EditorsBlog

Google Scanning Project

Over the last few days I have been driving along the coast of western America from San Francisco to Seattle. I have made it about 70 percent of the way and I am writing this article from a ski lodge in Lake Diamond. Along the way I have been listening to the local radio stations. In many places the only radio station that was available was National Public Radio (NPR). NPR is a commercial-free news and talk radio station. Once of the things I found interesting about this station was the lack of music and the amount of spoken word ranging from radio theatre to current affairs journalism.

One of the stories covered over the last few days was on the Google Books Library Project. I originally heard about this project several years ago when Google was planning to digitally scan books from library collections and over time integrate this content into Google search. This project appears to have been extended to books that are no longer in print. As per the Google ethos of 'Don't be evil,' as part of this project a computer that has free access to this collection will be provided to every public library project. Until listening to the librarians that were interviewed in this radio piece, I have never really thought too much about the impact of one organisation controlling access to information. The reason for public libraries being established in the first place was to provide a collection of useful material for common use. In other words information is not controlled by a single entity. What is your opinion on one entity possibly controlling access to out of print information?

- Peter Ward

Comments

 

ehausig@wish.org said:

I think that the operative phrase is "out of print information." In my opinion, it is better that a single organization preserves information than no organization at all. (Ideally, multiple pubic and private entities would step up to the plate on this endeavor.) On a similar note, there was a recent NPR report about how the Library of Congress doesn't have the facility to store electronic documents, such as PDF and DOC files. It was interesting because a military researcher was interviewed and he said that he found a Mac that was going to be thrown away and it contained the only documented account of a Korean War battle. Because it was electronic in form the Library of Congress wouldn't store it. (Note: I am an NPR junkie. It's so much better than the high-definition manure on those 24-hour news channels. ;-)

February 27, 2009 2:36 PM
 

paultinnz said:

Hi Peter,

Sorry about this but I don't quite get what you are saying here! In particular, "will be provided to every public library project", what did you actually mean to say here?

February 27, 2009 3:29 PM
 

willlamers said:

i would not say that they would control access to out-of-print material, I say they would provide one additional source of finding that material.  Controlling access would indicate to me that they would be the only source for that information.  If that information is not currently available to a library and Google provides it, that would not be a bad thing.

Just because a book is out of print does not mean it cannot be purchased.   However, the library has to work within it's budgetary constraints.  Purchasing one old book that may never even be opened does not make financial sense, but being able to log on to Google and read it for free does...

February 27, 2009 3:41 PM
 

pward said:

I think the point that was being made by the librarians in this radio article was that if only one entity where to control access to out of print books then it would be a monopoly free from economic competition

March 1, 2009 11:57 PM
 

meirbarlev said:

i would be vary carefull when letting one entity control access to out of print books. I can think of a lot of good reasons for it, but i worry about the power it will provide the ones who would abues it. they could falsly direct us (common readers) to whatever they want us to seeqread, they could hide info from us and all sorts of devious things. I would rather NOT do it then DO it. the bad outweighs the good in this case.

July 19, 2009 3:55 AM

About shanetasker



© 2010 Jude O'Kelly All Rights Reserved.