Volume 33#4, September, 2021 Table of Contents by against-the-grain

c/o Katina Strauch Post Office Box 799 Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482

VOLUME 33, NUMBER 4

SEPTEMBER 2021 TM

“Linking Publishers, Vendors and Librarians”

ISSN: 1043-2094

eBooks in Academic Libraries: The Librarians’ Perspective By David Gibbs (Interim Associate Dean, University Library, California State University, Sacramento) <david.gibbs@csus.edu>

perspectives of publishers. It is my hope that publishers will respond directly to the critiques and suggestions raised by the librarians in this issue.

This is the first in a two-part series on the state of eBooks in academic libraries 20 years in. This first issue takes the perspective of academic librarians: what is working and what isn’t on the academic eBook front? The follow-up issue, in February 2022, will present the

Most of the articles here address the eBook experience at a particular institution, and I have attempted to include a range of academic library perspectives. Debbie Dinkins recounts the history of eBook acquisition at a small undergraduate-focused institution, where demand-driven acquisition (DDA) has allowed the library to provide instant access to a larger pool of monographs

t has been just over 20 years since eBooks first made their entrée into academic library collections. Since then, libraries have struggled to promote awareness of eBooks, understand and manage user expectations, navigate often frustrating and confusing digital rights management (DRM) software, and find the right balance between print and electronic collections on a limited budget.

If Rumors Were Horses

appy Fall Everyone! Hope you have enjoyed your summer. There is much to talk about and a limited amount of space, so let’s dive right in!

Announcements and Congratulations Clarivate has named Elena Pallari, postgraduate researcher at University College London, as the recipient of the 2021 Eugene Garfield Award for Innovation in Citation Analysis. Launched in 2017, the award recognizes early-career scientists developing innovative approaches to citation analysis that improve how the impact of scientific research is measured. Ms. Pallari will receive $25,000 for her proposal for innovation in clinical research assessment. Her plans to evaluate methodological research impact in

clinical trials will help us learn from past trials and quickly adopt and adjust them in order to speed up medical advances, while also measuring and improving their influence on funding, policy, practice and health outcomes. This type of work in health sciences is especially relevant amidst a global pandemic when clinical trials are conducted at enormous speed. Congratulations to the bam zowie Jason Price for 15 years as an academic library consortium administrator, science librarian, and data analyst at Research & Scholarly Communication Director at SCELC (Statewide California Electronic Library Consortium)! continued on page 6

than ever before. Keri Prelitz and Ann Roll take a deeper dive into DDA to assess the cost-effectiveness of short-term loans at their university. Ramune Kubilius and Tim Butzen-Cahill provide a twenty-year longitudinal assessment of the availability of core eBooks in the health sciences. The final two articles explicitly call for publishers to modify current practices: Michael Rodriguez presents a case for allowing libraries to share whole eBooks via interlibrary loan, and I make an argument for bundling the sale of print and eBook titles.

What To Look For In This Issue: Dance and Copyright................. 26 Q&A — Copyright Column........ 28 For the Love of Books................. 30 Hum: A Unifying Tune for Societies and Associations?....... 44 TOC for ATG Online Articles..... 32

Interviews BibliU and Kanopy.................... 39 Colleen Campbell...................... 54 Greg Eow................................... 56

Profiles Encouraged People, Library and Company Profiles...................................... 58 Plus more...................... See inside

1043-2094(202109)33:4;1-N

ACS PUBLICATIONS:

Your Partner in Safety Cultivate a safety mindset and prioritize hazard awareness with ACS Essentials of Lab Safety for General Chemistry, an easily-adopted, two-hour course.

FIND OUT MORE solutions.acs.org/EssentialsOfLabSafety

GOBI and FOLIO ®

From ordering to circulation in just a few steps

GOBI® supports automated acquisition workflows for libraries using FOLIO as their open source Library Services Platform (LSP) solution, so you can easily go from ordering print books and e-books in GOBI to managing them in FOLIO. With order integration, you can place an order in GOBI and then see it automatically reflected in FOLIO. Using real-time APIs, FOLIO communicates with GOBI and other systems to ensure that your workflow is streamlined.

Simplify your library workflow with GOBI and FOLIO.

| gobi.ebsco.com

Against The Grain – ISSUE HIGHLIGHTS Against the Grain (ISSN: 1043-2094) (USPS: 012-618), Copyright 2020 by the name Against the Grain, LLC is published six times a year in February, April, June, September, November, and December/ January by Against the Grain, LLC. Business and Editorial Offices: PO Box 799, 1712 Thompson Ave., Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482. Accounting and Circulation Offices: same. Call (843-509-2848) to subscribe. Periodicals postage is paid at Charleston, SC. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Against the Grain, LLC, PO Box 799, Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482.

v.33 #4 September 2021 © Katina Strauch

ISSUES, NEWS, & GOINGS ON Rumors............................................................................................................... 1 From Your Editor................................................................................................ 6 Letters to the Editor........................................................................................... 6 Advertising Deadlines........................................................................................ 6 Table of Contents for Against the Grain Online Articles.................................. 32

Editor:

Katina Strauch (Retired, College of Charleston)

Associate Editors:

Cris Ferguson (Murray State) Tom Gilson (Retired, College of Charleston) Matthew Ismail (Charleston Hub)

FEATURES eBooks in Academic Libraries: The Librarians’ Perspective.............................. 1 The Trials and Tribulations of Providing eBooks: A Small University Library Perspective............................................................................................ 9 Ten Years of Demand-Driven Acquisition........................................................ 12 Health Sciences eBooks in 2021: Availability, Challenges, and Trends........... 14 Licensing and Interlibrary Lending of Whole eBooks...................................... 17 Toward a P+E eBook Model for Academic Libraries.......................................... 19 Back Talk — Rip Van Winkle Awakes................................................................ 62

Research Editors:

Judy Luther (Informed Strategies)

Assistants to the Editor: Ileana Jacks Toni Nix (Just Right Group, LLC)

International Editor:

Rossana Morriello (Politecnico di Torino)

Contributing Editors:

Glenda Alvin (Tennessee State University) Deni Auclair (De Gruyter) Rick Anderson (Brigham Young University) Sever Bordeianu (U. of New Mexico) Todd Carpenter (NISO) Eleanor Cook (East Carolina University) Will Cross (NC State University) Anne Doherty (Choice) Michelle Flinchbaugh (U. of MD Baltimore County) Joyce Dixon-Fyle (DePauw University) Michael Gruenberg (Gruenberg Consulting, LLC) Chuck Hamaker (Retired, UNC, Charlotte) Bob Holley (Retired, Wayne State University) Donna Jacobs (MUSC) Ramune Kubilius (Northwestern University) Myer Kutz (Myer Kutz Associates, Inc.) Tom Leonhardt (Retired) Stacey Marien (American University) Jack Montgomery (Georgia Southern University Libraries) Alayne Mundt (American University) Bob Nardini (ProQuest) Jim O’Donnell (Arizona State University) Ann Okerson (Center for Research Libraries) Anthony Paganelli (Western Kentucky University) Rita Ricketts (Blackwell’s) Jared Seay (College of Charleston) Corey Seeman (University of Michigan) Lindsay Wertman (IGI Global)

ATG Proofreader:

Caroline Goldsmith (Charleston Hub)

REVIEWS Reader’s Roundup: Monographic Musings & Reference Reviews.................... 20 Booklover — Not a Greek Tragedy.................................................................... 25

LEGAL ISSUES Legally Speaking — Dance and Copyright........................................................ 26 Questions and Answers — Copyright Column.................................................. 28

PUBLISHING Bet You Missed It............................................................................................... 8 The Scholarly Publishing Scene — For the Love of Books................................ 30 Stop, Look, Listen — New Wilderness in Orderly Markets Academic Publishing in Times of APCs and Transformative Deals.................. 33 Don’s Conference Notes................................................................................... 35 And They Were There — Reports of Meetings.................................................. 37

TECHNOLOGY & STANDARDS AND TEACHING & LEARNING Learning Belongs in the Library — An Interview with BibliU and Kanopy....... 39 Let’s Get Technical — (Mostly) Automated Daily Record Management for a Consortial SILS................................................................................................ 42 Emerging Tech: To Be or Not to Be? — Hum: A Unifying Tune for Societies and Associations?................................... 44

Graphics:

Bowles & Carver, Old English Cuts & Illustrations. Grafton, More Silhouettes. Ehmcke, Graphic Trade Symbols By German Designers.Grafton,Ready-to-Use Old-Fashioned Illustrations. The Chap Book Style.

Production & Ad Sales:

Toni Nix, Just Right Group, LLC., P.O. Box 412, Cottageville, SC 29435, phone: 843-835-8604 fax: 843-835-5892 <justwrite@lowcountry.com>

BOOKSELLING AND VENDING The Digital Toolbox — Balancing Patron Needs, Librarian Interests and a Too-Small-To-Do-Everything-Budget with a Robust Digital Collection.......... 48 Biz of Digital — Librarians Promoting and Supporting ORCID@Rutgers........ 49 Optimizing Library Services — Are the Top Institutions in the U.S. Acquiring Diverse Content?............................................................................. 51

Advertising information:

Toni Nix, phone: 843-835-8604, fax: 843-835-5892 <justwrite@lowcountry.com>

Publisher:

A. Bruce Strauch

Send correspondence, press releases, etc., to: Katina Strauch, Editor, Against the Grain, LLC Post Office Box 799 Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482 cell: 843-509-2848 <kstrauch@comcast.net>

ATG INTERVIEWS & PROFILES

Against the Grain is indexed in Library Literature, LISA, Ingenta, and The Informed Librarian. Authors’ opinions are to be regarded as their own. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This issue was produced on an iMac using Microsoft Word, and Adobe CS6 Premium software under Mac OS X Mountain Lion. Against the Grain is copyright ©2021 by Katina Strauch

Against the Grain / September 2021

Colleen Campbell – Coordinator of the OA2020 and ESAC Initiatives, Max Planck Digital Library...................................................................................... 54 Greg Eow – President, Center for Research Libraries, Global Resources Network........................................................................................................... 56 Profiles Encouraged......................................................................................... 58

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

A New Type of Transformative Agreement for Research Publishing in Biology “A sustainable path to open publication of biomedical research is a long-sought objective among the many science communication initiatives at Cold Spring Harbor. Our transformational offerings provide a model for any research-intensive institution whose scientists wish to make their articles openly available in these long-established, prestigious, not-for-profit journals.” — Dr. John Inglis, Publisher of CSHL Press, co-founder of bioR χiv and medR χiv

Turn your subscription license into an OA publishing license — Immediate benefits for your authors and no extra cost for most institutions Subscribers to Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press (CSHLP) journals who renew for 2022 now have the option to adopt a Transformative License Agreement. This allows corresponding authors from your institution to publish unlimited OA articles (once accepted for publication), while giving your users access to the complete collection of CSHLP journals. Transformative license agreements offer a fully OA publishing option for your researchers whose papers are accepted at Genes & Development, Genome Research, Learning & Memory, RNA, Molecular Case Studies, and Life Science Alliance Benefits include: • Unlimited open access publication in CSHLP research journals • Access to the complete collection of CSHLP journals • No additional cost for most current subscribers (some minimums apply) • Life Science Alliance: manuscript transfer option for authors submitting to CSHLP research journals ( JCR Impact Factor = 4.592) • bioRχiv at your institution: ° receive a branded channel on bioRχiv for preprints posted by authors at your institution (includes medRχiv postings) authors can save time when posting to bioRχiv by also transmitting a paper to any of more ° than 180 journals from 50+ publishers Present your institution as an “end to end” open access advocate for the biological sciences.

For complete details, including specifics for your institution, visit https://bit.ly/cshlpressopen SEE US AT THE CHARLESTON LIBRARY CONFERENCE— November 2nd, 10am – 6pm at stand #89 in the Gaillard Center

From Your (grandmothering) Editor:

he holidays are over sob sob! Daughter Ileana’s three kids and her good friend Kate’s four had a grand old time here — swimming, playing in the surf, rock climbing, and collecting bugs and butterflies. The other grandkids are in San Diego and Dallas! Now it’s time for first grade (George), pre-school (Porter) and pre-kindergarten (Teddy) to visit. Meanwhile, at the ATG office, we have been putting together the September issue guest edited by David Gibbs (California State University). This is the first of a two-part series on the state of eBooks in academic libraries. Articles are about providing eBooks to a small university library, ten years of demand driven acquisitions, health sciences books, challenges and trends, licensing and interlibrary lending of whole eBooks, finishing up with David Gibbs who stresses that librarians should not have to choose between p and e formats or pay for them twice!

