"Absorbent and yellow and porous is he!"

Ah yes, Spongebob Squarepants, the invertebrate who lives in a pineapple under the sea, has been making waves as of late. If only Joseph Campbell were around, he would immediately intuit that Spongebob was a Sponge with a thousand faces.

The Sponge with a Thousand Faces.

I have watched Spongebob Squarepants ever since it first aired on Nickelodeon in 1999, and still catch episodes when I can on Netflix, snatching twelve or so minutes to wolf down cereal while I snort soymilk out of my nose from Bob’s ridiculous-ness. That may be a bit of hyperbole, but frankly, the show is pure genius; one that is able to deftly straddle diverse demographics, bringing children, teens and adults together, all to watch the antics of a spineless fry cook sponge and his idiotic starfish bestie, Patrick. It also carries the distinction of being one of the only ’90s cartoons still running, and that is saying something. I own a few seasons, and have always enjoyed the show’s quick pace, the insane animation, the plots involving his terrible driving at Boating School, his job working as a fry cook for miserly Eugene Krabs at the fast food restaurant the Krusty Krab, his wacky friends like Sandy Cheeks (HA!) and Patrick Star, and his cranky neighbor Squidward Tentacles. The names are a hoot, the stories downright crazy. Which is also why I do not understand all the fuss about the supposed effects the show has on 4-year-olds.

The cast of characters (but not NEARLY all of them).

The show is very clearly aimed at older kids, and is definitely relatable to teens and young adults, as Spongebob has a job:

Spongebob works as a fry cook for the Krusty Krab.

Drives a car:

He is an awful driver.

Owns a pet:

His pet snail, Gary, who meows like a cat.

And goes to conventions to share his love of his favorite hobby, Jellyfishing:

The Jellyfishing Convention Hall.

Despite these milestones of adulthood, he is still relegated to a kid’s cartoon, and thus treated with the odd reverence and scrutiny that comes with being a show aimed at our youth. Shows like Sesame Street, Teletubbies, the Wiggles, and Dora the Explorer are all lumped in with Spongebob, and that is just plain wrong. No wonder the show has had a few “controversies” over the past few years.

Most notably was the insane notion that Spongebob, much like Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies, was gay. Admittedly, there are some similarities between the two shows: they are aimed at children, they are quite popular and have a huge following, they both occasionally break the fourth wall, and at times they both border on the psychedelic. But when Jerry Falwell, a conservative American cleric claimed that Tinky was a gay role model for kids, basing it only on Tinky’s purple coloration, his handbag, and the fact that his antennae was in the shape of a triangle. However, the BBC, the show’s co-producers, went on record stating that Tinky was not gay, or straight, simply a character on a children’s television show.

Something eerily similar happened in 2005 to Spongebob Squarepants, another children’s show character. James Dobson from the evangelical group Focus on the Family accused the yellow invertebrate of promoting homosexuality when he saw the character singing together with others in a promotional video. The creator, Stephen Hillenburg, went on record to dispute this, stating that Spongebob is not gay or straight, rather he considers him to be asexual. Dobson later attempted to backtrack, saying his comments were taken out of context, that his issue wasn’t with Spongebob directly but rather the organization which sponsored the video, which itself was meant to promote diversity and tolerance. Something nice did come out of it all, however, when John H. Thomas, president of the United Church of Christ said Spongebob would be welcome in their ministry, after all, “Jesus didn’t turn people away. Neither do we.” That is all well and good, but everyone does realize that Spongebob Squarepants is just a cartoon character, right?

I can't believe no one said anything about the boa!

And then we come to this latest bit of insanity, all over the internet from the AP to Wired: in May 2011 a study was published in Pediatrics, the Official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, in which scientists examined the effects of watching Spongebob in 4-year-olds.

According to the study’s own abstract:

So this proves what, exactly? That in the short-term, watching a show that is fast-paced and has mature humor and themes makes it difficult for kids to concentrate on tasks after viewing? Well, maybe they shouldn’t be watching TV before going to class, to sleep, or other things which require a calm demeanor. But didn’t we ALREADY know this? Also, there are a lot of variables at play here, and I hesitate to call this pseudo-science, but it seems like this study is more reactionary than conclusive.

