The Good Library Blog

What bugs me is the deternmination to MAKE people interested when they say 'not really interested.' If they`re not they`re not. Why should a lot of money and energy be used up trying to make them ?

Susan- you are so right; is striking that the Libraries Act which provides the basis for the library service calls upon councils to provide a libraries "for those who wish to use them"

So much money is spent trying to achieve the equivalent of selling petrol to people without cars.

Of course it is important to encourage people to read. But the role of the library in that process is to have the books they might want; not to preach at them. (Or outreach- which is the current equivalent)

Outreach work (if done well) is not a matter of just getting people through the doors or preaching at them to read.

Public libraries are paid for by all members of the community. If sections of that community have chosen not to use our service then we have a duty to investigate their reasons.

If we can make changes which help these people to use our service then surely that is a good thing?

By the way Tim, engaging with different groups (or outreach work) is often a good way of finding out exactly what books they want and is one of the many things we can do to tailor the service to suit the community.

Miriam - you don't have to do "outreach" of the kind which library authorities undertake to find out the reason why people choose not to use libraries. And my experience from reading all the reports over many years is that when the library service makes changes, they aren't in response to the reasons why people aren't using the service- they are in response to a variety of other agendas.

I think you'll need to clarify that Tim. I am not quite sure what you are getting at.

You seem to be saying that libraries should ignore people who(due to various socieoeconomic or cultural reasons)feel excluded from their services.

Which particular library service are you referring to?

I imagine that any changes are made with various factors in mind as they will, no matter how small, have an effect on other parts of the service. Is that what you mean by "a variety of other agendas"?

So why do 'they' not use libraries? Is it all down to radical lefty librarians foisting their infomercial agenda down the throats of honest taxpayers? Or right-wing libertarian librarians following their cost cutting, private enterprise agenda? Or wishy-washy liberals not doing what they are told?
I think it's a lot more complex than 'agendas', a great many of which come from our recently much vaunted councillors.

An impassioned plea in this area...
Librarian in Black I don't completely agree, as the comments show,but it's one answer to outreach..

There is no evidence anywhere that people feel excluded from libraries because of "socio economic or cultural reasons". Every single piece of research, wherever it is conducted, comes up with the same answer: people don't use libraries a. because they don't expect them to have available the books/newspapers/ materials that they want or need; b. because they are closed when they are needed to be open; and c. because they are dirty and old fashioned places.

"Outreach" and large expenditures of money on similar activities do not address any of those three things and are a waste of much needed time and money.

Methinks the 'people' have their facts wrong, and if they actually (gasp) set foot in a public library, they'd see that. Perhaps this false impression persists because people keep perpetuating it in the press?

And why the obsession with all things new and shiny? The Mitchell library here in Glasgow has recently been refurbished, but it's still in an old building with a lot of historic features, inside and out. It is also well-used. I go there to use the reference rooms which are quiet even when packed with students using laptops. Old and new can co-exist. That being said, many libraries are new and shiny, so it can't be the case that their appearance is letting them down. As for opening hours, well, library staff have a life too - they're entitled not to be open every hour of the day if their local authority can't afford the staff for longer opening hours.

I'm not nitpicking here, I'd just like to see some links to all of this research, and backup for the assertion yhat there is no evidence that socio-economic or cultural factors are an issue in people's use/non-use of libraries.
Even if libraries were supershiny, with brand new books and excellent opening hours, people who don't come still wouldn't.It's not a case of build it and they will come. Some 'outreach' is needed to let people know what is there. None of which needs to be expensive.
Unless of course it only matters that the people who currently use libraries keep using them, and no-one else really matters.

Pete

How do you know it's not a case of "build it and they will come" ? - that has generally proved a good policy for libraries as it does for everything else. "Word of mouth" is always the most potent method of advertising, but you have to do a good job for it to work.

If you want links - you can do worse than to start down the left side of this blog, then look at the Reading Agency website, then the Audit Commission, then the Select Committee hearings of 2005, then even the MLA. MORI has quite a lot and there have been many local authority studies-- perhaps even your own. (check your local library) They all say the same thing; the curious thing is that few people respond to them in the obvious way, by doing what people ask for.

There certainly has never been any study that suggests that use of libraries is affected by the socio - economic standing of the user-- it's always the libraries themselves which are the determinant. So you can trust your own experience.

Nor has there been any "cost cutting" or "private enterprise agenda" - all there have ever been are lousy libraries and a few better ones.

"There certainly has never been any study that suggests that use of libraries is affected by the socio - economic standing of the user"

Funny you should say that Tim because there are several indications in the report you have linked to at the start of this thread that there are.

Incidentally the idea your argument that "Every single piece of research, wherever it is conducted, comes up with the same answer: people don't use libraries a. because they don't expect them to have available the books/newspapers/ materials that they want or need; b. because they are closed when they are needed to be open; and c. because they are dirty and old fashioned places." is a pretty good vindication of outreach work which proves to non-library users that their preconceptions are very often wrong.

If you need any further proof that outreach is both needed and effective then have a look at any of the winners of the "libraries change lives" award.

Could you please clarify, are you suggesting that libraries should ignore people who feel that they are "of no interest"?

Tim,
granted. To some extent.

I believe that in some areas cost-cutting has been an agenda, albeit in the shinier guise of efficiency.

It may be that socio-economic standing crudely drawn has no effect. But in academic libraries certainly, issues such as language, race etc have been seen to have an effect on whether people use libraries; and I feel that such is likely true for public libraries, it's just that no-one has cared enough to ask.

The problem with giving people what they want is that the people asked aren't necesarilly representative, nor will they be the ones using the service down the line. There has to be a balance between serving current users well- and I absolutely agree that if people want more books and better buildings that should be the aim- and looking to serve future users and perhaps even get more people in.

Word of mouth only goes as far as the ears of the people the mouths like to talk to ;)Not to downplay its importance here, but it can't be the only thing.

In public libraries, are there non righteous, no not one, Tim?

"all there have ever been are lousy libraries and a few better ones."

I remember great libraries througout my life, from Redditch to Aberystwyth to Bridgend to Erdington to Rotherham. None of them without their issues, but all served me and their communities well. Does my experience, and that of the other users not count? Was it all so dark; and is it still? If word of mouth is so key, Tim, the doomsaying here isn't going to help.

This is not to say all is roses or criticism is bad; but such confidently sweeping assertions do no credit to the position you take.