Corey Seaman has collected many excellent reviews of reference books, Donna Jacobs focuses on the collected poems of Odysseus Elytis. Legally Speaking discusses copyright and dance which is followed by Will Cross’ Questions and Answers column. We have conference notes from Don Hawkins and Ramune Kubilius. David Parker says that learning belongs in the library given streaming video and eBooks, Let’s Get Technical talks about daily record management, while Deni Auclair and

Letters to the Editor Send letters to <kstrauch@comcast.net>, phone 843-509-2848, or snail mail: Against the Grain, Post Office Box 799, Sullivan’s Island, SC 29482. You can also send a letter to the editor from the Charleston Hub at http://www.charleston-hub.com/contact-us/. Dear Leah, Thank you for the extraordinary session today. Charleston In Between was a wonderful event — especially Panel One was absolutely exciting. Do you mind sharing the recording please? Very much looking forward to connecting with you again and to working together on a different occasion. Thank you so much. All the best, Sami Sami Benchekroun (Morressier) <sami.benchekroun@morressier.com>

John Corkery introduce us to HUM which wants to be an alternative to the publishing market. The Digital Toolbox seeks to balance patron needs with librarian interests, Biz of Digital is about ORCID and Optimizing Library Services asks is we are acquiring diverse content. We have interviews with the awesome Colleen Campbell and the hard-charging Greg Eow. And don’t miss Ann Okerson’s Rip Van Winkle Back Talk! Charming and thought-provoking! Happy fall! Love, Yr. Ed.

Rumors continued from page 1 Another congratulations to Adrian Stanley, General Manager of JMIR Publications. JMIR Publications, a leading, born-digital open access publisher of academic journals and other innovative, scientific communication products that focus on digital health, JMIR’s growth, sustainability, and innovation by focusing on strategic partnerships, brand expansion, and execution of creative initiatives and new technologies to elevate the mission of JMIR for greater social impact and position it as a trusted and true leader in the Digital Health and Open Science research ecosystem. Just saw this article by Kate Gilbert on JSTOR – How Homeschooling Evolved from Subversive to Mainstream. Leah Hinds’ daughter Maddie was homeschooled. In August, Maddie entered Clemson! Kudos!

On the Move and Conference News Jack Montgomery and his wife Lesley have moved to Statesboro, Georgia. They are both working at Georgia Southern University. Jack is working in the Government Documents section and Lesley has finished her library degree and is working in cataloging. Jack Montgomery and Meg White (Senior Consultant, Delta Think) are going to conduct the Penthouse Suite Interviews for the 2021 Charleston Conference. Tom Gilson will continue to help as well. Speakers to be interviewed may include: Paul continued on page 18

AGAINST THE GRAIN ADVERTISING DEADLINES VOLUME 33 — 2021-2022

Dear Sami, I hope you’re doing well! Thanks for attending the Charleston In Between event. Here are the links to the recordings: Panel One: Clarivate Acquires ProQuest Recording: https://youtu.be/zUUcTV89sFQ Panel Two: Exiting the Tunnel: Reflections from Savvy Executives Upon What the Bright Light of Post-COVID Offers to Them Recording: https://youtu.be/-Gdqea9rOC8 Best, Leah Hinds (Executive Director, Charleston Library Conference) <leah@charlestonlibraryconference.com>

Against the Grain / September 2021

Issue Ad Reservation Camera-Ready February 2021 01/05/21 01/19/21 April 2021 02/18/21 03/11/21 June 2021 04/01/21 04/22/21 September 2021 06/10/21 07/08/21 November 2021 08/12/21 09/02/21 Dec. 2021-Jan. 2022 11/04/21 11/22/21

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT Toni Nix <justwrite@lowcountry.com> Phone: 843-835-8604 • Fax: 843-835-5892 <https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Discover

Connecting a global and diverse research community, OSA Publishing’s journals account for 38% of total citations and 33% of all articles published in the field of optics and photonics (2021 JCR).

osapublishing.org

Bet You Missed It — Press Clippings — In the News Carefully Selected by Your Crack Staff of News Sleuths Column Editor: Bruce Strauch (The Citadel, Emeritus) <bruce.strauch@gmail.com>

Bookshops in the Time of Covid

Obits of Note

Sally Pattle owns Far from the Madding Crowd in Linlithgow, Scotland and is the winner of this year’s Nibbie for Independent Bookshop of the Year. She says they were clobbered by all the government ordered closures, but they have proven people still want books.

Arthur Staats (1924-2021) was a school drop-out who served on a battleship in WWII. On the GI Bill, he earned a Ph.D. in psychology at UCLA. He was opposed to spanking, believed in behavior modification through rewards and consequences.

With two other Indies, she formed Wee Three Indies and hosted virtual author events. And they ran their first online festival #WeeNatureFest.

See: “The psychologist who popularized the ‘time-out,’ The Week, June 18, 2021, p.39.

See: “This Week,” The Bookseller, April 23, 2021, p.24.

Let’s Read Encounters with Catastrophe Apsley Cherry-Garrard, The Worst Journey in the World (1922) (Scott’s disastrous 1912 South Pole expedition); (2) Cecil Woodham-Smith, The Reason Why (1953) (charge of the Light Brigade); (3) Tom Simkin and Richard Fiske, Krakatau 1883 (1983) (three month long volcanic eruption); (4) Elizabeth Kolbert, The Sixth Extinction (2014) (our current mass extinction); (5)Barbara Engelking and Jacek Leociak, The Warsaw Ghetto (2009) (day-to-day history of the ghetto). See: Jim Shepard, “Five Best,” The Wall Street Journal, May 29-30, 2021, p.C14.

And he invented — wait for it — Time Out!!

Richard Robinson (1937-2021) rejected his father’s business Scholastic, a magazine which at the time mostly covered high school sports. But a couple of years teaching English showed him the lure of the family trade. And did he make a difference. As CEO for 46 years, he turned Scholastic into a $1.4 billion behemoth of children’s lit. Goosebumps, Clifford the Big Red Dog, The Hunger Games. It distributes 1 in 3 American children’s books. It grabbed up Harry Potter and sold 180 million copies in the series. He said his goal was getting kids to read and expand their world view. See: “The publisher who created a kids’ book giant,” The Week, June 25, 2021, p.35

Author Re-emerges In looking for classic old movies, came across Hitchcock’s “The Lady Vanishes” and discovered it was adapted from a novel The Wheel Spins by Lina White. Turns out, in the ’30s and ’40s she was as famous as Agatha Christie and Dorothy Sayers. Some Must Watch became the movie “The Spiral Staircase.” Midnight House became “The Unseen.” Her books are on Amazon Kindle, so she’s creeping back into the limelight. See: “Ethel Lina White,” Wikipedia.org

Bookstore Plug In an article on best places in Key West, Cori Convertito, curator of the Key West Art and Historical Society, gets in a plug for Key West Island Books. There’s been a bookstore at 513 ½ Fleming Street since the 1920s. They focus on local authors. Uvakeywest.com See: David Farley, “Journal Concierge,” The Wall Street Journal, July 17-18, 2021, p.D4.

Let’s Read American Humor S.J. Perelman, The Road to Miltown (1957); (2) James Thurber, The Thurber Carnival, (1945); (3) Veronica Geng, Love Trouble (1999); (4) Woody Allen, The Complete Prose of Woody Allen (1991); (5) Nora Ephron, The Most of Nora Ephron (2013). See: Adam Gopnik, “Five Best,” The Wall Street Journal, July 17-18, 2021, p.C8. Gopnik is the author of “S.J. Perelman: Writings” in the Library of America Series.

Against the Grain / September 2021

Pat Hitchcock O’Connell (1928-2021) was Alfred Hitchcock’s sole daughter but only got small film parts “when they needed a maid with an English accent.” Her father did nothing to further her career and may have impeded it. She claimed to be content with her role as wife and mother and defended her father against claims of being a control freak. She was vocal in support of her mother as well, arguing that the best Hitchcock films were a joint effort. See: “The actress who lived in her father’s shadow,” The Week, Aug. 27, 2021, p. 35.

Cookie vs. Biscuit Covid had America’s kids locked down, and preschoolers became huge fans of British cartoon called “Peppa Pig.” Parents were shocked to hear their children use a plummy accent and words like “optician,” “lovely,” “petrol station,” “water closet,” and “Father Christmas.” They even learned to say “please” and “thank you.” And now there’s “Bluey,” a cartoon about dogs with Australian accents. See: Preetika Rana and Meghan Borrowsky, “Binge-watching ‘Peppa Pig’ Has Preschoolers Speaking Colourfully,” The Wall Street Journal, July 10, 2021, p.A1.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

The Trials and Tribulations of Providing eBooks: A Small University Library Perspective By Debbi Dinkins (Associate Dean of the Library, Stetson University) <ddinkins@stetson.edu>

Introduction Academic libraries have been providing eBooks to their users since the year 2000. At least that is the first mention that I find of eBooks in articles and presentations by academic librarians. In those sources, I also find the words “havoc,” “chaos,” and the phrase “took over my life” (Anderson). It is true that managing eBooks is mentally challenging. Granted, there are advantages: there is no need for processing an eBook and in many cases cataloging the book is easy as well, with vendor-provided bibliographic records. The challenges with eBooks are undisclosed, vexing aspects such as uploading them to an integrated library system, mediating patron access, near-constant management of the electronic collection, and all the other little technical things that most of us were unprepared for when we adopted eBooks into our collections. eBooks and their management became fulltime jobs for many of us. The adoption of this format changed the way technical services departments were configured and led to the Electronic Resources Librarian position descriptions I see every day in the ALA Joblist. We experienced these implementation problems at my small university library. To put our experiences with eBooks in perspective, here is a description of my library and our implementation process. The duPont-Ball Library serves Stetson University, a small university in central Florida, with an FTE of 3,150. The library serves primarily undergraduate students enrolled in majors in the arts, sciences, music, and business, as well as supporting a handful of graduate programs in education and business. In 2005, the library adopted eBooks into its collections by first subscribing to two reference eBook databases, Credo and Oxford Reference. Galvanized by the usage of those two databases, and intrigued by the possibility of saving money, we next subscribed to what was then the ebrary Academic Collection. When we subscribed in 2008, the collection consisted of about 44,000 academic, instructional, and popular book titles. Paying one subscription price for such a large collection gave library users many more monographic options for their research needs and saved the library a great deal of money. After implementing the subscription eBook collection, we quickly noticed that title requests from faculty were not being fulfilled by the subscription eBook collection. As with most academic libraries, we rely on our faculty to help build our monograph and journal collections. We encourage our faculty to submit title requests and we push Choice book reviews to them via email for selection. We needed another way to fulfill individual faculty title requests and still save money. That is when we discovered demand-driven acquisition.

Demand-Driven Acquisition (DDA) for eBooks In 2012 I published an article in College and Research Libraries News on the duPont-Ball Library’s experience with individual titles in a demand-driven eBook collection with ebrary (Dinkins, 249-252, 255). We began our experience with DDA by creating a profile for subject collections matching publisher, subject, and price criteria set up in the ebrary interface. Then it occurred

Against the Grain / September 2021

to me that adding individual faculty title requests to our DDA collection could also save us money. We would not pay for the title unless a purchase was triggered by usage. Previously in my career, I devoted a semester-long sabbatical to a research project comparing circulation statistics for print book titles selected by faculty to those of titles selected by librarians. The results of the project led me to believe that many of our faculty chose books merely because the reviews looked interesting. The titles were not always being assigned in courses, and many faculty selections studied in the sabbatical project had “Our users never circulated. Based on these are used to results, I had a good feeling that a seamless adding individual title selections to the DDA eBook collection would experience with save the library money, because the Kindle eBooks majority of the titles would never be from Amazon or triggered for purchase.

eBook downloads Data presented in the 2012 artifrom their local cle confirmed our suspicions. Over the course of one academic year, public library.” the potential savings for the library, based on the number of books accessed but not triggered for purchase, was $12,741.56 (Dinkins, 250). We continue to build demand-driven eBook collections in this way, and our eBook collection has grown to more than 260,000 titles. Due to aggressive collection evaluation and weeding efforts, we now offer 87,000 more monograph titles in electronic format than in print format. COVID-19 Pandemic I do not think an article on eBook collections can be written in 2021 without interrogating how well the collections served library users during COVID-19. Although COVID-19 is still impacting operations for academic libraries and may continue to do so for quite some time, we now have roughly a year’s worth of data on eBook usage and anecdotal data on the effectiveness of our eBook collections during the pandemic. In a recent article in the journal Computers in Libraries, librarians at Delaware County Community College (DCCC) assessed their eBook usage during a 10-month period between March and December 2020. They tracked usage for all of their eBook collections, which included Ebook Central, Gale eBooks, EBSCO eBooks in a patron-driven acquisition (PDA) collection, and eBooks in their O’Reilly for Higher Education collection (LaMagna, 16). In March 2020, when most campuses rapidly moved to online offerings, DCCC saw a decrease in usage for their eBook collections compared to the same month in 2019. As students and faculty reoriented to online learning throughout the Spring 2020 term, Ebook Central usage increased. In Fall 2020, Ebook Central usage at DCCC doubled from fall 2019 usage (LaMagna, 19). In an article from the February 2021 issue of Against the Grain, librarians from Case Western Reserve University (CWRU) reported on their usage statistics for eBooks and ejournals.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

CWRU librarians discovered a “1% increase in overall unique items accessed for both e-journals and eBooks, with a 25% increase in unique eBook titles accessed despite the 56% decrease in Counter-reported usage” (Stuart, 40). They also tracked turnaway count for the two years and found the data showed little change. We had a similar experience at Stetson University, with no significant difference in the number of turnaways for our Ebook Central collection between 2019 and 2020. The number of turnaways for our Ebook Central collections has been low historically, and I believe the reason is two-fold: we only catalog the titles that are available for use, and we turn on short-term loan options for titles when available. My own library’s usage of Ebook Central (our collection includes purchased titles, the Academic subscription, and a DDA collection), was equal or higher in 2020 than for the same months in 2019 (see Figure 1). The only exception was the month of October, and I believe this was due to the shifted semester time frame (beginning in early August and ending before Thanksgiving).