The study had 60 test subjects, a small sample size to be sure, and they were mostly white and middle-class. Plus the options were no television, and then it was between Spongebob Squarepants and Caillou? Caillou is SUPER BORING, of course the kids could concentrate better after watching that show, they were hungry for something to do! Not to mention that 4-year-olds are hardly the most appropriate audience for Spongebob, not to mention the fact that the humor is more than likely way over their heads.

Then you have the short term effects on executive function, and once again, parents who read this study and the subsequent articles don’t usually understand the distiction between short-term and long-term, and this study certainly does not prove any long-term effects, ill or otherwise. And what is it about the show itself that leads to such distraction? The show splices live action in with animation, has musical numbers for no reason, takes place under the water, yet the characters often build fires and cook on open ranges, and body parts fall off and reassemble at will. I mean, c’mon, this show is hella crazy, even sober adults might have trouble functioning at full capacity after watching an episode. And if you’re altered in some way? FORGET IT.

So aside from the flimsy evidence this study purports as a rationale to keep your kids away from the likes of Spongebob Squarepants and his pals, there really aren’t any good reasons why you should. Even a Nickelodeon executive said the show wasn’t made for 4-year-olds, but methinks it was made for YOU.

JELLYFISH DANCE PARTY!

Games have been a ubiquitous part of our culture since time immemorial.

So THE USA TODAY posted an article on 9.15.2011 about a study regarding the connection between violent video games and violent players. It was conducted by Villanova University professor Patrick Markey, and was picked up by Kotaku the very next day, who added some interesting things to the conversation. So here are some deets, and my take:

According to Markey in THE USA TODAY, ”Video games are not simply good or bad for everybody,” he says. “But for some individuals who have certain dispositions, if they play video games they’re much more likely to be negatively affected.”

Markey co-authored a study that was published in the Review of General Psychology, and was also presented at an American Psychological Association meeting.  His data includes responses collected in 2009 from 118 participants, and in the study half of them played violent games and the other half played non-violent video games.

Personally, I feel that this distinction is a hard one to make, and I would love to get my hands on the list of games used for the study. Even games like Pokemon or Critter Crunch are embedded with violence, but it is minor and certainly overshadowed by fatalities, pimp slaps and head shots.

One of the things gamers have had to deal with for quite a while now is the perception of violence portrayed in video games and how it might affect the gamers. This is a question which has been raised time and time again; when film was introduced folks were worried how it would affect the youth, television came out and the same debate raged, heck, even comic books took a hit and created their own self-governing and regulatory tool, the Comics Code Authority, that worked to sanitize and scrub the offending violence out of the comics, making the suitable for youth. But can you truly take the violence out of a cultural product? Isn’t it produced by culture, and therefore simply inseparable from the very environment in which it was created?

Our culture is inherently violent, and many of the games we play mirror this fact.  Take sports, for instance, and the myriad ways players can injure not only themselves, but others. Some sports are even built around this violence, and simply label it ‘strategy.’

Football is injury-prone. I mean, you're SUPPOSED to TACKLE!

Ever wonder why there are no old players?

But video games have been getting a bad rap for years, and it always struck me as bad science to think that the violence in the game turns players into raving lunatics, with no control over themselves. How many stories have we heard and articles have we read recently about terrible parents abusing and neglecting their children to play video games? About people using video games as their cover story to commit murder? And yet, this study seems to prove that “correlation DOES NOT PROVE causation.”

Take the photo below, for example. Look at that dog. Do you want to suddenly kick or punch it? Do you wish it harm?

Woof, woof! <pant>

If you answered yes, then you are a psychopath. It is as simple as that. As psychologist Markley states: ”If you’re worried about a video game turning your son or daughter into a killer, don’t worry about that. But is your kid moody, impulsive, or are they unfriendly? It’s probably not the best idea to have that child play violent video games.”

Did violent video games cause this? Or was it Grandpa's stories of childhood Cowboys & Indians games in the old neighborhood?

