Critique of Darnton: its about the narrative

[Philip Davis <pmd8@cornell.edu>]

There has been some very good discussion surrounding my post
critiquing Darnton's jeremiad on journal pricing (see:
http://j.mp/gjxBTi), however, I think we are getting off track
here.

The point of my post was not to compare the relative value of the
STM versus the humanities literature, JSTOR versus ScienceDirect,
or journals versus books. It was to point out that that the
narrative constructed by Darnton was based on selective data,
which, analyzed more fully, provides counter-factual evidence to
the position he was attempting to make.

Darnton promotes an old narrative that views the library as a
victim of a simple injustice perpetrated by greedy,
profit-seeking commercial publisher. I argue that casting oneself
as a blameless and innocent victim is not helpful and finish by
suggesting that the library needs to find a new narrative =97
hopefully framed positively =97 that helps chart the future of
academic libraries.

Not all academic librarians support this simple victim narrative.
Ivy Anderson promotes a more realistic view that views open
access solutions in a more positive light (see
http://j.mp/gOF62W). While her view is much more nuanced and
takes paragraphs to explain, I believe it is a more helpful (and
hopeful) library narrative to promote.

--Phil
---2071850956-881361637-1294964248=:10307--