23 Things - #15

Rick Anderson's article, questioning the future usefulness of a print collection, is an opinion for which I am going to have to respectfully disagree. Granted, I do see validity to his reasoning that the volume of material and resources available to patrons online could (or perhaps should) make print material obsolete - a paper white elephant if you will. However, a few reasons why print collections should both exist and continue to be replenished with acquisitions come to mind:
1. Patrons still desire for materials in print. This may be a greater truth in a public versus an academic library, I'm not sure. But books remain in demand, despite the always growing presence, accessibility, and awareness of online resources.
2. Even if every library in existence began tomorrow to digitize their entire collection and make them available in digital format, it would take years before they were all digitized, indexed, and accessible. Meanwhile, how many new print publications would be created?
3. I have to preface this one with saying that I completely agree with Mr. Anderson's next two "ice bergs:" educating our patrons on how to find information (i.e. teaching a man to fish), and taking the library to the patrons by all means accessible. However, I think it is important that we as librarians be careful how we pitch our desire to take the library to our patrons, and that we don't out smart ourselves by convincing those who hold the purse strings that the library "as place" is no longer an absolute necessity. I see this as particularly relevant in the academic setting, but certainly applies to all library institutions.

Finally, and for purely self-absorbed reasons, I would like to see the continued presence of print material as the immovable cornerstone of libraries - living side by side in informational harmony with electronic and online resources - at least long enough to be able to absorb and be a part of what "is" before it becomes what "was."