THE USA TODAY article goes on to say that “Markey found slight increases in hostility for those with certain personality traits: extremely high on neuroticism and extremely low on agreeableness and conscientiousness.”

So it isn’t the content of the game, but rather, the content of the player’s mind. If you are already in a disturbed state, easily agitated, aggressive or competitive, the games may showcase those tendencies, but the violence is NOT the trigger. I mean, why do you think no one plays chess near baseball bats or crowbars? Because it DOES NOT MATTER what game you are playing, if you are a nutbag, you are a NUTBAG.

It stands to reason: relaxing games help players relax, games with high levels of competition and violence may put players in an agitated state, but we are all still responsible for our own actions. I have a very long commute to work, and sometimes I get the road rage real bad. But do I get to jump out of my car in gridlocked traffic and smash someone’s window? No. I possess self-control, and do not get to blame Grand Theft Auto for my bad behavior and use it as an excuse to get all crazy. NO ONE DOES. Those terrible parents who let their kids starve so they can play Farmville, or beat their children to death because they are interrupting a raid? They are terrible parents, and video games did not make them that way, they always were terrible.

I understand this is a hot topic, and that a lot of studies have been done, including one interesting one published by Simmons College in the Journal of Children & Media. It basically stated that young children (age 7-15) who were exposed to violent video games may effect their ability to develop empathy, and even increase their acceptance of violence. But so does watching the nightly news, or a war documentary, or working in a library.

There are so many games out there that masquerade as family entertainment, but are inherently violent. Games like Angry Birds, Age of Empires, Pac Man, Donley Kong, Chess, Super Mario, Axis & Allies, Zelda, Clue, basically almost ANY board and video game out there portrays and thereby encourages violence as a strategy. It may not be obvious and you may disagree, but then again, you just may be DESENSITIZED and simply cannot EMPATHIZE with what I am saying.

Stay in School, kids!

And finally, a useful sidebar from THE USA TODAY article:

Tips for parents of gamers:

REFERENCES:

http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2011-09-14/Dont-study-the-video-game-study-the-player/50406018/1?source=twitter

http://sitemaker.umich.edu/brad.bushman/files/ba09.pdf

http://kotaku.com/5841130/study-on-effects-of-violent-games-blame-the-player-not-the-game

Tulsa race riot of 1921.

As the librarian in charge of ordering for our adult graphic novels section, I try to really cover as much ground as possible. Along the way I discover quality books which often inspire, amaze, and educate, and a recent selection did all of that and more. Syncopated: An Anthology of Nonfiction Picto-Essays, ed. by Brendan Burford, was such a book. Although I found it to be a bit uneven, as there are so many diverse stories with unique approaches and styles, they all were wonderful in their own right, but the one that resonated with me and stuck with me was a short piece by Nate Powell entitled, “Like Hell I Will.” It is drawn in black and white, which is ironic, for it tells the powerful story of the race riots in Tulsa, Oklahoma, during the early part of the summer of 1921.

After digging around and researching this event a bit more, I realized that this incident was not only a blight on our national image, but something intentionally omitted from any history book I have encountered throughout my many years of schooling. Interestingly enough, a New York Times article about this very incident appeared in June 19, 2011, entitled: “As survivors dwindle, Tulsa confronts past.” How serendipitous that this article should show up in my research, and yet I STILL knew nothing about it. You may not know anything about this event either, so first, a little background:

Thanks to the discovery of rich oil fields, Tulsa, Oklahoma had grown from a boomtown of 10,000 in 1910 to a population of over 100,000 by 1920.  These citizens had a high quality of life and enjoyed many of the most cutting edge conveniences of the day; Victrolas, indoor plumbing, and even modern labor-saving devices like vacuums and electric washing machines. Many of these new citizens were African-Americans,  who were looking to make their fortunes, and many certainly did just that. At this early part of the twentieth century, the Greenwood District of Tulsa, OK was the wealthiest African-American communities of its time, it was even dubbed the “Black Wall Street.” But this wealth also brought a rise in racial tensions between blacks and whites, and the friction mounted until a crack in the veneer occurred, one that would cause catastrophic destruction, wanton murder, and even lead to the appearance of the Klu Klux Klan not more than 3 months later.

