers a ‘product’ more quickly than the com­ mercial world, and improves the image of the library.” If academic libraries are to be publishers, we should publish the work of our faculty. We would invest in our authors’ books that would not necessarily make a profit and not in the potential popularity of the titles. Is it someone’s goal to make the library a commercial busi­ ness with a respectable profit maigin? S ta te m e n t o f o w n e rsh ip and m an agem ent College & Research Libraries News is published 11 times a year (monthly, combining July/August) by the Ameri­ can Library Association, 50 E. Huron St., Chicago, IL 60611. American Library Association, owner; Mary Ellen K. Davis, editor-in-chief. Second-class postage paid at Chicago, Illinois. Printed in the U.S.A. As a nonprofit organization authorized to mail at special rates (ÐMM Section 423.12), the purposes, function, and nonprofit status o f this organization and the ex­ empt status for federal income tax purposes, have not changed during the preceding 12 months. Extent and nature o f circulation. (“Average” fig­ ures denote the number of copies printed each issue during the preceding twelve months; “Actual” figures denote the number o f copies of single issues pub­ lished nearest to filing date.) T otal n u m b e r o f cop ies (n et p r e s s ru n ): Average, 12,494; Actual, 12,423. P a id /r e q u e s te d ou tsid e-c ou n ty m a il subscription s: If libraries are to truly be publishers, are we to spread ourselves even thinner and assume responsibilities for peer-review and quality as­ sessment? Should the reputation of the library evolve to denote something about the title or the author of its publication? Will libraries evolve into commercial services, profit- making services? Will library publishers manage copyright and pay roy­ alties? Is this the best way for limited library re­ sources and time to be spent? Our unique mis­ sion is one of service—to help our users in our communities find information resources, and use them to good purposes, whether a publication results or not. Metz-Wiseman described the dilemma well. “From ETD’s to the digitizing of special collec­ tions materials, libraries should engage in pub­ lication. Publication allows libraries to control the process and delivery, raises awareness/ visibility for libraries, delivers a ‘product’ more quickly than the commercial world, and im­ proves the image of the library as a traditional, sometimes reactive repository of knowledge. Plus, when libraries are publishers they are free from market considerations that can ad­ versely shape a ‘product’ by playing safe. Aca­ demic libraries may find themselves alone however when embarking on publication within their university. Faculty are comfortable in the role of author/creator/editor but full- scale publication production expertise is of­ ten not a commodity to be found on a U.S. campus.” So, am I a librarian or am I a publisher? Should you find the advertisement for my job in C&RL News or in the Society for Scholarly Publishing’s job bank? What will the answer be five years from now? ■ Average, 10,704; Actual: 10,501. P a id in -cou n ty s u b ­ scription s: Average, 1,164; Actual, 1,162. S ales through d e a le r s a n d carriers, street vendor's, c o u n te r sales, a n d o th e r n on -U S P S paid distribution: not applicable. Other c lasses m a ile d th rou g h th e USPS: not applicable. Total p a i d a n d / o r r e q u es te d c ir c u la tio n : Average, 11,868; Actual, 11,663- F r e e d istribu tion by m a il: Average, 115; Actual, 133. F re e d istrib u tion ou tsid e th e m a il: Aver­ age, 0; Actual, 0. T otal f r e e distrib u tion : Average, 115; Actual, 133. Total distrib u tion : Average, 11,983; Ac­ tual, 11,796. Copies n ot d istrib u ted : Office use, left­ over, spoiled: Average, 511; Actual, 627. T otal (sum o f p r ev io u s en tries): Average, 12,494; Actual, 12,423. P e r c en t p a i d a n d / o r req u es te d c ir c u la tio n : Average, 99.04%; Actual, 98.87%. Statement o f ownership, management, and circu­ lation IPS Form 3526, September 1998) for 2000 filed with the United States Postal Service, Postmaster in Chi­ cago, Illinois, September 28, 2000. 932 / C&RL News ■ Novem ber 2000