LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 9 Apr 2013 15:24:19 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (75 lines)
From: Bill Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 18:49:25 -0400

Joe,

Sally was specifically talking about library journal acquisitions.
I don't think she meant, "Why is print still offered?"

Your point is extremely well taken on the publisher side, in that
print delivery of journals is (as I remember things) vigorously preferred
by individual society members.    To the best of my knowledge,
there are no studies in this specific area.

Bill


On 4/8/13 3:19 PM, LIBLICENSE wrote:

> From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 11:36:31 -0400
>
> Dropping print on the library side is one thing, dropping it on the
> publishing side is something else.  It makes perfect economic sense
> for publishers to drop print, and then they do and regret it.  This is
> because, for some unknown reason, dropping print often results in more
> cancellations of society memberships.  Makes no sense, right?
>
> Joe Esposito
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 4:42 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> From: Bill Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 08:37:16 -0400
>>
>> Sally,
>>
>> One can surmise theories.  Listserve recipients would know how
>> accurate these are.   Some university "libraries of record" in the USA
>> still collect the print because of...
>>
>> 1) institutional inertia?
>>
>> 2) pressure from older faculty members?
>>
>> 3) "specialized collection" status? (i.e., smaller special collections
>> for Schools of Public Health, Social Work, Anthropology, etc.) where
>> the number of core journals needed by the faculty could be limited.
>>
>> 4) existing ownership of relatively long runs of print journals?
>>
>> 5) sufficient funding/budgeting for print journal ownership and maintenance?
>>
>> 6) fear of "loss of content" because of server problems from online
>> journals, coupled with lack of practical knowledge about whether
>> disparate journals/journal packages utilize backup services?
>>
>> These are a few that come to mind.
>>
>>   Bill
>>
>> On 4/5/13 4:59 AM, LIBLICENSE wrote:
>>
>>> From: Sally Morris <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 11:11:15 +0100
>>>
>>> It has been noted repeatedly how much these costs would fall if libraries
>>> would drop print journals entirely. Yet they don't - why not?
>>>
>>> Sally
>>>
>>> Sally Morris
>>> South House, The Street, Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex, UK  BN13 3UU
>>> Email:  [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2