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