What these studies and my own experience with eBook usage during 2020 tells me is that usage did not drop, except at the very beginning of the lockdown period of the pandemic (March 2020). eBook usage quickly recovered and, in some cases, exceeded usage from 2019. eBook usage during any given semester has always followed a bell curve, in that usage begins to peak in the middle of the semester and slowly decreases until the end of the semester. Even though my university and many others changed the timeline of the semester, eBook usage still followed a similar pattern. My library chose to buy more titles in eBook format during 2020 because both faculty and students were working remotely. Having more choice of eBook titles also contributed to higher usage for us.

As of this writing, Ebook Central requires a user to load Adobe Digital Editions (ADE) in order to fully download an eBook. The eBook is then readable and browsable in the ADE interface. This works well for users after their initial ADE download experience, but the first time they try to download an eBook can be a complicated experience. EBSCO eBooks are downloaded in a similar fashion, with ADE. Recently, EBSCO has streamlined the eBook downloading and reading experience with an app for mobile devices, which does not require ADE. Smaller vendors and publishers offer other options for download to a computer or mobile device with varying difficulty. Our users are used to a seamless experience with Kindle eBooks from Amazon or eBook downloads from their local public library. eBook providers of academic content need to streamline and align their delivery in some way, perhaps even agreeing on an academic library industry standard for eBook delivery. Having to explain multiple platforms and why those platforms work differently and, in some cases, more restrictively, to college students is frustrating for librarians and confusing for the students. Faculty do not understand the differences either. I think EBSCO is moving in the right direction with their mobile app. I wish other eBook vendors and publishers would follow EBSCO’s lead. Pricing for eBooks varies across vendors and publishers. Typically, when an academic library buys an eBook, the price is list price (usually for one concurrent user) or list price plus a percentage (for multiple concurrent users). A small university like mine tends to look for eBook collections that offer a lower price-per-title option, either through a subscription collection or with demand-driven acquisition. Demand-driven collections, with a pay-as-you-go payment plan, also fit our budget and our users’ expectations well. In the last few years, I have been intrigued by evidence-based acquisition (EBA) purchase options for eBooks, but my library has not tried one of these options yet. The library budget is almost fully encumbered on day one of our fiscal year; it is a rare occurrence when we have funds available for a deposit account of the size required for EBA purchase models. Providers such as JSTOR, Sage, Cambridge University Press, and the American Chemical Society all offer EBA purchase models. Even GOBI offers EBA and DDA models for acquiring eBooks. Even though libraries must initially invest to use the EBA model, this model allows the library to control the eBook budget more effectively. More flexible budgeting for EBA models, either by paying in installments over the year or with discounted pricing, could help small academic libraries with limited budgets.

Future of eBooks for Academic Libraries

Finally, the recent pandemic forced many academic libraries to seek out new ways of delivering course reserve content electronically. Controlled digital lending was a revelation and a life-saver for my library. Controlled digital lending is defined and illustrated by the following:

As I enter the last decade of my academic library career at Stetson University, I look forward to encouraging publishers and vendors to develop new access models and payment options for eBook collections. I think the first priority should be enhancing the usability of eBooks offered by academic libraries. In my opinion, the main attraction of eBooks in academic libraries has always been the ability to search through the text. Undergraduates do not have to read the entire book to find the information they need for papers and research. This was a major enhancement for undergraduate students. However, our students sometimes still tell me that they want an eBook they can hold in their hands — they do not mind that it is an eBook, but they want to access it on a mobile device for easy reading.

Properly implemented, CDL enables a library to circulate a digitized title in place of a physical one in a controlled manner. Under this approach, a library may only loan simultaneously the number of copies that it has legitimately acquired, usually through purchase or donation. For example, if a library owns three copies of a title and digitizes one copy, it may use CDL to circulate one digital copy and two print, or three digital copies, or two digital copies and one print; in all cases, it could only circulate the same number of copies that it owned before digitization. Essentially, CDL must maintain an “owned to loaned” ratio. Circulation in any format is controlled so that only one user can use any given copy at a time, for a limited time. (controlleddigitallending.org)

10 Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

The Internet Archive has taken the idea of controlled digital lending and maximized its potential by offering lending through their Open Library. According to the Internet Archive Blog, the Open Library contains more than 1.5 million digitized books. Because the Internet Archive has at least one physical copy of the book, most of their digital copies can be borrowed through their site for one hour. If the Internet Archive owns more than one print copy, the title can be checked out for two weeks. Anyone with an email address and an internet connection can access digital copies of print books through Open Library (Freeland). The Internet Archive helped my library with our course reserves during the 2020/2021 academic year. The majority of our students were living away from campus and taking their courses virtually. Our faculty, for the most part, were also off-campus. Before the pandemic, most of our faculty had resisted eBooks for their courses. In some cases, I understood their reluctance. Because of our small budget, we rarely buy eBook access for multiple users. This is a problem for an eBook being used for a course. Many faculty members who tried using single-user eBooks for course reserves found it frustrating for their students, and some faculty found alternative methods for providing the information, such as downloading chapters and posting them to their course site. Some faculty simply insisted the library order print books for course reserves purposes. When the pandemic hit, we were able to find many of our course reserves books in the Internet Archive and provided access that way. The access was a bit more limited than even single-user access, but at least the students could access the content without the library having to purchase the content in additional formats. I am in full support of the idea of controlled digital lending, especially when the digitizing and the management of lending is centralized with the Internet Archive or another similar nonprofit organization. Small libraries and their users can only benefit from this type of access to digital content. As one would expect, authors and publishers are against controlled digital lending. Four major commercial publishers filed a copyright infringement lawsuit in June 2020, and it is making its way through the courts (Sabaghian).

Conclusion My simplest conclusion to this article is to recommend that eBook publishers, aggregators, and vendors work together with academic librarians to develop an industry standard of delivery and functionality for eBooks. The industry standards can be complicated and have many different levels of acquisition, but the main idea is to standardize the user experience. In my library, the most common frustration for my library users, both students and faculty, is with eBooks. If we could work toward a standardized download experience across platforms, it would be an important first step. As we see from eBook usage during COVID-19, library users like using eBooks for research. In my opinion, the time has come to give academic library users an easier user experience.

References Anderson, B. (2013). In the Beginning … There was netLibrary. Retrieved May 31, 2021, from VCU Scholars Compass: from https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1036&context=libraries_present.

Against the Grain / September 2021

Ta kelook a closer at.... The CHARLESTON REPORT Business Insights into the Library Market

You Need The Charleston Report... if you are a publisher, vendor, product developer, merchandiser, consultant or wholesaler who is interested in improving and/or expanding your position in the U.S. library market.

Subscribe today at our discounted rate of only $75.00 The Charleston Company 6180 East Warren Avenue Denver, CO 80222 Phone: 303-282-9706 Fax: 303-282-9743

Controlleddigitallending.org. (n.d.). Position Statement. Retrieved May 29, 2021, from Controlled Digital Lending by Libraries: https://controlleddigitallending.org/statement. Dinkins, D. (2012, May). Individual Title Requests in PDA Collections: A Small University Library’s Experience. College & Research Libraries News, 73(5), 249-255. Freeland, C. (2020, July 30). How Internet Archive and Controlled Digital Lending Can Help Course Reserves This Fall. Retrieved May 29, 2021, from Internet Archive Blogs: http:// blog.archive.org/2020/07/30/how-internet-archive-and-controlleddigital-lending-can-help-course-reserves-this-fall/. LaMagna, M. (2021, April). Unexpected Ebook Usage During Unprecedented Times: A Community College Experience. Computers in Libraries, 41(3), 15-19. Sabaghian, A. (2020, June 22). Center for Democracy & Technology. Retrieved May 29, 2021, from Up Next: Controlled Digital Lending’s First Legal Battle As Publishers Take On The Internet Archive: https://cdt.org/insights/up-next-controlleddigital-lendings-first-legal-battle-as-publishers-take-on-theinternet-archive/. Stuart, S. (2021, February). Let’s Get Technical - A Case (Western Reserve University) Study of COVID-19 e-Resource Usage and Free Access. Against the Grain, 35(1), 40-41.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Ten Years of Demand-Driven Acquisition By Keri Prelitz (Collection Development and Management Librarian, Pollack Library, California State University, Fullerton) <kprelitz@fullerton.edu> and Ann Roll (Associate Dean of Collections and Scholarly Communications, Pollack Library, California State University, Fullerton) <aroll@fullerton.edu>

Introduction The widespread availability of eBooks for libraries has quickly led to a myriad of ways for vendors to package them and for libraries to acquire them. Methods vary widely, from large subscription packages to single-title, single-user purchases. One method that has significantly changed and evolved over the course of the last ten years is the user-driven model known variously as patron-driven acquisition (PDA), or demand-driven acquisition (DDA). eBooks enabled a faster time frame from discovery to request to acquisition than was ever possible with print books, so models that took advantage of this potential speed were quickly developed. However, just as quickly, these models were adjusted and modified. Many of those changes included high price increases and reductions of title offerings. However, despite these fluctuations, DDA continues to be used for some of the same reasons that earned it popularity in the first place. These include the ability for a library to provide a broad range of access to users, then acquire titles based on demonstrated use by library patrons. DDA allows users quick and efficient access to new content. While the initial focus is on broad discovery and access, DDA informs and streamlines long-term ownership. DDA has also been found to provide a better return on investment over more traditional acquisition methods (Walker and Arthur 2018). However, despite these advantages, DDA can also lead to unpredictable costs and unstable content availability, which has led some libraries to abandon the model entirely. This article discusses the history and evolution of DDA over the course of the last ten years through the lens of one library, Pollak Library at California State University, Fullerton (CSUF), which has maintained an active DDA program throughout this evolution.

A History of DDA For libraries that were more concerned with saving money than eBook ownership, the short-term loan (STL) was an appealing option that offered patrons an immediate alternative to interlibrary loan (ILL). It allowed a patron to instantaneously access an eBook for a chosen number of days, while only costing the library a fraction of the list price. The percentage of the list price that determined the price of the loan was set by the publishers and was not applied toward the final purchase cost, but the number of STLs that would trigger an automatic purchase was set by the library. This model ensured that only books with significant usage were purchased, and it addressed concerns that the DDA model would trigger purchases of eBooks that were used only once. Initially, the majority of one-day STLs cost between 5 to 15 percent of the list price (Brown 2016). However, some publishers saw a significant decrease in revenue and quickly increased STL prices to upwards of 50 percent of the list price, imposed front-list embargoes, or stopped participating in shortterm loans altogether. The popularity of DDA led to its integration with approval plans, resulting in increasing complexities for both vendors and librarians when it came to profiling. With the various publisher embargoes and pricing structures, it became progressively dif-

12 Against the Grain / September 2021

ficult for the profile to catch all intended content. While some publishers embargoed all their eBooks for months or years after the publication of the print version, in an attempt to capture both sales, others embargoed on a title-by-title basis. Other strategies used by publishers were to only offer single-user licenses or to price eBooks exorbitantly as compared to their print counterparts. Publishers began launching their own eBook platforms and making some or all content exclusive, and vendors began offering libraries the opportunity to incorporate multiple platforms into “The benefits a single profile. Then there were the issues of duplication among eBook of providing platforms and subscriptions, and increased access DDA eligibility and prices changing to eBooks via frequently, making DDA pools dynamic. Ultimately, all these comDDA during the plexities led to an increase in staff campus closure time needed for DDA management.

proved to far

In addition to all the aforemenoutweigh the tioned issues, there was a new acincrease in DDA quisition method being offered on ProQuest’s Ebook Central platform, expenditures, Access-to-Own (ATO), which was which were similar to STL and could be implemanageable mented alongside it. With ATO, the percentages that determined the with a few price of the loans were the same for adjustments. ” all titles: 55 percent of the list price for frontlist and 35 percent for backlist. The number of loans before purchase was nonadjustable: two for frontlist and three for backlist. However, unlike STLs, the loan expenditures were applied toward the final purchase price of the eBook. About 22 percent fewer publishers participated in ATO than STL, and the majority of those participated in both. Additionally, the embargoes set by publishers were generally the same for both loan models. Libraries that wanted to put a stronger focus toward ownership and avoid STL’s pricing fluctuation may have looked to ATO as an appealing alternative.