Black Wall Street

It was on May 31, 1921, Memorial Day, that the spark was set off that led to the firestorm that would burn and rage in across Tulsa. Nineteen-year-old Dick Rowland was a black shoeshiner, and had entered the rear entrance of the Drexel Building to head up to the “colored” washroom located on the top floor. The details are somewhat fuzzy here, but the generally accepted story is that while riding in the elevator, Dick lost his balance and grabbed seventeen-year-old elevator operator Sarah Page to steady himself. She screamed, Dick ran out, and a clerk working in a nearby store discovered a distraught Page and concluded that she had been assaulted. The authorities were contacted; Dick was black, Sarah was white.

Unfortunately, no documentation of the events were ever recovered, but a rape charge was levied against Rowland, and he fled to his mother’s Greenwood neighborhood home, he was scared. Rightly so, as Tulsa, like many other communities at the time, were no strangers to lynching.

The next morning Dick Rowland was located and taken into custody, then brought to the Tulsa County Courthouse for further questioning, but by then the media was already whipping the public into a lynching frenzy with sensationalist bylines like “Nab Negro for Attacking Girl In an Elevator” and  an editorial entitled “To Lynch Negro Tonight.”

Sensationalist headlines did not help the situation.

Unfortunately for Rowland, Tulsans seemed to have a history of vigilante action. For example, in 1920 there had been a lynching of a white man, Roy Belton, and so the sheriff tried to ensure that this would not happen to Rowland. He increased the guard and barricaded the building, and as a mob formed outside, went out to try and convince them to go home, but the crowd would not budge. In fact, not only would they not disperse, but a few white men even entered the courthouse and demanded Rowland, but were successfully turned away.

Soon, hundreds of white Tulsans crowded the front of the building, demanding that Rowland be handed over, even as the sheriff refused, and by 9p.m. 25 African-American men, many of whom were WWI vets, armed themselves and headed down to the Courthouse, offering to help protect Rowland, but the sheriff refused them as well, and they went back home, unable to help. But tensions continued to mount, and the crowd started to get antsy, even attempting, but failing, to break into the National Guard armory at one point. Soon another, larger group of armed African-American men returned to help protect Rowland, were once again denied, and as they turned to go, a white man tried to take the gun from a black veteran’s hands. A shot rang out, and the riot had begun.

As the night wore on, rioting overcame the city of Tulsa, blanketing it like an insidious fog that obscured reason and blinded citizens to self-control. The white Tulsans, angry about being denied perceived justice through lynching, railed against the African-American population. Although greatly outnumbered (nearly ten to one!), many of the black WWI vets began to take defensive positions, forming battle lines and digging trenches, vainly trying to prepare for the true warfare that was descending upon the city. But the cards were not stacked in their favor.

The authorities, both lawmen and religious leaders, tried unsuccessfully to dispel the massive crowd, even the mayor seemed powerless. The National Guard was called in, but it was already too late. While the Guard was en route, white rioters were deputized and began to head towards Greenwood, looting along the way, smashing in storefronts and ransacking black businesses, arming themselves and setting fires to stores and homes. The fire fighters had great difficulty in stamping out the fires as the rioters worked to prevent them from doing their jobs, and the city was ablaze with rage and flames, dark clouds of smoke filling the Tulsan air.

Held at gunpoint

When the Guard finally did arrive, they spent much of their time protecting a white neighborhood from a black counterattack which never materialized. But the white mob pressed their own attack, and the killing began. A black surgeon named A.C. Jackson was shot to death while escaping from his burning Greenwood home, even after surrendering to the rioters, and an unarmed black man was brutally murdered inside a movie theater. Whites driving cars began doing drive-bys through black neighborhoods,  and even airplanes had been conscripted as tools of violence, dropping their payloads of incendiary bombs and shooting rifles at the black Tulsans who were on the ground.

