Cracking open my first library textbook*, I was a little excited to see what style and perspective Smith and Wong would take in addressing the status of reference services in the new information age. And color me surprised! (/sarcasm) The authors of the textbook on library and reference services defended the utility of reference librarians! Beginning with the history of public libraries being established in the United States, Smith and Wong describe the boom of reference services in response to a paper written by Samuel Green that called for “personal assistance” [1] to be a fixture in library settings. Next, Smith and Wong narrate the trajectory of reference and the work it provides as the profession is transformed by various technological and demographic shifts in the past 140 years. Lastly, the authors close the chapter by highlighting the debates over the past few decades about the future of reference services and the library itself. The main consensus resulting from these debates appears to be, according to Smith and Wong, that reference librarians are definitely still needed in order to sort through the complexity and vastness of available information as well as continuing “to provide direct personal service to members of the community.” [2]
I definitely agree with the authors’ main point – reference librarians are needed to overcome the multitude of shortcomings that search engines like Google and sources like Wikipedia contain in abundance. But I think the real question that we need to confront in the information age is this – are reference librarians wanted? Are they even spared a passing thought? Sure, reference librarians provide a variety of services that go beyond simply answering a question or finding a source for a patron, but those actions are still the popular conceptions of what a reference librarian is for. Much like the model of tiered reference service at certain research libraries [3], the routine reference transaction in the information age has shifted to where Google is the primary point of reference and the basic reference librarian is a more “high-level” expert. The problem with this arrangement is the same as the aforementioned reference model, which Smith and Wong demonstrate: “many users simply accept the information provided at the first level of service and do not follow through with a referral.” [4] When the average Googler is searching for the causes of the American Civil War, they will not check out the repositories of primary sources or the varied perspectives of scholars that a reference librarian would know of firsthand; They will click on the first link on the first page that gives a broad summary of the conflict. When the average Googler is typing “Sandy Hook” and the first result is “Sandy Hook hoax”, they do not immediately consult a reference librarian to determine if the sources from said search are verifiable and accurate. They will make their own determination.
And often times, that determination is wrong. The existence of websites that peddle conspiracy theories and false information is in no short supply. Yet, despite the best talents of our current generation of reference librarians, these websites are extremely popular. One may only look to the current state of affairs in the 2016 U.S. presidential race to see the evidence laid bare, as the upper echelons of presidential politics become increasingly susceptible to conspiracies and falsehoods. The continued relevance of reference librarians depends on combatting the universal lie that sustains the World Wide Web: Because if it’s on the Internet, and it feels true, then it must be true!
A clip from The Rachel Maddow Show exploring the site Infowars and its founder Alex Jones, whose conspiracy theories have enticed the Donald Trump campaign and its followers.
--
* Not literally. My own personal copy has yet to be shipped.
[1] Smith, Linda C., and Melissa Autumn Wong. 2017. Reference and Information Services: An Introduction. 5th edition. Santa Barbara, CA. ABC-CLIO. p. 8.
[2] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, p. 22.
[3] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, pp. 18-19.
[4] Smith and Wong, Reference and Information Services, p. 19.
"color me surprised! (/sarcasm) The authors of the textbook on library and reference services defended the utility of reference librarians!" Oh, I was waiting for someone to bring this up. Ditto the boxed essay on the evergreen need for reference librarians. I'm glad you brought it up so you guys didn't think I was a crusty old bat. :)
ReplyDeleteI really like how you discussed whether or not reference librarians are wanted vs. needed. You gave some great examples of how librarians are passed over in favor of (unsafe) googling Do you have any suggestions on how librarians could make themselves wanted or seem more relevant (I say "seem" because of course librarians are relevant but the general population doesn't always see it that way)?
ReplyDeleteI believe that reference librarians will always be wanted, even when students don’t know that that’s who they need. And you still have the old school patrons coming in wanting reference librarians. I’ve noticed how older patrons do not want to talk to the student workers behind the desk, and sometimes they don’t want to talk to me after I tell them I’m a supervisor because I look like the students. They want a reference librarian, and for them it’s someone older looking. Sometimes you also get people making sure that the person they are talking to is not a student, but an actual librarian with a degree.
ReplyDelete