Once again there is a flurry of discussion about the LibraryLand practice of charging speakers to speak, and it has become bundled up in another discussion, the role of state library associations [n.b. corrected Freudian slip].
I’ve worked for some great folks, but Bob was the best. I worked for Bob when I ran a special library for the EPA. Bob was an engineer, not a librarian, and he technically wasn’t my boss, since he was a real Fed and I was a contractor, except my real boss was a potato-head working for a lowest-bid contractor two states away, and I don’t work for potato-heads; so for all intents and purposes I worked for Bob.
In addition to being brainy, witty, and hugely empathetic, Bob was very supportive of the library, But one thing I adored about him were the questions he asked… such as “I went to my public library and I tried to use the computer, but it was so hard. Why are catalogs so hard to use?” Or, “You mean you went on a public mailing list and found a conference roommate you’ve never met? Do you think engineers do this?” (Bob asked quite a few rhetorical questions.)
It was interesting to see LibraryLand through Bob’s eyes. I’m sure we seemed quaint.
I don’t even have a good transition for that anecdote, so I’ll leap right in and say that we’re experiencing a generational disconnect on how we serve one another, and it’s driven by many things, including technology. But it’s not just a case of “them young’uns don’t want to pay their dues.” Often, those young’uns are already paying dues, such as pulling together courses such as “Five Weeks to a Social Library,”
I’ve done best with state associations when I focused on specific issues such as intellectual freedom or helping to establish or revive gay and lesbian task organizations. I’ve chaired two IF committees, both, I felt, very effectively. But the second time left a sour taste in my mouth–not the committee, but the aftermath. I was told the IF committee was moribund, so with the help of a dy-no-mite committee, I revved it up. We did a joint awareness project with the local ACLU; we helped a newspaper do an excellent four-part series on the Patriot Act; we established the state’s intellectual freedom award (despite the complaint from one higher-up that we had Too Many Awards–oh yes, that was the real problem in California: far too many people being recognized for their efforts).
Our thanks? After my term, the state association politicos proposed dissolving the IFC (along with other units in the state association). Only a threatened melt-down from IFC members (including me) stopped that from happening.
If you didn’t know better, you might think some folks had an issue with the committee doing too well.
When I listen to people talking about their frustration with trying to “work from within,” I tap the rage (yes–rage) I felt when “they” proposed dissolving the IFC. Because what I sense most from comments by Janie, Sarah, and others is the feeling that they played along by the rules, tried to work from within, did everything they could, and were still shat upon by They Who Must Be Obeyed.
To the extent state associations will survive over the next ten to twenty years, it will require this much:
* Some state associations will need to stop pretending to be membership-oriented statewide ALA affiliates and will have to become what they really are: PACs for public libraries.
* Some state associations will need to recognize that this is not your mother’s LibraryLand. There are enough opportunities to shine without attending state conferences. If they want to put on a top-notch regional conference, they’re going to have to treat their speakers well–at least well enough to comp registration and offer even a tiny perk. Someone like Michele Boule has a national reputation and is speaking at her local state conference as a courtesy. Get a grip: you aren’t doing her any favors.
* Some people need to step aside and let new ideas prevail. You can’t afford to pay speakers? Let’s see that budget for printing and mailing newsletters. Let’s see that budget, period. We’ll help.
* As for the state association cliques that are like high school “mean girls”… well, actually, I’m glad these cliques exist. Better they should think they are important at this level and leave the rest of us alone.
Then there are some state associations who putter along quite nicely, serving as good regional institutes for collegiality, activism, or other important functions. This will sound crazy, but I miss the New York Library Association legislative committee meetings (which I “liaised” to from IFC). Such a passionate bunch of freedom-lovers I never did meet. At the time, I recall thinking the state conference was a twee lame, but our gatherings had an earnest crunchy do-goodness I learned to miss.
So, no, I do not think state associations have “outlived their usefulness.” I have been to dozens of state association meetings, and yes, they are largely oriented to public libraries, and yes, they do need to be thinking about their role in LibraryLand. It’s clear that state associations can’t simply assume things will function the way they did in 1967 or even 1997. I do see the importance of PACs, and regional conferences, and advocacy. The question is, does everyone else?
Posted on this day, other years:
- FRL to Magee: Get Off My Lawn - 2008
- Germanic? Mais non, petit Walter! - 2006
- Podcasting on the Rise - 2005
- Librarian Writers, Writer Librarians - 2005
Karen, as chair of group putting on the preconference session that Michelle is presenting at, I’d like to address your comment that “Someone like Michele Boule has a national reputation and is speaking at her local state conference as a courtesy. Get a grip: you aren’t doing her any favors.” We’re not trying to do her a favor, and all along we’ve recognized that she’s doing us a favor, not the reverse! That’s how the system works; I hope (and expect) that I’ll do similar favors for her and other groups in the future. I wish we could pay Michelle for her travel and expenses; that system *doesn’t* work, and I recognize that.
