Subject: Re: Ads in online journals, was: Re: CBC and Liblicense list Sent: 4/12/98 3:18 PM Received: 4/12/98 4:42 PM From: Mark Rauterkus, mrauterkus@sportsurf.net Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Hi, The following message, my first here, is a wake up call of sorts - be it a bit on edge and "counter culture" to what I'm seeing in this discussion. I've been lurking on this list for a few weeks, and I'm scratching my head with shock at the nature of some of these comments. Mine is an attitude to promote the freedom of expression and the free-marketplace of ideas. I was under the impression that libraries are for "access" --- yet most of you want to be playing gatekeepers of old school methods. Hold onto your hat. Reactions welcomed. >I agree with Ann's concerns. By subscribing to the product we may be >implicitly endorsing the products being advertised. You must then unsubscribe your library from every newspaper and popular magazine published. You must unplug all computers from the internet. You might as well poke out your eyes, plug your ears and live life through your nose. > If the cost of >aggregation and distribution are covered by advertising we should not have >to pay anything. In that case, we would add a disclaimer stating that we >do not endorse the products. Miriam Drake Take a ride down the road -- notice the billboards. Notice the handbills, perhaps near the door to your library and/or around campus. I'm going to take an unpopular stance here -- but I have the impression that the people who walk into libraries have brains between their ears. Readers are smart and can think for themselves without "added disclaimers stating that YOU do NOT endorse the product because of this AD." In another post an acquisition librarian wrote: >We seem to be using terms like "sponsorship" and "advertising" almost >interchangeably here -- but am I wrong in thinking that the two are >actually very different? Yes. The two terms and the meaning of each are very different. However, if one is sitting high in an ivory tower or riding on a "high horse" -- they might look to be the same. >I'm thinking of the difference between the >underwriting that you see with public broadcasting (where sponsors are >mentioned and their products or services described, but there's little or >no "hyping" of the product itself) and the advertising that you see on >commercial TV or in magazines. Might you be in a dream world? Hyping? Who wants to carry around a "hype-meter?" > I'd feel more comfortable about seeing the >former in online journals than the latter, although I'm not sure I can >justify that feeling philosophically -- after all, most of the print >magazines and many of the journals we provide to patrons are full of >traditional advertising, so why should anyone expect an electronic product >to be different? You shouldn't. You are right. Advertising is in the magazines and popular press things. Advertising is everywhere and you can't and should not bat another eye at its presence. Background: I'm a publisher. Over the past 15 or so years I've put out products (books, (hardcover, softcover, trade paperbacks, workbooks) videos, software, magazines, E-books, and even a few subsidized titles) I've been miffed by various librarians and even bookstore managers who have rejected some of these titles out of hand because of their back-cover advertisings. Case in point. We published a 400 page trade paperback with 300 illustrations by 4-time Olympic water polo coach. This is the very best book ever on the sport by far. I've given away more books in Pennsylvania (my home state) than I sell. Then there is a whole season's of practices from a N. California for Masters Swim Team. Both books have back cover ads, and they would not have been put into print without a bit of help from those advertisers. One firm sells fins and the other firm does swim parkas. Neither book had a hope of being published by S&S. I'm a very small publisher. Those backcover "sponsorships / ads" paid to get the covers printed. Those books are not in some libraries now because of block-headed thinking (in the past) by those in the library marketplace. Yet, the big publishers, Time Magazine, Sports Illustrated -- well, those titles are in libraries and bookstores. How-to tactical books SHOULD have advertisments within the books, and even on the back-covers. The popular newspapers, magazines and even Journals should have advertising. And, folks, so to should all the electronic media outlets too. >From Belgium writer: >As to the question of ads in online journals, I am very cautious >about it. In the United States, advertising is present in every >human activity since a long time. Here in Europe, the invasion >is more recent. Yes, but the American folks here (overstatement) don't realize that ads are present. They seem to think that they are a watch guard for propaganda and a disclaimer agent too. >Only naive people can really think that such >an introduction is for the sake of quality. It is for profit and >nothing else. Well, naive people think that they can think for others and influence the business world too. >I think it is dangerous because it may divert >young uncritical souls from education and leave them like sheep >in a society of wolves. "It" being advertising in above statement. Perhaps, ads in journals. But, in America, we already have ads everywhere, as stated above. How about STATE RUN PRESSES. Does that suit the fancy of the folks here? If we only had state run presses and all ads had to go through a screening process -- some here might be very happy, right? Here is another point I'd like to raise. Do you