Tulsa on fire

Not all white Tulsans were rioting or shooting black folks indiscriminately, however. Some whites did not agree with the rioters, and did not participate in the violence. In fact, and this is especially poignant in Powell’s graphic depiction in Syncopated, some white citizens even stood up for their black coworkers and neighbors, and in some cases, employees, as angry rioters demanded they be turned over to them. Some complied, but others did not, and faced vandalism and even were attacked themselves.

Finally, around noon on June 1st, the National Guard put a stop to the riot, declaring martial law across the smoldering city. It took only 16 hours for the city to descend into lawlessness and then rise back up, but an immense amount of damage was done, both physically and mentally. More than 6,000 black citizens had been rounded up and forced into prison camps. The final death toll was surprising: a total of 39 people perished. 26 of the casualties were black Tulsans, and over 800 people had been admitted to the hospital for injuries. It is believed that the majority of those admitted were white, as the two black hospitals had been burned to the ground, along with over 35 city blocks. The resultant legal wrangling was a joke; Dick Rowland was never charged and later exonerated, the (all white) grand jury blamed the black Tulsans for the riot, and in the face of all that had occurred, not a single white person was imprisoned. Not for murder, for arson, for rioting, for vandalism, for the obscene and disgusting way they acted, not for anything.

The majority of black Tulsans were now homeless, many lost their businesses, some their lives, but not their spirit. Even in the face of white aggression, they returned and rebuilt Greenwood, although thousands spent a cold winter living in a tent.

Tents in Tulsa

According the “Tulsa Race Riot of 1921” article from Montgomery College, “It took the better part of the next ten years to recover from the physical destruction and to rebuild and repatriate the residents to their homes. This event, however, is barely mentioned in history books and is particularly absent from Oklahoma history books.”

In 1997 a state commission was formed and it investigated the riot, which at the time was still something of a taboo topic in Tulsa, as well as everywhere else in Oklahoma. Findings from the report indicated that reparations should be paid to the remaining survivors, but the Oklahoma Legislature refused the suggestion. Even a lawsuit on behalf of victims was thrown out of federal courts as the statute of limitations had legally expired.

Another great tragedy, marginalized to a footnote in history, and no note in history books. A race riot in the state that gave us a folksy musical, Sooners, oil, displaced native peoples, and is shaped like a fist with a protruding finger. Well, I think we all know what finger that is.

Oklahoma

These videos were culled from the vast collection of Tulsa Riot information that is available on Youtube:

TULSA RACE RIOT pt. 1

TULSA RACE RIOT pt. 2

THE TULSA OKLAHOMA MASSACRE OF AFRIKAN PEOPLE (warning: violent images!)

And here is the book which started it all for me, and my journey down this particular rabbit hole:

Syncopated: An Anthology of Nonfiction Picto-Essays

Syncopated: An Anthology of Nonfiction Picto-Essays, ed. Brendan Burford
Villard Books (New York, 2009), ISBN 9780345505293

References:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/us/20tulsa.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.okhistory.org/trrc/freport.pdf

http://digital.library.okstate.edu/encyclopedia/entries/T/TU013.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulsa_Race_Riot

http://www.montgomerycollege.edu/Departments/hpolscrv/VdeLaOliva.html

http://www.tulsareparations.org/TulsaRiot.htm

I mean, I consider myself a nerd, I really do, especially in light of this particular game, which I have been playing intermittently for over 15 years. I find that the players are quite diverse; some are business owners, some are lawyers, teachers, librarians, older, younger, even a girl or two, you name it. And I understand that her article was to be considered a treatise on how shallow we can be, especially when it is one nerd judging another. But Finkel? He’s a super nerd, a nerd god. I mean, a WORLD CHAMP? Do you even know how much these folks can earn playing a game? I am sure she wouldn’t look down her nose at a World Poker Champ, or someone who just won 100K playing pool, or bowling, so what is the deal? She even said this: “One person’s Magic is another person’s fingernail biting, and no profile in the world is deep enough to account for that.” So she wants online profiles to encapsulate everything about a person, every quirk, each foible, all of the diverse things you may be into, or do, should be listed. That is an insane idea, there is no way you could (or would want to) list everything in what should be a snapshot of yourself. The whole point is for people to be intrigued, to want to get to know you better, to fill in those mysterious gaps themselves. That’s the relationship part of the whole thing. Why even spend time with someone you already know EVERYTHING about? Where’s the fun in that?