DDA at Pollak Library Pollak Library currently has a DDA pool of nearly 100,000 titles accessible via ProQuest Ebook Central. The DDA program is embedded in the GOBI approval plan for all subject areas. However, the current plan has evolved over the course of the last decade. Pollak Library began its first eBook DDA program in 2010. At that time, a profile was created directly with EBL, which has since been acquired by ProQuest. Librarians quickly recognized that incorporating the DDA plan into the existing YBP approval plan would allow for a more detailed profile in alignment with the library’s collecting strategy and add efficiency to the workflow. Thus, DDA was folded into the YBP approval plan in 2011, and DDA has continued to be a part of the approval plan ever since . At this point in time, STL was a low-cost option to provide access and assess usage. The library established that an automatic purchase would be triggered after four STLs. The

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

New Book Titles Live on PsychiatryOnline! PsychiatryOnline.org is the platform for DSM-5®, all American Psychiatric Association Publishing journals including The American Journal of Psychiatry, and bestselling textbooks, as well as APA Practice Guidelines. This comprehensive virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources to assist with diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development. Joining the PsychiatryOnline Premium Packages: The American Psychiatric Association Publishing Textbook of Substance Use Disorder Treatment, Sixth Edition Now Available as Single Title Subscription: Introductory Textbook of Psychiatry, Seventh Edition Joining the Psychotherapy Library Package: Psychodynamic Therapy For Personality Pathology Play Therapy Learning Supportive Psychotherapy, Second Edition

Priority Code: AP2103A

approval plan is structured to profile titles as either title “notifications,” for which the library receives information about the book to consider purchasing it, or a “book,” in which the library automatically receives and purchases the book without reviewing it beforehand. Any title that was profiled to be sent as a title notification and was also available as an EBL eBook with a DDA option was added to the library’s DDA pool. In 2013, this was expanded, and DDA-eligible titles that were profiled as either books or notifications were added to the DDA pool. This proved to expand the breadth of title options for users while continuing to save the library money. However, in 2014, a number of publishers chose to either remove titles from DDA plans entirely or dramatically increase the cost of STLs. These publisher changes led some libraries to move away from STLs or DDA entirely due to unmanageable costs (Buck and Hills 2017). Despite this, Pollak Library continued with its current DDA approach and continually monitored activity.

analyzing STLs, the review surprisingly uncovered that four STLs before purchase was still saving the most money, but at the cost of ownership. From the review, a graph (see Figure 1) was created to predict the effects that adjusting the number of STLs prior to purchase would have had on expenditure and the number of titles purchased. While STL prices had increased, two-thirds of titles with usage had fewer than two STLs, and almost half had just one. Thus, four STLs before triggering a purchase was still saving the library money. In addition, for two-thirds of titles that were eligible for STLs, the cost of the STL was 25 percent or less of the list price.

Continuing Use of STL In 2019, the Pollak Library undertook a thorough retrospective review of DDA activity and STL settings. With the increase in the average percentage of a one-day STL over the last decade, the hypothesis was that there would be several instances where the Pollak Library had paid more than list price for a title without ever purchasing the book, and therefore the number of STLs triggering a purchase would need to be lowered. After

Against the Grain / September 2021

Figure 1: Cost impact of number of STLs before autopurchase

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Assessment of ATO and Autopurchases

Conclusion

Titles that had been autopurchased or had at least one STL were also analyzed to predict how ATO would have impacted spend and ownership had it been employed. Had ATO been active for all eligible titles, expenditure would have increased 7 percent, and the number of titles purchased would have increased 11 percent. Thus, ATO would be beneficial when focusing on ownership. If ATO had been active only for the titles not eligible for STLs, expenditure would have decreased only three percent, but ownership would have decreased ten percent, so this would not be an effective strategy.

Despite the many changes to DDA over the last decade, the “just in time” acquisition approach was successfully put to the test in the last year, and regular analysis keeps it a cost-saving method. The benefits of providing increased access to eBooks via DDA during the campus closure proved to far outweigh the increase in DDA expenditures, which were manageable with a few adjustments. There is little doubt that DDA will continue to evolve, but hopefully the future holds much-needed improvements for patrons, such as transparency of licenses to add clarity as to how many seats are available or when they would become available, and better access for end users. Pollak Library has now consistently found that the method that worked ten years ago continues to work today, both in terms of providing broad access to a wide range of content and in cost savings over outright purchases.

Lastly, one modification we made to the Pollak Library DDA program after analysis was to change the preferred license model from nonlinear to single-user and employ automatic upgrades. Our analysis showed that 15 percent of DDA purchases had concurrent use that would elicit an upgrade, and on average single-user licenses cost 29 percent less than nonlinear licenses. This resulted in significant ongoing savings for the library, particularly in the past year with the campus closure due to the COVID19 pandemic and the unexpected shift to online classes mid-semester. While DDA expenditures initially dropped at the end of the 2019-20 academic year, they increased, as predicted, with the start of the 2020-21 academic year. The increase in expenditures was minimized by the automatic upgrades and license model change.

References Brown, Sherri, Lea Currie, and Andi Back. 2016. “Boom or Bust: Short-Term Loans Five Years Later.” Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284316454. Buck, Tina Herman, and Sara K. Hills. “Diminishing ShortTerm Loan Returns: A Four-Year View of the Impact of DemandDriven Acquisitions on Collection Development at a Small Academic Library.” Library Resources & Technical Services 61, no. 1 (2017): 51–56. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.61n1.51. Walker, Kevin W., and Michael A. Arthur. “Judging the Need for and Value of DDA in an Academic Research Library Setting.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 44, no. 5 (2018): 650–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.07.011.

Health Sciences eBooks in 2021: Availability, Challenges, and Trends By Ramune K. Kubilius, MALS (Collection Development / Special Projects Librarian, Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> and Tim Butzen-Cahill, MLIS (General Manager, Doody Enterprises, Inc.) <tim@doody.com>

he health sciences eBook landscape has been examined periodically over the past 20 years. eBooks continue to play a central role in today’s health sciences library collections, so it’s worth assessing factors that affect eBook acquisition, such as market availability. At each library, internal requests and usage patterns prioritize collection development decisions, while core title lists are tools for expanding collection breadth — to help identify gaps, new editions, and new subject areas. Though core title lists may not address all of a library’s collection needs, criteria-based and regularly maintained core lists can provide samples of titles for collection studies. For this brief review, we used a present-day health sciences list,

14 Against the Grain / September 2021

Doody’s Core Titles (DCT), to examine the state of health sciences eBooks and their associated landscape.

Background In 2002, Linda Walton and Ramune Kubilius reported that 99 percent of 120 academic health sciences libraries’ websites they examined showed the availability of Web-based textbooks. However, their survey of a popular core list of the time (the Brandon/Hill list, described below) revealed that online format was only available for 19 percent of the titles recommended in that list (Kubilius and Walton). Online title availability is not the only driver of usage, as Ella Hu’s 2019 case study about commonly licensed eBook packages showed: basic medical science eBook usage is highest, while usage of eBooks in various specialties varies. The 2001 definition of “eBook” used by Rick Lugg and Ruth Fischer — “...monographic body of content, intended to be pub-

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Meet students’ needs with crucial digital resources

Newly Added Books

Cultivate learning and curiosity with a curated collection from OverDrive Professional: • Millions of ebooks and audiobooks – pleasure reading &

curriculum support

• Libby, the most-awarded library reading app • A variety of access models to best fit your needs and budget • NEW! Databases & Streaming Media services —

Engaging resources to educate and entertain

Make your library the hub for entertainment, deeper curriculum exploration, career planning and student well-being with OverDrive Professional.

Visit company.overdrive.com/academic-libraries to learn more.

lished and accessed electronically” — will be broadened for this brief review. The term will encompass monographs, textbooks, reference books, handbooks, and examination review books provided in electronic format for those involved in education, clinical care, and/or research.

Doody’s Core Titles For forty years (1965 to 2004), the Brandon/Hill lists were “selected lists” of important print book and journal titles recommended for small medical and hospital libraries, and libraries of all sizes relied on the lists to make informed acquisition decisions (Hill and Stickell). Doody’s Core Titles, first published in 2004 after it was announced that the Brandon/Hill lists would no longer be published, is an annual refereed list of books in the health sciences (Doody’s, “History”). While DCT continues and expands the legacy of the Brandon/Hill lists, it differs in that it does not include journals. DCT includes books in 121 specialty areas broadly covering all aspects of medicine, nursing, allied health, basic sciences, and affiliated disciplines. It is available for purchase and is incorporated into some book vendor sites. Each edition includes titles selected and rated through a collaborative process between librarian selectors and content specialists (Doody’s, “Core Title Selection Process”). The 2,246 titles selected for the 2021 edition of DCT comprise more than three and a half times the size of the Brandon/Hill list used for the 2002 study. To establish the availability of core titles as eBooks, the authors analyzed data from DCT’s eBook discoverability program, an opt-in feature for publishers and

Against the Grain / September 2021

aggregators to provide DCT users links to source eBooks for institutional licensing or as part of a collection (Doody’s, “eBook Aggregator Partners”). At review time, e-versions of 1,847 DCT titles (82%) were available for online institutional licensing, more than four times the percentage of core titles available as eBooks (19%) in the 2002 study. The substantial increase is partially due to the growing number of eBook licensing platforms: eight aggregators were identified in the 2002 study, while DCT 2021 includes data from 36 licensing platforms from 17 aggregators. Continuity exists within the industry: six of the eight 2002 study aggregators still host DCT titles in 2021 (with some corporate and product name changes): LWW, Ovid, McGraw Hill, Elsevier (MD Consult in 2002), Teton Data Systems, and Wiley. While in 2002 health sciences eBook aggregators were also core title publishers, in 2021 the greatest selection of eBooks are hosted on platforms of third-party library service providers and book distributors. EBSCO’s GOBI includes 1,611 (87%) of the 2021 core title eBooks, and ProQuest’s Ebook Central includes 1,233 (67%). Rittenhouse’s R2 Digital Library includes 404 (22%), while Ovid provides access to 353 (19%), the largest offering of the six 2002 study aggregators that host DCT 2021 titles. It isn’t only library service providers that have moved into offering eBook content. Society publishers also offer institutional licensing packages, including the American Academy of Pediatrics (Pediatric Care Online) and the American Psychiatric Association (Psychiatry Online). Commercial publishers have expanded their offerings. McGraw Hill, for instance, now offers more than a dozen subject-specific subscription collection options, many of which include DCT 2021 titles.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Challenges Since 2008, DCT users have had access to eBook availability information, though it remains optional for publishers and aggregators to participate. This information is neutral, does not weigh into the DCT selection process, and likely does not influence publisher and aggregator eBook models or practices. Notably, 399 DCT 2021 titles (18%) are not currently marked as available in eBook format. The titles are published by 76 different publishers (roughly 61% of publishers with DCT 2021 titles). Some of the titles may not be available as eBooks. If they are, information may not be provided by DCT online discoverability partners, or availability may be on platforms that are not traditionally licensed by libraries, such as learning management or clinical health information systems. This represents a significant gap in title availability — on publishers’ proprietary platforms and in what they offer through aggregators — which poses “In 2021, challenges for libraries wishing to provide online access to core titles. progress can be This also suggests opportunities for seen in greater aggregators to seek arrangements eBook content with more partner publishers in order to diversify their instituavailability tional eBook licensing portfolios. and improved Admittedly, though, expanded usage reporting availability of health sciences eBstandards, but ooks from third-party aggregators still may not include titles critical to other continuing a specific library’s needs. Also, local challenges…can practices, policies, and procedures place libraries determine choices and preferred routes for licensing eBooks. in untenable

positions, caught between institutional expectations and industry business models.”

Health sciences libraries’ collection expenditures have increasingly grown more diversified. Subscriptions to journals, a traditional scholarly output in the health sciences, continue to predominate, and database licenses remain a recurring annual expense. Libraries are also increasingly called upon to acquire and manage nontraditional online resources (Shultz and Berryman). Still, eBooks continue to be authored, edited, published, and used. Budgeting for eBooks can be challenging, since each acquisition model may represent different itemizations: one-time purchases, recurring subscriptions, and annual platform fees. As the DCT 2021 analysis illustrates, commercial and society publishers vary in eBook packaging and institutional licensing models. Libraries experience constraints of pre-packaged, often pricey collections containing unwanted titles, and limited a la carte title options. Challenges are not limited to librarians — end users experience many pain points when accessing and navigating digital information as well (Laera et. al.). When curriculum-related eBooks are only available on platforms targeting individuals, will students want (or be able) to pay out of pocket, or will libraries offer to manage access to these platforms that have no (traditional) institutional licensing business models? In 2001, Sherry Thompson observed eBook challenges, “hurdles (that) include everything from licensing issues, potential access problems, internal and external customer training issues, negotiation disagreements between parties to solving misunderstandings about contracts.” In 2021, progress can be seen in

16 Against the Grain / September 2021

greater eBook content availability and improved usage reporting standards, but other continuing challenges, mentioned by Thompson and illustrated in this review, can place libraries in untenable positions, caught between institutional expectations and industry business models.

Trends The events of 2020/2021 brought changes that will likely have ripple effects. Publishers offered free trials and expanded access during the COVID-19 pandemic, and libraries needed to manage access to and discovery of this content. Closed libraries “paid a second time” for online access to inaccessible print books they already held. They responded to national and world events by expanding eBook collections into new areas, including diversity (DEI, multiculturalism, anti-racism), foreign medical language learning, the history of medicine (pandemics), global health, and graphic medicine. Publishers and third-party providers, including Doody’s, responded to new needs by creating various “special topics” collections and lists (Doody Enterprises). Examples of innovation in recent years include eBook enhancements with multimedia, review banks, personalization, and functionality. Consortial and institutional eBook initiatives often include STM (scientific, technical, and medical) publishers and content. For example, in March 2021, member discussions began for FY 2022 crowdfunding of an eBook program in Illinois that would build on funding received from the Secretary of State/Illinois State Library (CARLI), and an Open Access book agreement was announced between University of California Berkeley and Springer Nature (Springer Nature). Local initiatives involving both Open Access books and Open Educational Resources (OER) are gaining a foothold in academic health sciences institutions, requiring technology or development support, more than simply traditional library collection funding. There is no doubt that many changes have occurred in the health sciences eBooks landscape over the past twenty years and more recently. One does not need a crystal ball to predict that more evolution lies ahead.