ever consider that the authors themselves might have agendas too? Important scholars often rule their whole fields of study by selecting and killing certain articles for peer-review journals. Research that challenges their positions is never welcomed. This happens too, and the only way to get out the word to a flock of sheep being starved by a large tooth leader can occur in the advertising realm. This then makes ads a flashpoint for freedom. My position is not to defend ads. My position is to say that those in professional roles need to provide access and let the people think for themselves. We all make decisions every moment in life. And, FWIW, institutions and people have already made the decisions that ads, sponsorships, grants, scholarships, state-aid, fee-based subscriptions, subsidy-works, web sites, white papers, and what not are fine sources for information access -- and ads are here to stay in all endeavors of communication. -------------- Mark Rauterkus, Publisher E-books work in classrooms! mrauterkus@sportsurf.net http://SportSurf.Net/ --------------
Subject: Re: CBC and Liblicense list Sent: 4/13/98 5:44 PM Received: 4/13/98 7:13 PM From: Pete Goldie, pg@lbin.com Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu At 04:18 PM 4/12/98 -0400, you wrote: >The following message, my first here, is a wake up call of sorts - be it a >bit on edge and "counter culture" to what I'm seeing in this discussion. Dear Mark, Well done, your opinion on the anti-business slant of some of the commentary from librarians. Many of the comments in the lib-list reflect naive thinking that gives a bad name to a good liberal arts education. I am in a similar situation, being a small publisher of academic titles, and I am continuously amazed at the demand of some librarians that I become a non-profit organization because any behavior otherwise is morally suspect. Yet these same librarians complain about the difficulty with ordering from small publishers, how we should use an aggregator, become part of a major distributor chain, and must discount single copies because of the inconvienience we cause them with a small order. Add to these reasonable requests that we provide our titles for next to free, do not offend the eye with advertisements, use the browser software they personally approve of, and place no restrictions on access or use. As the Internet and e-pub medias are purportedly an equalizer for small publishers, how come so few small publishers manage to survive producing quality titles? That answer must address the maturity of market.. which to no small part is the librarians. To them I say, show some purchasing discrimination, critical analysis of quality (both content and delivery media), and put your money where you mouth is. Like you, I have a very liberal policy of giving away CD-ROMs to teachers and worthy educational organizations. On one title of ours, the "Darwin CD-ROM", I have given away over half as many as we have sold. This title has received many exceptional reviews by scholars (not computer magazines), and how many libraries have purchased a network license? ZERO. Why do academic libraries subscribe to Time, Newsweek and People anyway? All they seem to record is the failure of journalism. Pete Goldie **************************** * Pete Goldie, Ph.D. * * President * * Lightbinders, Inc. ****** * 2325 Third Street - Suite 324 * * San Francisco, CA 94107 * ********************************************* * Internet: pg@lbin.com http://lbin.com * ********************************************* * Voice: 415-621-5746 Fax: 415-621-5898 * ********************************************* *** NEW! DARWIN Multimedia CD-ROM - The Collective Works of Charles Darwin on CD-ROM (2nd Edition): http://lbin.com/darwin/ *** NEW! Orchids of the Tropical New World CD-ROM: http://lbin.com/orchids/
Subject: Proof is in the pudding - was Ads in online journals, Sent: 4/12/98 3:20 PM Received: 4/12/98 4:42 PM From: Mark Rauterkus, mrauterkus@sportsurf.net Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Hi, Feeling a bit like I should back up my rather harsh posting just sent to the list, -- check out this news blurb from the front of The Internet Advertising Discussion List, Digest #211 - Friday March 10th, 1998. See: http://www.internetadvertising.org/ -- snip starts --- News: Microsoft Plans Stealth Blitz to Mend Its Image Source: LA Times Stung by the public relations fallout from antitrust investigations of its business practices, Microsoft Corp. has secretly been planning a massive media campaign designed to influence state investigators by creating the appearance of a groundswell of public support for the company. The elaborate plan, outlined in confidential documents obtained by The Times, hinges on a number of unusual and some say unethical tactics, including the planting of articles, letters to the editor and opinion pieces to be commissioned by Microsoft's top media handlers but presented by local firms as spontaneous testimonials. --- SNIPPED ---- Full story: LA Times http://www.latimes.com/HOME/NEWS/BUSINESS/UPDATES/lat_microsoft0410.htm Didn't Bill Gates make some PR mention in a southern state days before talking to the US Senators? Did that librarian throw out Bill Gates? Of course not. Point being -- those who want to play gatekeepers to advertising -- would be foolish. -------------- Mark Rauterkus, Publisher E-books work in classrooms! mrauterkus@sportsurf.net http://SportSurf.Net/ --------------
Nancy Fadis@SCIOS 04/13/98 09:24 AM "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." Although I do not recall the author of this line which has become commonly mispoken, I share with you its correct expression. Nancy Fadis Scios Inc. Mountian View, CA