As far as I am concerned, Ms. Bereznak, you deserve the Know Your Meme write up, and the nice card someone has immortalized you in. After all, beggars can’t be choosers.

Do not mess with Magic players.

First off, funny fan-boy bait for everyone!

Harry Potter in the Hood (NSFW)

Hilarious videogame called I’m NOT Drunk!. Propaganda or parody, it is still funny!

Chinese WoW playing gets confused with Real Life

A World of Warcraft Intervention!

An excellent documentary called Second Skin about MMO’s and their effects, is now available. Here’s a little taste, via Kotaku.

Plants vs. Zombies music video! WARNING: Extremely catchy song.

And of course, the effects said video has on a toddler.

Super Mario Bros. protest by “real” Italians. Fuggedaboutit.

College Humor remains hip with their take on social networking via the musical Web Site Story.

Japanese fashion gets a little crazy with the Gyaru fashion trend (thanks Japanator!), and UK Teens emulate it, much to everyone’s dismay. WTF England, wtf.

And Harper College Library has perhaps my favorite Library tour video OF ALL TIME.

Now for the random ramblings in link form, from Japanese mythology to scientific gaming!
Japanese mythological creatures called Tanuki use a specific body part to great effect. Here is some neat artwork, via Japanator.

Gaming is the new scientific frontier, according to this researcher.

The innovative game Scribblenauts deserves a lot of credit, especially from Information Specialists!

UK author Helen McCarthy hips us to Manga Cross-Stitch, a great book for all of the crafty otaku out there!

And according to this msnbc article, screaming obscenities may indeed be a pain killer. Great, so now that’s what I’ll tell the cops at 3am.

That is all.

Team Fortress 2 mail in coupon

Total Eclipse of the Heart. LITERALLY.
Srsly frakkin’ FUNNY! A LITERAL VIDEO TRANSLATION of that most famous and insidious of ’80′s songs, Total Eclipse of the Heart by Bonnie Tyler. Behold the glory!

Live Action PITFALL
As part of the 2009 Come Out & Play Festival in NYC, the live-action Pitfall Tournament was a hit. Now that’s total immersion!

Augmented Reality Zombie game
A project from Georgia tech and SCAD-Atlanta brings us a new AR game, which is a composite that mashes up hand-held peripherals, table surfaces, holographic technology, and SKITTLES. Oh yeah, Skittle-Bombs away!

Star Trek/Wars
After I saw the “new” Star Trek, it reminded me of something…but I couldn’t figure out what.

Steampunk Light Box
If any of you have ever had a hankering to start up a DIY project, this one seems interesting and not too difficult.

GUNDAM
Anyone who’s kept up with news out of Japan knows they have a thing for robots, and apparently, the bigger the better, like this life-size Gundam model which stood outside of Odiaba for a few months before being moved away. Pink Tentacle has some amazing night shots!

The Recently Deflowered Girl
Of course we all recognize the work of artist Edward Gorey, but did you know that he tamed up with Ms. Hyacinthe Phypps to create a manners book for women who are deflowered in myriad situations? Neither did I, until now.

Well, I hope this has been as enlightening for you as it has for me. Goodbye.

The Gay Comics List:
This site is freakin’ awesome! For any fans of GLBT comics, Libraries and Educators alike whoa re looking to beef up their collection and/or awareness, and anyone else who just likes the beef cakes, this is an excellent source.

FUCK YOU, PENGUIN:
Caution, if you like LOLcats, then you’ll hate this. Or you might love it, I dunno, maybe you’re just messed up in the head. Either way, do not drink milk while reading this site, cuz it WILL COME OUT YOUR NOSE.
LOLcats? A dime a dozen.
Raggin’ on pictures of innocent animals? Priceless.

