Chuck Hamaker/Ebsco Full-Text Databases Post

[Janet Fisher <jfisher@MIT.EDU>]

In response to Chuck Hamaker's post about full-text databases and their
impact on print subscriptions, I would like to say I wish what he suggests
is happening is actually happening. In fact, MIT Press has done telephone
follow-up with non-renewed library subscribers to some of our oldest,
established, highly-cited journals, and we have definitely had responses
indicating that librarians had cancelled because of the journal's
availability in a full-text database. Some database products were even
named specifically. As a result, we are definitely reviewing whether we
want to remain in these types of products.

Janet Fisher
Associate Director for Journals Publishing
The MIT Press

________________

At 04:45 PM 3/20/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Response to Sam Brooks
>Senior Vice President of Sales & Marketing
>EBSCO Information Services
>
>Your recent e-mail message to libraries "Full Text Databases, Print
>Journals, and Electronic Journals - Distinctly Different Products" seems
>to me to show some misunderstanding about how libraries look at aggregator
>databases in the context of traditional journal collections. I've been to
>many conferences where librarians were agonizing over whether aggregator
>content was stable enough to rely on in terms of titles in their
>collections. The decision to substitute aggregator content for a
>traditional subscription title is not one that librarians take without a
>great deal of thought. Aggregator content when that content seems to be
>stable (and perhaps aggregators should consider providing some context for
>individual titles-ie. Length of contract, etc) is important but neither
>ebsco nor publishers should be afraid that its existence means that
>traditional subscription lists are shrinking based on that content.
>
>What is more likely, and is certainly true in every instance I know of, is
>that if a title appears to be stable, it is considered not as expendable,
>but as a candidate for increasing the pool of available content to a
>library. I suspect publishers are seeing increases in subscriptions from
>libraries, overall, as aggregator content is integrated into library
>collections. That is, instead of retaining paper and microfilm of some
>titles, if they are also reliably available in aggregator databases, then
>libraries are considering adding additional titles. In fact this is the
>most likely case, since microform suppliers report increasing sales,
>almost across the board. That is, since some journals published are
>problematic in terms of really receiving all issues, of surviving
>physically long enough to be bound, and the physical issues have to be
>replaced with a longer term copy, libraries are deciding that current
>issues of a title available in an aggregator database which they also get
>in paper might be substituted for new titles, with microform retention
>copies for the older one. New journals subscriptions, perhaps for the
>first time in 15 years, in some libraries, are actively being selected.
>
>I hope neither publishers nor aggregators become fearful of this. If you
>have a standard title it's not going away. This is a plus for publishers
>and for companies like ebsco. The drive for this is perfectly
>understandable: publishers continue creating new titles that are needed
>for new teaching and research areas. In fact, the aggregator databases
>are, I suspect, resulting in a re-birth of the publishing industry as
>start up journals have a better chance of reaching profitability much more
>quickly than at any time in the last fifteen to twenty years. And I
>suspect that the "loss" rate for paper subscriptions is minimal compared
>to the numbers and dollars going for new subscriptions and multiple sales
>channels. Instead of this caution that seems evident in your post, I would
>think content providers should be celebrating a new wave of subscriptions
>coming in, the first sign of a thaw in a long time in this industry. I
>suspect this is true given the continued acquisition of older publisher of
>new titles in their "stable" of titles, by the announcement of Taylor and
>Francis' acquisition of Gordon and Breach (which actually has some good
>titles, but had created serious image problems for their products) and by
>Elsevier's focusing on Academic/Harcourt. What this all says is that the
>aggregator databases are creating new publishing and profit opportunities
>for publishers, and creating the opportunity for libraries to look at
>broader coverage for newly emerging interest areas.
>
>Chuck Hamaker
>Associate University Librarian for Collections and Technical Services
>UNC Charlotte
>
>-----Original Message-----
>Subject: Message from EBSCO - Attn: Academic Librarians
>
>
>Full Text Databases, Print Journals, and Electronic Journals
>- Distinctly Different Products
>
>EBSCO's leading online full text databases offer access to full text
>articles from peer reviewed journals published by many of the
>world's most prestigious academic publishers.  EBSCO's full text
>databases offer tremendous value to an academic library by expanding
>access to the content of important publications already in the library's
>print or e-journal collection while, at the same time, providing new
>access to a great number of highly valuable full text resources
>previously unavailable to the library's users.   In addition, EBSCO's
>databases offer a convenient way for users to search the full text
>articles from a large collection of publications in one easy process.
>And now, with the advent of EBSCO SmartLinks(TM), users can access the
>full text of articles after searching popular abstract/index databases
>such as PsycINFO and Sociological Abstracts.  Users can link to full
>text articles in EBSCO's aggregated full text databases as well as to
>online journals from citations in leading secondary databases available
>via EBSCOhost.
>
>Online journals (also known as e-journals) provide users with online
>access to articles from current issues of the journal.  Online journals
>generally contain the same current articles that are included in
>current issues of the printed journal.
>
>Many full text journals in aggregated databases have embargo periods
>(delay of availability of full text articles imposed by publisher), and
>some journals that don't now have embargoes may have embargoes in
>the future.  In addition, as the publishers own the content and control
>the availability of the full text through databases, there is no
>guarantee that a full text journal currently available via a database
>will continue to be available in future years.  These are important
>distinctions between aggregated databases and online journals.  For
>these reasons, full text databases are not a practical, long-term
>substitute for print or e-journal subscriptions purchased or licensed
>directly from the publisher.
>
>Over the past several years, libraries have realized tremendous benefits
>from the use of full text databases.  Costs for print subscriptions have
>increased an average of 8.3% each of the last two years.  This is greater
>than the average price increase for full text databases, despite the fact
>that the amount of content available in these databases has increased
>dramatically over that same period.   However, if these databases are
>exploited, the benefits now experienced by libraries and their users could
>erode.  Full text databases are here to stay, but the favorable ratio of
>content and access to cost may not be.  Naturally, modest price increases
>will take place as publisher royalties increase and delivery methods are
>improved, but dramatic cost increases may be avoidable.
>
>Databases should be viewed as a complement (not a replacement) to the core
>print and electronic journal collections.  If publishers experience
>cancellations of current (print or online) journal  subscriptions due to the
>inclusion of their content in aggregated databases, they are likely to
>remove their content from these databases or increase their royalty
>requirements.  Were this to happen, library users could be forced to deal
>with incomplete library collections as publishers remove content from
>aggregated databases, and the price of databases could increase
>significantly.  However, this potential turmoil can likely be avoided if
>librarians make print and e-journal purchasing decisions independent of
>whether the full text of a journal is available in an aggregated full text
>database.  Proceeding in this way should result in price and content
>stability within aggregated databases, ensuring that end  users continue to
>enjoy the benefits of access to these large collections of valuable data.
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Sam Brooks
>Senior Vice President of Sales & Marketing
>EBSCO Information Services