Received: 4/15/98 From: ferguson@columbia.edu To: Mark Rauterkus, mrauterkus@sportsurf.net ...I sent you a message saying, right on! for your contribution to the liblicense list. Many of my cohorts live in lala land. .... tony
Subject: Re: CBC and Liblicense list Received: 4/15/98 From: Pete Goldie, pg@lbin.com To: Mark Rauterkus, mrauterkus@sportsurf.net > >Hi, > >Thanks for the back-up on the lib front. I was sure I'd be toasted with a >flame war -- as I said some cutting things. Your points are great too. >Thanks again. Dear Mark, Looks like I succeeded in diverting any flame war directed at you! Geez, some of these librarians have thin skins. Always glad to stir up the stew. Best regards, Pete
LIBRARY GROUPS CALL FOR NEW POLICIES ON E-JOURNALS
The International Coalition of Library Consortia, a group comprising more than 40 library groups, has issued a statement calling for an end to the "excessive pricing" of electronic publications and for a cease-fire in "attacks" on libraries' rights to redistribute documents. "We're saying that, during this period, it is important not to be locked into a pricing model that is difficult for libraries to afford," says one of the statement's authors. The coalition's statement suggests that subscription rates for e-journals should be lower than those for printed versions, and that libraries should have the option to subscribe to the electronic version only. In addition, libraries should be allowed to follow fair use guidelines in dealing with electronic material, and store archives of e-journals on their own systems. Publishers have been noncommittal in their response to the statement: "I don't think our pricing model is unreasonable," says a spokesman for Elsevier Science, adding that his company is "trying to expand the options on pricing models" for online publications. (Chronicle of Higher Education 10 Apr 98)
Subject: Re: Ads in online journals Sent: 4/15/98 7:22 PM Received: 4/16/98 7:10 AM From: Lois Weinstein, mlcny@metgate.metro.org Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu After reading Steve Melamut's comments, I wondered whether any of the physicians ever rented a video from Moovies or Blockbuster. And if so, did they just sit through all the previews and ads for musical products OR did they simply "FAST FORWARD" until they reached the feature presentation. And if they knew how to do that, why not "fast forward" through the ads on the medical videos? If ads in online journals are a problem then why aren't we also discussing ads in print journals, on the side of packages, on billboards, on tv shows and in movie theaters? Face it - this is part and parcel of the American way of doing business. Just because an ad appears in an online journal or web site does NOT mean that the online journal or web site endorses the product. A disclaimer can be added to the ad from the journal or web site if they want to indicate that they do not endorse the products of their advertisers. TV stations do it all the time. Lois Weinstein, MLS, AHIP Executive Director The Medical Library Center of New York Phone: (212) 427-1630 Fax: (212) 860-3496 email: mlcny@metgate.metro.org On Mon, 13 Apr 1998, Steven Melamut wrote: > Users are not necessarily rational beings. I know of a major medical library > where the patrons (MDs) complained about the pharmaceutical advertisements in > the first few minutes of a series of videotapes that the library had. The tapes > are unavailable without the ads and the physicians said they would rather do > without them. > > steve > > ******************************************** > Steven Melamut > Kathrine R. Everett Law Library > University of North Carolina > CB #3385 Ridge Road Chapel Hill, NC 27599 > melamut@email.unc.edu melas@ils.unc.edu > work: 919-962-1196 fax: 919-962-1193 > ******************************************** > > > >
Subject: Re: Ads in online journals Sent: 4/15/98 7:21 PM Received: 4/16/98 7:10 AM From: Ann Okerson, aokerson@pantheon.yale.edu Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu MOD NOTE: Re. Pam Matthews' well-taken point, the list isn't for "dissing," though at the same time we try not to "censor" messages that might be seen as disagreeable by some readers. My point in raising the *specific* resource and the probably substantial advertising that will be found in it (and is indeed likely tie up scarce resources, namely workstations in libraries, when others would want to use them to search the online catalog, say) -- was to raise the question: how can librarians as customers, work with producers to shape a future in which advertising is going to be likely? How can we set some best practices for such advertising? Can we? The producer in question wants to work with library customers in exactly this way. So, once again I'd challenge the readers of liblicense-l to come up with some statements of what the acceptable features of advertising in WWW academic Internet resources might be. I don't think this is inappropriate in the least, no matter how much advertising there is everywhere we look. The fact is, all of us (librarians, readers, publishers, vendors) have a stake in this matter. Publishers do not want to overdo and give offence; we do want them to contain costs. Looking for ideas here, Ann Okerson Ann.Okerson@yale.edu P.S. A couple of people have written that advertising in online resources has gotten away from the licensing topic. We think not, as advertising is closely linked to pricing which in turn we all agree is one of the major stumblingblocks in licensing negotiations.
Posts