Acknowledgements The authors appreciate the helpful comments provided by their colleagues — Bart Davis, Joelen Pastva, and Dan Doody.

References CARLI. 2021. “CARLI News May 26, 2021.” Last modified May 26, 2021. https://www.carli.illinois.edu/carli-news-may-26-2021 Doody Enterprises. n.d. “Doody Special Topics Lists.” Accessed May 20, 2021. http://corp.doody.com/doodys-special-topics-lists/ Doody’s Core Titles, n.d. “History.” Accessed May 20, 2021. http://www.doody.com/DCT/Content/DCTHistory.asp Doody’s Core Titles, n.d. “Core Title Selection Process.” Accessed May 20, 2021. http://www.doody.com/DCT/Content/ DCTProcess.asp Doody’s Core Titles. n.d. “eBook Aggregator Partners.” Accessed May 20, 2021. http://www.doody.com/DCT/Content/ DCTAggregators.asp Hill, Dorothy R. and Henry N. Stickell. n.d. “A History of the Brandon/Hill Selected Lists.” Accessed May 20, 2021. https:// web.archive.org/web/20080808135219/http:/www.mssm.edu/ library/brandon-hill/history.shtml Hu, Ella. 2020. “Ebooks in an Academic Medical Library: Is Our Ebook Collection Aligned with the Medical Programs?”

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Doody’s Core Titles, June 9, 2020. https://www.doody.com/dct/ PublicFeaturedArticle.asp?SiteContentID=350 Kubilius, Ramune and Linda Walton. 2002. “E-Books/ Web-Based Medical Textbooks.” Handout presented at Health Sciences Lively Lunch at the Charleston Conference: Issues in Book and Serial Acquisition. Charleston, SC, November 1, 2002. https://doi.org/10.18131/g3-rbk4-sj05 Laera, Elizabeth, Karen Gutzman, Angela Spencer, Charlotte Beyer, Saskia Bolore, John Gallagher, Sean Pidgeon, and Ryan Rodriguez. 2021. “Why are they not accessing it? User barriers to clinical information access.” Journal of the Medical Library Association 109, no. 1 (January): 126-132. https://doi. org/10.5195/jmla.2021.1051 Lugg, Rick and Ruth Fischer. 2001. “The Host with the Most: eBook Distribution to Libraries.” Against the Grain 13 no. 6 (December): 35-40. https://doi.org/10.7771/2380-176X.3646

Shultz, Mary and Donna R. Berryman. 2020. “Collection practices for nontraditional online resources among academic health sciences libraries” Journal of the Medical Library Association 108, no. 2 (April): 253-261. https://doi.org/10.5195/ jmla.2020.791 Springer Nature. 2021. “Springer Nature and UC Berkeley Library sign new open access book partnership.” Springer Nature Group, March 23, 2021. https://group.springernature.com/gp/ group/media/press-releases/new-open-access-book-partnershipwith-uc-berkeley-library/18993926 Thompson, Sherry. 2001. “Health Science eContent Distribution: The Challenges and Opportunities.” Against the Grain 13, no. 6, (December): 34-5. https://doi.org/10.7771/2380176X.3645

Licensing and Interlibrary Lending of Whole eBooks By Michael Rodriguez (Collections Strategist, UConn Library, University of Connecticut) <michaelr@uconn.edu>

Introduction Print books and individual electronic book chapters have a long history of getting shared among libraries through interlibrary loan (ILL). However, library-held eBooks, because libraries license them rather than own them outright, generally cannot be lent in their entirety to a borrowing library’s users without explicit permission from licensors (usually publishers). The licensing and interlibrary lending of whole eBooks is an essential next step in making eBooks more accessible, shareable, user-friendly, and truly viable as alternatives to print. This article uses the University of Connecticut’s pilot program as a springboard for making the case for whole-eBook ILL.

Guiding Principles A fundamental guiding principle of eBooks must be that use cases are facilitated, not foiled, by the content’s electronic format. eBooks must offer the value-adds of electronic formats, such as keyword searching, viewing on various computers and devices, multiple concurrent users, and accessibility for users with print disabilities. eBooks must support the full spectrum of users and use cases, from looking up a fact or reference to reading a whole book cover to cover. However, eBooks must also preserve the portability and shareability of the print book reading experience. Publishers should paginate texts. Users should be free to retain eBooks for later viewing offline, annotate and mark up copies, and share with colleagues. They must be able to interact with the texts through whichever electronic format (e.g., PDF, EPUB, or JPEG) is most suited to their use case. Whenever possible, publishers must offer reasonably priced eBook options to libraries for all titles they sell. Last but not least, libraries must be allowed to share whole eBooks via ILL.

Functional Requirements In order for whole-eBook ILL to address the full range of use cases and sustain the best elements of the print reading

Against the Grain / September 2021

experience, publishers should eschew digital rights management (DRM). DRM creates frustrating barriers for users, e.g., imposing time limits on reading, forcing users to download third-party software such as Adobe Digital Editions, and/or barring the making of personal copies. The industry shift toward DRM-free eBooks has accelerated in recent years, with hundreds of university presses and commercial publishers alike opening up their content. JSTOR and Project Muse provide DRM-free eBooks by default, while ProQuest, EBSCO, and other major distributors have seen their publisher partners increasingly embrace DRM-free sales. The next step on the road to true DRM-free status is enabling one-click download of full eBooks accessed via academic libraries. Many publishers already offer one-click downloads by default. These industry leaders include Walter de Gruyter, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, and many “The licensing smaller presses via ProQuest and and interlibrary EBSCO. Other publishers still restrict downloads to lending of whole the chapter level only. eBooks is an But if users cannot obessential next tain a full eBook with step in making one click, they must laboriously download eBooks more chapters one at a time accessible, — frequently 20-plus shareable, userchapters per book — and organize the PDFs on their comfriendly, and puter. Lack of a one-click download truly viable as option is frustrating for readers who alternatives to want to search the entire text or read print.” the book cover to cover. This shortcoming also makes whole-eBook ILL hard to scale, as it requires library staff to replicate this clunky user experience with each book lent. Publisher platforms should build in key functionalities like one-click downloading by default.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Lending Models

Benefits and Non-Harm to Publishers

Two leading models exist for whole-eBook ILL. The first model is exemplified by Occam’s Reader (http://occamsreader.org/), a tool conceived in 2011 and currently sponsored by Texas Tech University Libraries. Borrowing users must click on token-authenticated links, received via email from lending libraries, to view requested eBooks in their web browsers. Borrowed copies are locked down with DRM. Readers generally cannot copy any portion of the eBook, retain any portion after the loan period, share pages with peers, or interact with the text beyond simply reading it. While a pioneering effort, this DRM-based model supports a limited range of borrower use cases. Libraries pay top dollar for eBooks — far more than print — often hundreds of dollars for a DRM-free version. Therefore, libraries should be empowered to lend eBooks without prohibitively restrictive conditions.

Publishers may hesitate to authorize DRM-free whole-eBook ILL lest it harm their sales. This fear is unfounded. First, wholeeBook ILL (DRM-free or otherwise) has no discernibly greater market impact than traditional print ILL does. UConn has been lending eBooks for more than two years and licenses tens of thousands of DRM-free eBooks, yet the library has lent only 89 eBooks since 2019. Even the COVID-19 pandemic did not drastically increase UConn’s eBook lending volume, despite the widespread shutdowns of U.S. print lending services. (Granted, many patrons and library staff may not think to try requesting an eBook via ILL.) Engrained legal constraints on ILL continue to apply. For example, no library may borrow materials frequently enough to substitute for owning them. DRM-free eBook lending among libraries ultimately carries the same low level of risk that DRM-free lending within libraries does. Illicit web bots can scrape PDFs en masse from publisher sites far more easily than legitimate users can download chapters manually one by one. ILL and download restrictions frustrate legitimate use cases but do little to curb illicit behavior.

The second model for whole-eBook ILL treats whole eBooks the same way as electronic chapters and articles. Lending library staff download PDFs from publisher platforms and transmit them securely to borrowers through standard ILL systems such as ILLiad, Odyssey, and RapidILL. PDFs expire and are deleted from the ILL system after a predetermined period (typically 30 days), but if the individual borrower has downloaded a copy of the PDF, they may keep it indefinitely — just as they may currently keep a requested article. As authorized by publishers, DRM-free ILL aligns with libraries’ growing emphasis on e-preferred collection development, leverages widely used existing ILL solutions rather than adding to libraries’ technology stacks, and renders the eBook reading experience consistent for users regardless of which library has loaned them the book.

Pilot Programs This DRM-free eBook ILL model was piloted at scale in 2016 by VIVA (https://vivalib.org/c.php?g=836990&p=6137355), Virginia’s academic library consortium. In this pilot, VIVA partnered with Brill, Oxford University Press, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley to allow lending of whole eBooks acquired by the consortium. Starting in 2019, the University of Connecticut (UConn) built on VIVA’s leadership and negotiated systematically with publishers to permit whole-eBook ILL in their license agreements. UConn has obtained explicit license clauses or written authorization from Brill, Cambridge University Press, Edward Elgar, Elsevier, Emerald, Walter de Gruyter, and seven other publishers at no additional cost to the library. In 2020, UConn participated in a consortial negotiation that obtained whole-eBook ILL rights from Springer Nature for the first time. Alongside these publisher negotiations, UConn engaged with Ex Libris, Project ReShare, and other resource-sharing organizations to advocate for the critical importance of building whole-eBook ILL as a core functionality into ILL systems. Like VIVA, UConn sought to integrate its whole-eBook ILL provisions seamlessly into standard ILL terms. For example, UConn’s ILL clause with De Gruyter states that “the Licensee may respond to requests by other libraries to send an insignificant amount of content (e.g., ejournal articles, eBook chapters, or full eBooks) via noncommercial Interlibrary loan services.” A clause with Brill affirms that “the Licensee may fulfill occasional requests for the Licensed Materials from other institutions, a practice commonly called Interlibrary Loan, in accordance with the copyright laws of the United States. Requests for whole electronic books may be fulfilled under this Section 4.” Library staff normalize whole-eBook ILL when they treat it as just another licensing element.

18 Against the Grain / September 2021

Above all, whole-eBook ILL is a value differentiator. It helps publishers sell eBooks to libraries. In an increasingly overloaded world of information, with presses habitually upping their number of publications per year and launching new customer-facing platforms (e.g., Manchester Hive or Cambridge Core), publishers can stand out from the crowd by optimizing their terms of use. For example, UConn has forged large-scale business partnerships with Cambridge and De Gruyter in no small degree because of their willingness to embrace whole-eBook ILL. Generous ILL clauses should enable publishers to gain new customers and steadier revenue streams, position them as industry leaders, and shatter any perceptions of them as fusty or hostile to customers’ interests. Whole-eBook ILL is a natural extension of the accelerating industry shift toward DRM-free — a parallel shift that is overcoming similarly unsubstantiated concerns about market impact.

Conclusion As they strive to normalize whole-eBook ILL, libraries must advocate and engage with vendors and peers alike, softening hesitancies and misconceptions among diverse stakeholders. Whole-eBook ILL offers publishers an exciting and ultimately profitable opportunity to lead the way into a digital-first world of information — a new reality where eBooks are as shareable as print books. Licensing and interlibrary loan of whole eBooks is a simple, powerful way to attain this future.