Michelle, and Gary Wan from Texas A&M, her co-presenter, will be able to meet and speak to almost 100 librarians as a result of our pre-conference. Each of those librarians will pay only $40 for the workshop, making this a great value! Many of them are academic librarians, a group that we want to serve better. Most of those librarians will never attend ALA or a national conference because their institutions can’t or won’t send them. To me, this is *why* we have state library conferences: to bring in wonderful speakers as affordably as possible to educate the largest number of our peers.
Danielle Cunniff Plumer
Chair, Library Instruction Round Table
Texas Library Association
You have, of course, said this better than I ever could.
Danielle, I appreciate your comments in acknowledging that the system isn’t working. Where it IS working is that Michele will hold a great regional workshop and she and her audience will benefit from the experience. It’s also good that the workshop’s cost is kept low.
I suspect a lot of this could be addressed by approach. From following the discussion elsewhere, what tripped Michele’s trigger was a mass-produced email; this was a case where as a speaker she should have been set aside and given some strokes–but the system doesn’t allow for that, because the system isn’t built around TLC for local speakers. I have done many a local freebie (even freebies that took personal time and perhaps some gas cash) because someone asked nicely (and in some cases said “ignore the standard form letter that will ask you to register”).
It goes back to not simply assuming that a local speaker automatically benefits from doing a talk. On the one hand, every talk I give builds me (even an absolutely horrid experience in Washington State where a roomful of public library directors ate me alive); but on the other, you know, I could always be doing something else.
This conversation as it has unfolded online has certainly been an interesting one. It is one that is near and dear to my heart from both sides of the table. I have been the program coordinator for the NJLA conference and forced to live by these rules that seem unbending even when they do not make sense to me *and* I have also spoken (willingly and gladly) for free dozens and dozens of times for library groups and conferences of all sizes (I stopped counting my freebies after 100).
I loved being the co-chair of the conference planning committee (I am a natural born organizer) and put 100s of hours of my own time over the course of 3 years in to making the state annual conference a success. I did this for my own personal growth and also to give back to the profession. My overall experience with NJLA during the 5 years I was actively involved was very positive and I will likely get involved again some day soon. My only reason for stepping down from NJLA commitments was a decision to focus on the family front after bringing our little guy home (it took me too long to become a Mom, and I want to enjoy every minute I can).
I think state and local conferences do serve a vital purpose, and it is why I continue to speak at them for free when asked to do so. This time I was requested to speak by my department manager to represent our library. I do not need to be paid (although it would be nice), but I do have a problem with paying to speak.
I was hesitant to speak up on this issue. I am not one for confrontation and I respect the time and effort that goes in to planning conferences. I know how hard conference chairs and programming coordinators work and I know that they too do this for free. I just sincerely would like to have an honest discussion about this practice of having speakers pay their own registration on the agenda of every local and state organization that hosts a conference.
Thank you Karen for helping to move this discussion forward.
Not that there isn’t room for discussion on this topic as well, but is the reference in the first paragraph to the “role of state libraries” an oversight when you meant the “role of state library associations”? Or maybe I need to read more carefully to understand how you are talking about both and the linkage you make between them.
Thanks, Sheila
>
And that is exactly why I am not a member of TLA.
So that Danielle and LIRT do not feel beleaguered, which I think she may, it is not Danielle’s fault that she works in a broken system. LIRT struggles very hard in TLA to break out of the public/school library mold that is prevalent. They do a great job with what they are given and frankly TLA should be taking cues from LIRT and giving them a lot more support. TLA should eat the cost of internet, which should never even be an issue, not LIRT.
I know that all the blathering I did last week looks like sour grapes to some, but it is hindsight and all that. Like said in my own space, I have more thoughts, but I want to save them for after the preconference is over. I want the discussion to center around TLA’s failings, not LIRT’s.
oops yes state library associations not state libraries! sorry am at conf and can’t log in to fix it…am on treo. thanx!!!
Karen, the curious things about this all was that although a mass-produced email triggered the issue, it was a mass-produced email specifically for local speakers. The wording was admittedly poor, but it was not a demand that the speaker register; instead, it was an offer to extend the discounted pre-registration period if the speaker wanted to register. In effect, TLA was offering a discount to local speakers that it doesn’t offer to other folks. I think that Michelle was “primed” to react negatively to the email because of Jenny’s experience with PLA and the experiences that many others have shared.
Overall, I think that this particular situation doesn’t merit the time and attention it has received but that it has given a lot of us the opportunity to reflect on a number of real problems and even abuses out there (including the question of how we compensate local speakers for their time and expenses).
Danielle
oops yes state library associations not state libraries! sorry am at conf and can’t log in to fix it…am on treo. thanx!!!
I realized my cutting and pasting did not go through. My comment about not being in TLA was a response to the “state associations are PACs for public libraries” statement. Sorry for the confusion.