McSweeney’s Internet Tendency:
Of course, who doesn’t like McSweeney’s? Unless you AREN’T a pretentious Douchebag, you obviously worship the site. Well either way, read the Internet-Age Syllabus and Course Overview, before I get angry. And you won’t like me when I’m angry.

FLUTTER:
If you thought Twitter was brief, well, you were right. But Flutter just might be our next Microblogging fix. Or not, you decide.

Well, that’s all for now, but trust me when I say, there are LOTS more to follow, so stay tuned!

See?! I WANT ONE NOW!

I am trying to keep up on the Google Digital Library case, and the arguments are flowing outta this one like Swine Flu

introducing the Swine Flu Dancers!

across the Rio Grande. Orphan books, copyright holders, authors, publishers, censorship, this case has got it ALL!

As many of us already know, in 2005 Google was sued by the Author’s Guild (of Calamitous Intent), because they were showing snippets of texts online, which then led to the 2007 settlement (SETTLEMENT!) that ended up covering book holders, so no harm, no foul. Google was able to scan, index, display and even sell all books in print online (sure makes research a heckuva lot faster). Now this sets up Google as the world’s largest digital Library, which, by the way, looks nothing like you might imagine. Or this image, as a matter of fact.

NOT the Google Digital Library

Officially, ALA, ARL and ACRL do NOT oppose this settlement, but are more worried about it than a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. The Department of Justice is already investigating the matter, as it stinks to high heaven like an anti-trust matter. Is it? Who knows? I’m not the DoJ, or the AG, for that matter. Who is? You’ll have to TORTURE it out of me.

As they state in their brief:
“The Library Associations do not oppose approval of the Settlement. The
Settlement has the potential to provide unprecedented public access to a digital library
containing millions of books. Thus, the Settlement could advance the core mission of the
Library Associations and their members: providing patrons with access to information in
all forms, including books. However, the digital library enabled by the Settlement will be
under the control of Google and the Book Rights Registry.”

And it is this Book Registry (a not-for-profit entity) that has gotten all of our knit-sweaters in a bunch, because since it sits at the distributing end of this operation, it may take a page from other vendors and charge a subscription fee for the use of the digital database. As it is, Universities and Colleges pay a small fortune for their subscriptions, and according to a Wired article “A university library spends an average total of $4.3 million a year for online journal subscriptions. If journal subscriptions are “comparable” to the institutional subscription, and a library pays $4.3 million for access to 31,000 journals, one can only imagine the price the Registry might insist upon for a subscription to millions of books.” Like, whoa. Or, as ALA puts it, “The institutional subscription could evolve into an essential research facility, but
in the absence of any meaningful competition, the Registry and Google can set the price
of the subscription at a profit maximizing point beyond the reach of many libraries.” Like WHOA, indeed. I mean, just because they’re paranoid, doesn’t mean Google’s not after their books, amirite?

Also, this case strikes fear into the very heart of an issue near and dear to me, CENSORSHIP. I am NOT a big fan, needless to say, and as Google has bowed to pressure before (most notably with their self-censorship in China, although to founder Sergey Brin’s credit, he did regret the action), the concern for censorship in the Digital Library is possible, and quite palpable.

Again, according to the Wired article, “the agreement gives [Google] the right to keep up to 15 percent of the books it scans out of the available database for no reason. After all, the Library Project will allow minors to access up to 20% of the text of millions of books from the computers in their bedrooms and to read the full text of these books from the public access terminals in their libraries. Although public libraries have often contended with demands to eliminate or restrict access to specific books, any collection management decision by a particular librarian affected only that community. Here, by contrast, if Google bends to political pressure to remove a book, it will suppress access to the book throughout the entire country.”

AHHHHHH! Now this is, in fact, crazy-making. We Librarians already have to contend with the confused, the contentious and the cantankerous when it comes to reviewing challenged books, but what about Google? Is there a process? Who gets to make that decision? How could it possibly pull a book from the database in one area and make it available in another? Oh-eM-Gee.

How’s THAT for a slice of fried gold?! Well fellow Librarians, we have our work cut out for us. Time to make some CD and DVD windchimes, eh? You’re welcome, Summer Craft Programs.