Rumors continued from page 6 Saffo and Michael Keller (Stanford University); Joy Connolly (American Council of Learned Societies); Niko Pfund (Oxford University Press); Liz Lorbeer (Western Michigan University Homer M. D. School of Medicine); Kevin Guthrie (ITHAKA); Lila Barnes (Internet Archives); Kevin L. Smith (University of Kansas); Sara Benson (University of Illinois). Speaking of the Charleston Conference, people are registering for both the in-person and the virtual! Be sure and watch this collection of videos from an awesome group of people who are continued on page 58

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Toward a P+E eBook Model for Academic Libraries By David Gibbs (Interim Associate Dean, University Library, California State University, Sacramento) <david.gibbs@csus.edu>

t is by now well understood that print books and eBooks each have advantages and disadvantages; each format offers affordances that, depending on the circumstances, makes it preferable to the other. Many readers find it easier to focus on a print book, without the competing distractions of email, social media, and the Internet that one has when reading on a laptop, tablet, or phone. eBooks, on the other hand, offer the advantages of instant access, portability, and searchability — all invaluable to students and academic researchers, who are often juggling and synthesizing multiple books at a time. A 2018 survey by Library Journal confirmed that most college students prefer to read print books for pleasure but use eBooks when doing research (Ennis). Many have argued that print is better for deep, focused reading, while digital favors search, discovery, and cross-platform information acquisition (see, for example, Wulf). I personally feel that reading on a dedicated e-reader such as a Kindle provides just as immersive an experience as a print book, with the added benefit of linking out to dictionaries and Wikipedia. (A Kindle provides just enough communication with the world outside the book to enhance my reading experience without distracting me from it.) Most academic library users access their library’s eBooks on a computer (usually a laptop), tablet, or phone, and rarely read them cover to cover. A study at the University of Toronto showed that, for titles available in both formats, both print and eBooks were heavily used for popular titles, and both were little-used for little-used titles (Yuan, et. al). In other words, it’s the content that counts, not the container, and for books that are likely to be used, a library should ideally be able to provide both formats for its patrons. Public libraries currently offer a far superior eBook experience to their patrons than academic libraries can, especially for linear reading. Because they generally purchase fewer unique titles per year, public libraries can purchase multiple copies of popular titles, in multiple formats — print, eBook, audiobook — thus providing options to satisfy differing patron needs and preferences. (I sometimes check out both an eBook and audiobook version of the same title from my public library and switch back and forth between the two depending on where I am and what I am doing.) Public library eBooks can be checked out online and instantaneously downloaded to one’s reading device. If no copy of an eBook is currently available, it’s easy to add yourself to a waiting list. And innovative efforts such as the New York Public Library’s SimplyE e-reader seek to give public libraries even greater control over their content delivery and presentation, allowing them to curate and present their e-collections in ways that are tailored to their users’ needs. Academic libraries lag far behind. We have little control over our eBooks, which remain tied to publisher or vendor platforms and subject to their rules and restrictions. Downloading an eBook from an academic library is usually a hassle, the experience varies from platform to platform, users often don’t understand why an eBook is unavailable and they can’t put themselves on a waitlist, and eBooks are almost never downloadable to dedicated devices like a Kindle. When journals first started to be published on the Internet, subscribing libraries were offered online access as a free supplement to

Against the Grain / September 2021

the print subscription, a model sometimes known as P (print) + E (electronic). As readers gradually became more and more comfortable with online access, and eventually came to prefer the convenience of the online format, libraries began to drop their print subscriptions. Online access went from being a supplement to the print to supplanting it altogeth“Academic er. Nowadays, the print periodicals librarians should section of the library is even more of not have to a ghost town than the book stacks, visited only occasionally by power choose between users and ILL staff. Libraries typprint and eBook ically purchase the print version of formats when a journal only if there is no online version, if the online version is making selection prohibitively expensive, if the print decisions, and is heavily visual, or if students are they should not still required to consult the print for have to pay twice an outdated assignment.

for the same Unlike serials, monographs have rarely been available through a P+E content.” model; print books and eBooks have always been sold as separate products. Often a publisher will delay the release of an eBook version of a title, much the same way that movie distributors used to delay the release of a DVD or streaming version of a film until the box office demand had been satiated. (Now, we simply pay more to stream a film while it’s in the theaters.) Publishers and aggregators sometimes have “sales,” in which they offer a discount on eBooks that are already owned in print by the library. ProQuest offers a Title Matching Fast (TMF) service that will match a library’s print holdings to electronic titles for sale. Such efforts are helpful, but they are retroactive rather than proactive. Purchasing the same title twice in different formats is inefficient from a workflow standpoint, and the discounts offered are usually inadequate to make up for the fact that the library has already paid for the content. It would be far preferable for the library to be able to simultaneously purchase, immediately upon a book’s publication, both a print and an eBook copy of a title at a cost that is fair to both the publisher and the library. What would a fair cost be? In the days of P+E journals, there was typically no additional cost for electronic access above and beyond the print subscription fee. Is there any reason that the purchase of a print book should not similarly come with at least one-user online access? Consider that, despite what some publishers say, once the publication and production costs of an eBook are recouped, each additional copy sold is essentially pure profit. (By contrast, each copy of a print book costs the publisher something to produce.) Normally libraries receive a 15-20% discount on the list price for print books, but no discount on eBooks. Would it not be reasonable for libraries willing to pay the full list price for a print title to receive a one-user copy of the eBook bundled with it? This seems fair from a cost point of view, and it would save time for both acquisitions and cataloging staff. Users would have their choice of format at point of need.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

To avoid possible turnaways, libraries could enable automatic upgrades (to a 3-user, concurrent access, or unlimited model), such as are currently offered by both ProQuest and EBSCO. Even given the option of a reasonable P+E purchasing model such as described above, not every library would choose to acquire a print copy of every title. In some disciplines, e is heavily preferred. Some libraries have space constraints or have even gone e-only. On the flip side, even researchers who prefer to read in print often find themselves in need of an electronic copy of any given title, usually to search for a particular name, concept, or quote. I have often made use of the free snippets available on Google Books, Amazon, or the Internet Archive’s Open Library for this purpose, but the needed text is not always available, and such workarounds could be avoided if publishers were willing to bundle their titles. Academic librarians should not have to choose between print and eBook formats when making selection decisions, and they

should not have to pay twice for the same content. I urge publishers to consider the proposals I have made here, and I look forward to reading their responses in the February 2022 issue of Against the Grain.

References Matt Ennis. 2018. “Survey: Print for Reading, ‘E’ for Research,” Library Journal 143:7. Karin Wulf. 2021. “Revisiting: Dear Reader, Are You Reading?” https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2021/06/09/revisiting-dear-reader-are-you-reading/ Weijing Yuan, Marlene Van Ballegooie, and Jennifer L. Robertson. 2018. “Ebooks Versus Print Books: Format Preferences in an Academic Library.” Collection Management 43 (1): 28–48. doi:10.1080/01462679.2017.1365264.

Reader’s Roundup: Monographic Musings & Reference Reviews Column Editor: Corey Seeman (Director, Kresge Library Services, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan) <cseeman@umich.edu> Twitter @cseeman Column Editor’s Note: We have a nice mix of books on the library and archival profession as well as reference books. The books on librarianship really stretch the boundaries of what many consider the core work by looking more closely at archives and data curation in our organizations. The reference books provide views of the value of a dollar (something very important for those starting their fiscal year on July 1st) and feminism and literature. These books all represent opportunities for your libraries to provide a bit more coverage for your readers. I am very fortunate to have a great crew of reviewers for Against the Grain. I thank my reviewers for this issue: Kathleen Baril (Ohio Northern University); David Gibbs (California State University, Sacramento); Mary Catherine Moeller (University of Michigan); Tiffany Norris (Birmingham-Southern College); Jordan Pedersen (University of Toronto) and Steven W. Sowards (Michigan State University). If you would like to be a reviewer for Against the Grain, please write me at <cseeman@umich.edu>. If you are a publisher and have a book you would like to see reviewed in a future column, please also write me directly. You can also find out more about the Reader’s Roundup here — https://sites.google.com/view/ squirrelman/atg-readers-roundup.

If a reference work reaches its 6th edition, several things have taken place. For one, usage has demonstrated ongoing value. For another, the work has become a familiar and “well known” resource and is potentially taken for granted. This newest edition reminded me to look at The Value of a Dollar again with fresh eyes. This book gathers historical price and wage figures for the United States. The content is “all about practical economy: what things cost and how much money people have to buy them” (page v). It is not a resource for global studies. It is not a commodities report. Look here for the cost of coffee, hats and radios, not the cost of bulk wheat, soybeans and copper … a gallon of gasoline, not a barrel of crude oil. Prices are for consumer products: this is not the source for changing costs for farm land, submarines or bridges. This is the kind of book that a reference librarian loves: full of facts and figures, but eminently browsable. It is evocative to know the price of admission for a Jimmy Cagney movie in 1934 (25 cents), or a Macintosh computer in 2004 ($2,500). The fun of browsing is supported by a variety of facsimile advertisements. This mix of hard and soft information should find an audience in high schools, colleges, and public libraries.

Derks, Scott. The Value of a Dollar: 1860-2019. Sixth edition. Amenia, NY: Grey House Publishing, 2019. 978-1-68217-949-9, 600 pages. $155.00.

This book also pinch-hits as a history of advertising, because historical advertisements are a source for many prices found within. The Value of a Dollar cites ads in newspaper and magazine ads, as well as mail-order catalogs, posters and retail store web sites. Sources are specifically cited (Sears, Roebuck 1922 or the Chicago Tribune 1983), and samples of consumer advertisements offer texture and flavor to readers.

Reviewed by Steven W. Sowards (Associate Dean for Collections, Michigan State University Libraries, East Lansing MI) <sowards@msu.edu>

The book draws on sources like the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but the presentation is nothing like the Consumer Price Index web site at https://www.bls.gov/cpi/. A BLS time series such as the “CPI for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)” presents generalized

Happy reading and be nutty! — CS

20 Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

yearly figures for a “market basket” of “frequently purchased items, such as food and personal care products” but rarely for specific goods (gasoline is something of an exception). The Value of a Dollar, on the other hand, quotes dozens of dated prices for specific goods: a pound of coffee (for example) from 1863 to 2012, but without a systematic time series. Content is organized chronologically: years 1860-1899 all together, thereafter by five-year periods ending with 2015-2019. A handy “composite consumer price index” shows inflationary trends (for example, the buying power of the 1860 dollar corresponds to $30.63 in 2019), followed by five-year summary tables for types of expenditure, and multiple tables and graphs showing longer trends for selected goods such as men’s or women’s suits, toasters, newspaper subscriptions, eggs or automobiles. Each five-year section includes annual prices for two dozen food items, other selected consumer goods (from liquor to clocks), and a selection of annual salaries. With diligence, some of these tables could yield time series, but the basket of goods varies over time: typewriters and cuff links in the 1920s, VCRs and garage door openers in the 1990s. Chapter length is consistent: 33 pages for 1900-1904, 30 pages for 2000-2004. There are print and eBook versions of this work, and print-format buyers gain access to the online version. There are good reasons to work with both versions. The printed codex lends itself to flipping back and forth between sections, and the reader can mark pages for comparison with nothing more technical than slips of paper. In the eBook, on the other hand, the reader can use keywords to track down details such as 65 quoted prices for automobiles and 10 prices for Buicks in particular, or more than 200 citations from Sears, Roebuck catalogs. (Full disclosure: keyword searches relied on the 5th edition eBook covering years to 2014, not the 6th edition.) Information, illustrations, and examples are drawn from a wide range of sources, including yearly Sears, Roebuck catalogs, digitized historical newspapers, the Historical Statistics of the United States, and federal government time series published by the Federal Reserve and the Department of Commerce. None of these sources combines price series with specific examples. Note that a companion volume covers The Value of a Dollar: Colonial Era to the Civil War, 1600-1865. ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)

Evans, Robert C. Critical Insights: Feminism Grey House Publishing, 2020. 9781642656633, 338 pages. $105.00 Reviewed by Mary Catherine Moeller (Assistant Librarian, Kresge Library Services, Ross School of Business, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor) <mcmoelle@umich.edu>

Guide to the ATG Reviewer Ratings The ATG Reviewer Rating is being included for each book reviewed. Corey came up with this rating to reflect our collaborative collections and resource sharing means and thinks it will help to classify the importance of these books. • I need this book on my nightstand. (This book is so good, that I want a copy close at hand when I am in bed.) • I need this on my desk. (This book is so valuable, that I want my own copy at my desk that I will share with no one.) • I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.) • I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.) • I’ll use my money elsewhere. (Just not sure this is a useful book for my library or my network.)

Feminism is an essay written by a different academic author, all centering around the theme of feminism. Furthermore, each chapter is centered around a different piece of literature and those pieces range from Shakespearean plays to modern day novels. The authors each take their own approaches to dissecting their chosen works, giving the reader a chance to see a wide range of ways in which feminism can be used to better understand literature. The “Critical Contexts” section provides the reader with a base of knowledge about feminist theory and how it can apply to literature. In one chapter, Frederick Kiefer uses a historical approach to better understand costuming, props and stage direction and its portrayal of Ophelia in Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Joyce Ahn, in her chapter, makes the argument that the use of feminist criticism is on the rise and walks readers through its use in understanding literature over time. In another chapter, Robert Evans explores the subtleties of Thomas Campion’s representation of female voices in his poems through a method called close reading. Nanette Rasband Hilton, in her chapter, compares and contrasts the rhetoric of Ida B. Wells and Margaret Fuller and the social justice underpinnings of their early works. This, in my opinion, is the best section of this book. It is the section upon which everything else builds and introduces readers to diverse approaches to applying a feminist lens to literary theory.

Feminism brings to the forefront issues of gender, sexuality, race, class, among others. Feminist theory, when applied to literature, helps us to better understand society’s perception of certain populations over time and begin to unpack what that means for the future. Critical Insights: Feminism gives readers an introduction to feminist theory and the various ways in which it can be used to better understand literature.

The “Critical Readings” section takes the context from the first section and begins applying it to different readings. The authors of these chapters focus on the portrayal of women, gender stereotypes, race, class, etc. in various forms of literature over time. The section begins by looking at poet Emily Dickinson and by the end we’ve made our way forward in history all the way to contemporary author Margaret Atwood. At the very end there is a resources section with additional works on feminism so that readers can continue to learn more about the topic.

Editor Robert C. Evans is the I.B. Young Professor of English and Philosophy at Auburn University at Montgomery. His publications focus on topics such as Renaissance literature, literature of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, short fiction, critical theory and women writers. Every chapter in Critical Insights:

This book serves as a great introduction to the basics of feminist theory and its applications to literature. It includes a wide variety of perspectives and methodologies for applying a feminist lens but does not get too heavy making it easy for everyone to understand.

Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)

Hunter, Gregory S. Developing and Maintaining Practical Archives: A How-to-Do-It Manual. Third Edition. Chicago: ALA Neal-Schuman, 2020. 9780838912775, 302 pages. $85.00. Reviewed by David Gibbs (Interim Associate Dean, University Library, California State University Sacramento) <david.gibbs@csus.edu> Professor Gregory S. Hunter published the first edition of this book in 1997 in response to what he perceived as a lack in the teaching literature for a “one-volume summary of contemporary American archival theory and practice for classroom use.” He goes on to admit, “Only when I began writing the book did I realize the difficulty of the task and the reason others avoided it” (xv). It was a daunting task, not least because of the widely varying types of institutions that engage in recordkeeping and archival work, but also the very different needs of the audiences they serve. Dr. Hunter clearly did something right as the second edition (2003) received the Society of American Archivists’ Waldo Gifford Leland Award for “writing of superior excellence and usefulness in the field of archival history, theory, or practice.” As a former editor of American Archivist, the premier American journal of the profession, and professor at the Palmer School of Library and Information Science at Long Island University, Dr. Hunter is well positioned to cover the full breadth of the field, from college and university libraries, to cultural heritage institutions, to corporations. His formative experience was in corporate archives and records management, a background that shows in the preponderance of examples he draws on from that corner of the profession. This is not a bad thing (in fact, other overviews of the archival profession might tend to give short shrift to non-academic archives); it is simply a position that the reader should be aware of. Hunter does use a running academic example throughout the book, the fictitious North Fork University, to provide “real-world” examples of the various concepts under discussion. While the title emphasizes the “practical” intent of the book, there is a healthy mix of theory and praxis. Hunter synthesizes other scholars’ ideas throughout and provides ample footnotes. The book is organized loosely sequentially, starting with an introduction to archives and manuscripts, followed by chapters on how to survey records; selection and appraisal; acquisitions and accessioning; arrangement; description; preservation; security and disaster planning; and access, reference, outreach, and advocacy. Chapters that fall somewhat outside the sequence deal with how to start an institutional or community archives; how to lead and manage; and the nature of the archival profession. What’s new in this edition? For one thing, Hunter has integrated a discussion of audiovisual and digital records into every chapter of the book, rather than attempting to treat them separately. In addition, he has added coverage of community archives as well as discussions of diversity, inclusion, and social justice. Dr. Hunter is the kind of pragmatist the profession needs in the post-analog world. He highlights the tensions between preservation and use (since every time you touch a record, you shorten its life), and perfectionism and practicality. He notes that only one or two percent of records in a typical organization merit preservation. He advocates for digitizing records with informational but no intrinsic value and discarding the paper. The discussion of “More Product, Less Process” is particularly practical. Warning against

22 Against the Grain / September 2021

the archivist’s tendency to “overprocess” collections, he notes, “An archivist can get to know the forest pretty well without examining each tree” (100). Similarly, “A good finding aid is intended for the researcher, not for the edification of the archivist. The focus should be on the use by others, rather than on showcasing the literary abilities of the archivist” (115). Hear, hear! Hunter’s style is highly readable, and his wry sense of humor suffuses the text. Occasionally bits of dated language or references persist. (There have been at least two generations of medical television shows since M*A*S*H that could have been used to illustrate the concept of triage.) Throughout the book, interesting and upto-date sidebars highlight examples of contributions archives have made to our lives. Parts of the book get rather technical–notably the treatment of digital and audiovisual records, and the chapter on preservation — but they are easily skipped over should one choose to do so (book reviewers excepted, of course). This book is a solid choice for anyone seeking an overview of archives and the archival profession. Hunter has succeeded in covering a complex discipline in a single, readable volume. ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)

Kroski, Ellyssa (ed). Makerspaces in Practice: Successful Models for Implementation. Chicago: American Library Association, 2021. 978-0-8389-4805-7, 264 pages. $74.99 Reviewed by Tiffany Norris (Library Director, BirminghamSouthern College, Birmingham, AL) <tdnorris@bsc.edu> Makerspaces in Practice: Successful Models for Implementation covers a great deal of ground in its 13 chapters. Authors discuss a wide range of topics including: the current status of makerspaces; how to fund and sustain a makerspace; challenges libraries are likely to face after they have implemented a space; and success stories that give hope that it can be a positive venture. “We are making great strides inside the library community in sharing the value of the makerspace and maker communities.” The book includes perspectives from public, K-12, and academic libraries as well as a look into the future to predict what trends could be coming next that would influence makerspaces in libraries. In the library world, it can be all too easy to chase after what seems to be trending. From makerspaces to virtual reality rooms to recording studios, sometimes it is difficult to know which trends are worth investing our time and money in and which ones are better suited for another department or area. Kroski argues that makerspaces are no longer a “shiny new trend,” but rather an opportunity to partner “with library patrons in the production process,” with almost 90 percent of public libraries offering some type of maker programming for their patrons. “In many cases, makerspaces have revitalized libraries by taking the concept of knowledge to a new level and transforming them from disseminators of information to creators of knowledge.” The book’s goal, then, is to help those who are trying to get started while still being useful to those who are already running their own makerspaces. The book achieves its primary goal, providing practical advice on everything from securing funding to addressing accessibility to circulating items. Possibly the most useful part is perhaps the library-worthy amount of additional resources at the end of each chapter. On a personal note, I believe I will return to this book time and again as our library considers how to take our current makerspace (currently consisting of a 3D printer) and grow it into a space that benefits our patrons and community.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Direct to Open Add Your Support Today Join the Big Ten Academic Alliance, Johns Hopkins University Libraries, University of Toronto Libraries, MIT Libraries, and more. Support Direct to Open by September 30, 2021 to receive exclusive benefits including access to backlist/ archives and trade collection discounts.

Direct to Open harnesses collective action to support open access to excellent scholarship. When successful, D2O will: • Open access to all new MIT Press scholarly monographs and edited collections (~90 titles per year) from 2022 via recurring participation fees. • Provide participating libraries with term access to backlist/archives (~2,300 titles), which will otherwise remain gated. Participating libraries will receive access even if the model is not successful. • Cover partial direct costs for the publication of high-quality works that are also available for print purchase.

https://direct.mit.edu/books/pages/direct-to-open

The benefit with a work like this is that we can do that and still work within our library resources. “The academic library may have been last to the table, but the strides they have made have been astounding. When you blend makerspaces with research and education at this level, you can’t help but be exposed to students and faculty whose productions are groundbreaking.” This is hopeful news for the academic librarians among us!

Highby thoughtfully examine the power dynamics of workplaces, and what it means to be disabled in a capitalist world where the interchangeability and replaceability of individuals is foundational. Their analysis draws on critical disability theory, personal experiences, interviews, and theatrical improvisation techniques to lead the reader to concrete suggestions for implementing change and improving workplace culture.

Several chapters pointed out that data collection, assessment, and evaluation are vital steps to support makerspaces on a long-term basis, and these were good reminders that it is always easier to start as you mean to continue. “The success of your makerspace will depend on your engagement and how you define success, and then on assessing to see if you have met your goals.” The importance of these steps cannot be overstated, but neither can the idea of enjoying the quickly developing technology. As one of the authors noted, “Take risks, have fun, and enjoy your amazing creative library job.”

Overall, this book shines in its comprehensiveness, and in the authors’ willingness to include personal stories as a way of building a sense of community with the reader. A personal highlight for me though was the final two chapters, where Schomberg and Highby take turns recounting what a day in their life looks like, and what living well looks like for them.

ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this in my library. (I want to be able to get up from my desk and grab this book off the shelf, if it’s not checked out.)

Schomberg, Jessica and Highby, Wendy. Beyond Accommodation: Creating an Inclusive Workplace for Disabled Library Workers. Sacramento: Library Juice Press (https://libraryjuicepress.com) , 2020. 9781634000864, 218 pages. $35.00 Reviewed by Jordan Pedersen (Metadata Librarian, University of Toronto Libraries) <jordan.pedersen@utoronto.ca> Because disability and accommodation within the workplace are often delicate topics that require large amounts of trust, compassion, and patience, it is valuable to understand the frameworks in which disability is positioned, as well as the power dynamics at play. For people with disabilities, this might mean finding community and support to assist when making the choice of whether or not to disclose a disability in the workplace. Similarly, for non-disabled people, being aware of the barriers that people with disabilities face, inside and outside of the workplace, can ensure that individuals know how to spot barriers and remove them. Ensuring accessible, healthy workplaces can be a challenge, but resources such as Beyond Accomodation can provide guidance. Authors Jessica Schomberg and Wendy Highby are both, at time of writing, academic librarians who have held a variety of professional roles, both within, and beyond, librarianship. They both identify as being people with disabilities, who bring personal and artistic presence to writing about their experiences. They are both activists who appear to take a holistic approach to all that they do, reconciling the fact that we are human beings first, and that our other labels, such as professionals, come later, even though popular discourse would have us believe otherwise. Schomberg and Highby present a persuasive account of strength in vulnerability, the value of interdependence, and the necessity to dispel stigma, stereotypes, and bias. The authors are able to highlight the connections between disability frameworks, political theories such as neoliberalism and Marxism, and various justice movements such as environmental, racial justice, and disability rights. They are inclusive of a variety of disabilities, and are thoughtful and gentle when writing, evidenced in their explicit trauma-aware approach. To highlight some of their theoretical analysis, one can look to Chapter 3, titled The Library as Organization. Schomberg and

24 Against the Grain / September 2021

While at times the content becomes a bit repetitive, it is a valuable read if you are looking to expand your knowledge of theories of disability, the accommodation process, and employment resources for people with disabilities surrounding fair treatment especially in the United States. ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.)

Stuart, David. Practical Data Science for Information Professionals. London: Facet Publishing, 2020. 9781783303441, 183 pages. $77.99. Reviewed by Kathleen Baril (Director, Heterick Memorial Library, Ohio Northern University) <k-baril@onu.edu> In current practice, librarians find themselves immersed in data throughout the profession, whether we are collecting usage data for electronic resources, measuring the use of our physical spaces or gathering data to demonstrate the value of the library to our larger institution. There is no denying it, libraries are now awash in data. But what should we do with this data: what is the best way to gather it, what should we gather and what are the best methods for gathering it? David Stuart’s book, Practical Data Science for Information Professionals, provides an introduction to all information professionals interested in learning more. David Stuart is an independent information professional and honorary research fellow at the University of Wolverhampton, United Kingdom. Stuart regularly publishes on information science, metrics and semantic web technologies. His previous books include Practical Ontologies for Information Professionals, Web Metrics for Library and Information Professionals and Facilitating Access to the Web of Data. Practical Data Science for Information Professionals walks the reader through the basics of data science and includes chapters that define data science and that examine methods and tools for data analysis. The book is at its best when it is explaining basic principles of data science; for example, in chapter three, the author explains the data science process from beginning to end. Stuart outlines the steps in the data science process which include: framing the problem, collecting the data, transforming and cleaning the data, analyzing the data and then communicating the data through visualizations. Each step is carefully explained with helpful charts and graphs as well as references throughout for further exploration. This chapter also remains relatively free of references to more technical aspects of data science that presuppose a knowledge of either statistics or continued on page 34

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Booklover — Not a Greek Tragedy Column Editor: Donna Jacobs (Retired, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC 29425) <donna.jacobs55@gmail.com>

ummer has always come with a reading list. This summer is no exception and includes a variety of titles: The Code Breaker by Walter Isaacson (a must read for a retired research scientist); Tiny Histories-Trivial events and Trifling decisions that changed British History by Dixe Wills (a Christmas present with an intriguing subtitle); The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse by Charlie Mackesy (an illustrated joy): Maryville, The Audacity of a People by Diane Hamilton (Diane is a “History Buddy” of mine and she has written about this African American town that was established after the Civil War in Charleston); a more perfect Union by Teri Ellen Cross Davis (a poet who brings her African American experience forward for us to bear witness). Insert a deadline for the Booklover column and the choices now include The Collected Poems of Odysseus Elytis. For over ten years and more than 70 laureates, the “bucket list” goal to read one piece of work from every writer who has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature continues to challenge. I find that I’m down to the “hard-to-find” category or poets. It is remarkable how many laureates are poets. I should make a count one day. But for now, the list is in hand to search the Charleston County Library’s offering online and I reserve two books, both from poets: The Collected Poems of Odysseus Elytis, translated by Jeffrey Carson and Nikos Sarris, and Omeros by Derek Walcott.

Carson’s own beauty at word craft: “Biography tells little about Elytis. When in Athens, he usually woke up late, met with friends in various confectionary shops in the afternoon, wrote for much of the night. Summers he spent on Lesbos or other islands. For half a century he lived in the same small apartment in Athens, where an adequate family legacy enabled him to devote his time to writing. But his words reveal that his inner adventures were tumultuous, almost too vivid, and that poetry provided a way to order them. The poet chants his good news and then radically converts himself through his intensities of meter, diction, metaphor, structure. These make up the poet’s true biography, and they are almost unbearably intimate.” With only the imagination of how Elytis’ poetry sounds in his native language, I leave you with the sensuousness of the translated versions — a very small stanza from The Axion Esti and the entirety of Blissful Donna. Once again, major props to the translators. The Axion Esti — What is good? What is evil? — A point A point

and on it you balance and exist

and beyond it trepidation and darkness

This Booklover column focuses on two works from The Collected Poems of Odysseus Elytis: The Axion Esti, “one of 20th-century literature’s most concentrated and richly faceted poems,” according to the Swedish Academy; and Blissful Donna, because… how could I resist the title?

and behind it the grinding teeth of angels

Odysseus Elytis was born in Heraklion on the Island of Crete in November of 1911.

