From: Allan Scherlen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 23:20:31 -0500

Speaking of the value of print journals I had an experience recently
that impressed upon me another value of the print version that I had
not considered.  I was preparing a presentation for a library
conference on an historical topic and found an illustration in a
journal from the mid-eighties that would be very illustrative for the
talk. The e-journal version of the illustration, however, was fuzzy
and almost unusable.  Luckily our library had not yet weeded the paper
duplicates of the title and I was able to get a clear scan.

Allan Scherlen

Sent from my iPad

On Dec 13, 2012, at 6:55 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 17:51:47 -0500
>
> So an issue of the New Yorker from this fall (the double issue Oct
> 29/Nov 5 with Mitt getting a tattoo on the cover) went missing, and we
> went to get a replacement.  Seems not to have shown up at all.  Called
> the New Yorker's subscription service number from the masthead in the
> back of the magazine and found that it can't be done.  They now retain
> only the current issue and two immediately previous and pulp
> everything else.  If you want a back issue older than that, go to the
> secondary market and good luck to you.
>
> 1.  Am I wrong that this is a big comedown in service over days of
> yore?  I understand the $$ drivers, but for a magazine as
> non-evanescent as the New Yorker, it still seems extreme.
>
> 2.  Makes me realize that while we've been focused on assuring
> preservation of and access to e-versions of serial publications, we
> may be approaching the brink of losing the old assurance of print
> preservation.  Once upon a time, lots of libraries got things in
> print, bound them carefully, cataloged them, shelved them, cared for
> them lovingly.  Loving care for print materials is no longer something
> you can count on (colleagues trying to give away books at the point of
> retirement are getting some rude awakenings around me) and when people
> switch from p- and e- to e-only, there may well be things that just
> get lost.  Reminds me a bit of the great loss of print books in the
> Catholic church in the 1960s when Latin went out and mountains of
> stuff got trashed, replaced by mimeographed booklets.  It's actually
> hard to find those old liturgical books now.  Same of the New Yorker
> in 50 years?  Or Popular Mechanics?
>
> Jim O'Donnell