Blissful Donna

Interesting — as in my mind, poetry originated in Greece. I guess because I learned about Homer and the epic poems of the “Iliad” and the “Odyssey” early in my education. And, according to the Merriam Webster website, the word poet comes from a Greek word meaning “to make.” Being more of a science geek, poetry didn’t initially resonate with me. It did intrigue me, however. Thus, I’ve been a student of poetry and the spoken word since high school. Odysseus Elytis was recognized in 1979 by the Nobel Committee “for his poetry, which, against the background of Greek tradition, depicts with sensuous strength and intellectual clear-sightedness modern man’s struggle for freedom and creativeness.” In his reaction to the award, Elytis nodded to Homer and the influence of the Greek heritage on poetry: “The Swedish Academy’s decision was not only an honor for me but for Greece and its history through the ages. I believe that it was a decision to bring international attention to the most ancient tradition in Europe, since from Homer’s time to the present there has not been a single century during which poetry has not been written in the Greek language.” The “Introduction” to The Collected Poems of Odysseus Elytis is written by one of the translators, Jeffrey Carson. It gives the reader a window into not only the skill of this translator but also

Against the Grain / September 2021

— A point A point

and on it you can infinitely proceed

or else nothing else exists anymore

Take some pollen from consolation’s sparkle A place that flashes into the infinite Higher even than your highest hope Blissful Donna! And from the world of lightbeams’ edge Roll the waves with dissolved emerald For the zephyr of the music of the south Waves for the zephyr of the music that takes Night’s virginity far away With journeys to boundless caves With girls who love the embraces of lilies And melodize the depth of sky And long for empty aether’s chill wind Take a place that flashes into the infinite A blue pupil of an unaccounted eye With stamens of wish at your level Blissful Donna! And from a consubstantial heart Go and see the depth of years Strewn with pebbles of quiet seas.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

LEGAL ISSUES Section Editors: Bruce Strauch (Retired, The Citadel) <bruce.strauch@gmail.com> Jack Montgomery (Western Kentucky University) <jack.montgomery@wku.edu>

Legally Speaking — Dance and Copyright Column Editor: Anthony Paganelli (Western Kentucky University) <Anthony.Paganelli@wku.edu>

s the saying goes, “dance like no one is watching.” In the realm of copyright and choreography, it might be best if no one is watching if you are using a copyrighted dance work. Of course, understanding the copyright and choreographed relationship has been difficult since it was added to the U.S. Copyright Law Section 102(a)(4) in 1976. Due to this recent addition to copyright law, there is little legal literature regarding the representation of dance infringement litigation. There are some high profile infringement issues that involve Martha Graham, as well as Beyoncè. The major issues in choreographed works and copyrights is determining how and what is a copyright choreographed work. For instance, Michael Jackson performed the iconic “moonwalk” dance move during a live event in 1983. The move has been reproduced by numerous people and performed in different public events. Even though we associate this dance move with Michael Jackson, it was performed several decades before and was never copyrighted. As noted by Saucier (2018), “The Moonwalk is not a work protectable by Copyright Law because it is considered a ‘social dance step’ or ‘simple routine,’ which is explicitly not covered under copyright law.” In fact, the dance move was first documented by Cab Calloway around 1930, and later with Bill Baily during performances at the Apollo Theater in 1955. The dance move was not a unique style of dance and has been performed over the past several decades before it was globally popularized by Michael Jackson. Therefore, the question is how do you copyright a dance? As mentioned prior, the U.S. Copyright Law has established protection for choreographed works, but in order for a choreographer to have standing in the court, they must register the work with the U.S. Copyright Office. However, to register the work, a choreographer must have the original work documented in a fixed and tangible medium. The elements of a copyrightable dance work includes “rhythmic movements of one or more dancers’ bodies in a defined sequence and a defined spatial environment, such as a stage; a series of dance movements or patterns organized into an integrated, coherent, and expressive compositional whole; a story, theme, or abstract composition conveyed through movement; a presentation before an audience; a performance by skilled individuals; and musical or textual accompaniment” (U.S. Copyright Office). For a choreographer, the complex issue is establishing what is original. According to Saucier (2018), there are two factors for choreographers to achieve an original dance. First, “the work is the independent creation of the choreographer.” This means that the dance cannot be categorized as a social dance.

26 Against the Grain / September 2021

According to the U.S. Copyright Circular 52, social dances includes ballroom dances, folk dances, line dances, square dances, and swing dances. The second factor is “that the work exhibits some degree of creativity.” While determining what is original and creative is difficult, a choreographer could consult or collaborate with other experts in the field to best determine originality and creativity. The U.S. Copyright Office does provide information on several types of body movements that are not eligible for copyright protection, such as yoga and even a touchdown celebration are body movements not covered by copyright laws. Furthermore, a somewhat difficult aspect of dance copyright is the fixed and tangible medium. Most dances are often created for a small number of performances, which most choreographers may not video record as the tangible medium. In addition, some choreographers may not use dance notation, which is a written documentation that could be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. Another way dance can be fixed to a tangible medium is through still images or textual descriptions. Often, the inability to document and submit the work for copyright is the issue several choreographers have in defending their works in the court systems. Once the choreographed work has been fixed to a medium it is technically copyrighted, but for full protection under the U.S. Copyright Law, the work needs to be registered with the U.S. Copyright Office in order to gain support of the court system. As Saucier (2018) mentioned, the purpose for the registration is to give the choreographer the right to reproduce their work, prepare derivatives of the work, distribute the work for sale or license the work, allow the work to be performed publicly, and “the right to display a copy of the dance by means of a film or slide or television image.” While there is not a major dance copyright infringement case that has rivaled certain music or computer software infringement suits in terms of monetary settlements, there are few cases regarding copyright infringement on choreographed works that are significant. The two major copyright trial cases since 1976 included the famous 20th century choreographers George Balanchine and Martha Graham.

Fuller vs. Bemis Before choreography was included into copyright, Kraut (2016) described a case from 1892 regarding the choreographer and dancer, Loïe Fuller that filed a lawsuit against a former

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

dancer Minnie Bemis. As a dancer touring the vaudeville and burlesque venues, Fuller created the Serpentine Dance in 1891 for the play Quack, M.D. During the time period, she performed her dance at different theatrical venues, which she often fought for better contract agreements with theater managers. She even sought compensation and attribution for her likeness image, which the theaters used to promote the venue and her signature Serpentine Dance. Following a failed attempt to sue a theatrical company for breach of contract, she left the play Uncle Celestin. The production company then hired Minnie Bemis to replace Fuller and perform the Serpentine Dance. This led to Fuller suing Bemis for copyright infringement. Fuller had attempted to copyright the performance through a textual description of the dance that included her costume and how it was used in the dance. Two copies were mailed to the Library of Congress in May 1892, along with the fifty cents for the copyright registration. Unfortunately for Fuller, the costume description in the registration was considered a skirt dance or Nautch dancing, a colonist term for Indian dance. Eventually, the U.S. Circuit Court rejected her claim of copyright infringement. Judge E. Henry Lacombe ruled on June 10, 1892 that Fuller’s description of the dance described “The merely mechanical movements by which effects are produced on the stage are not subjects of copyright where they convey no ideas whose arrangement makes up a dramatic composition” (Kraut, 2016, p. 73). This case provided an idea of the early history of the relationship between choreography and copyrights that are being introduced more in the court systems recently.

Fortnite Lawsuit For example, the leading video game company Epic Games that produced the popular Fortnite video game in 2017 has been sued by rapper 2 Milly for the “Swipe It” dance and the Instagram influencer the Backpack Kid for the “Floss Dance,” as well as Alfonso Ribeiro, the actor who portrayed Carton from the 1990s television sitcom The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air for the “Carlton Dance.” These celebrities sued Epic Games for the use of dances in the video game. The lawsuits claimed that the video game allowed users to purchase specific dances that were used during the game. According to Hamandi and Nelson (2020), “The third-person shooter allows players to buy and perform in-game dances or ‘emotes’ that largely draw from relevant pop-culture. Parties claiming they have invented, or first performed, the dance on which an ‘emote’ is based have filed multitude of copyright law suits against Epic Games, the publishers, and developers of Fortnite.” In 2018, the lawsuits were filed and the plaintiffs had to establish if the dances were copyrighted and registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. As noted prior, the key to dance copyright protection is that the work is registered at the Copyright Office, which none of the dances were registered at the time. Following a U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com, those filing a copyright infringement suit, must have the work registered with the U.S. Copyright Office. Prior, a person could apply for copyright protection after filing the lawsuit, which could take several months. While the concept that the work must be registered before an infringement case can be filed has become complex, especially considering the vague description and requirements of copy-

Against the Grain / September 2021

righting a dance work. The other aspect is the cost and time to register creative works with the U.S. Copyright Office. In the case of Fortnite, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss in February 2019 based on the dance moves being too simple, and therefore the dances could not be copyrighted in accordance to the 1976 Copyright Law. To support the motion, the defense presented “correspondence with the court at that time that showed Ribeiro’s claim had been denied by the Copyright Office, which decided the Carlton was only a ‘simple dance routine’ and thus couldn’t be copyrighted” (Gach, 2019). Yet, the “Floss” dance was registered as a choreographed work and dismissed (Hamandi & Nelson, 2020). There were other lawsuits against Epic Games, including two basketball players from the University of Maryland, which was also dismissed based on two factors. First, the works not being copyrighted prior to the lawsuit did hinder the plaintiffs’ case in seeking protection for their dance works. Second, entire copyrighted dances are protected under copyright law, not individual dance moves, which the “emotes” in Fortnite used a short segment of the dances.

The Issues with Choreographic Works and the U.S. Copyright Law Based on the court’s decision, the ability to protect choreographed works is complex and difficult. As mentioned earlier, choreographers have the challenge to document a dance onto a fixed and tangible medium, meet the requirements for registration from the U.S. Copyright Office, and to defend their works. The Fortnite case clearly indicates the difficulties choreographers have protecting their work. In addition, the lack of court decisions and briefs regarding choreographed works are limited, which indicates choreographers are not taking advantage of the 1976 copyright law to protect choreographed works. According to Krakower (2018), “Since the Copyright Act’s enactment, which included protection for choreography, few choreographers have asserted this hardwon legal right. Many choreographers seem to pass on taking legal action when faced with the daunting task of understanding how to make a claim, and then navigating through entrenched copyright law defenses.” Krakower (2018) noted that more can be done to protect these works. She stated, “its lack of definition and minimal case law leaves gaping questions for any future litigants. For better protection of choreography, Congress should tighten up the statute by providing a more concrete definition that does not require a narrative or plot element to ensure the greatest American choreographers and their progeny are adequately protected.” Krakower also addressed the need for further clarification on fair use in regards to choreographed works, which was the issue involving the Fortnite lawsuit. Further research is needed in order for librarians and publishers to collaborate and support our dance communities. This wonderful art form can be better promoted, preserved and archived once we are able to better understand, advocate, and navigate the legal issues surrounding the creative world of dance.

Reference List Choreography and Pantomime. (2021). Copyright registration of choreography and pantomime. U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 52. Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ52.pdf. continued on page 28

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Questions & Answers — Copyright Column Column Editor: Will Cross (Director of the Open Knowledge Center and Head of Information Policy, NC State University Libraries) <wmcross@ncsu.edu> ORCID: 0000-0003-1287-1156 QUESTION: A researcher asks, “What happened in the Access Copyright case?” ANSWER: York v. Access Copyright, 2021 SCC 32, has been one of the most closely watched Canadian copyright cases in higher education. Sometimes compared to the litigation around Georgia State University’s electronic reserve system and the Copyright Clearance Center’s blanket license in the United States (Cambridge University Press v. Becker, 863 F.Supp.2d 1190 (N.D. Ga. 11 May 2012)), the case dealt with core questions about the role of copyright exceptions in academic libraries supporting their educational mission. The case considered an attempt by Access Copyright, a collective society who licenses access to copyright materials, to enforce a tariff against York University in order to collect royalties for copying done as part of York’s educational mission. York argued that copies made for students enrolled in courses were permitted under fair dealing. A trial judge found the tariff enforceable against York but the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the tariff was voluntary and thus not enforceable. The Supreme Court of Canada agreed with the Court of Appeals and held that, since the tariff was not mandatory York had no obligation to pay. Further, because Access Copyright was not the rightsholder for most of the works at issue it had no standing to bring an infringement claim. York also argued that the copying was permitted under fair dealing in reliance on a set of institutional fair dealing Guidelines. While the Supreme Court declined to rule on the fair dealing issue, it did go out of its way to endorse the role of guidelines, writing that “There is no doubt...that guidelines are important to an educational institution’s ability to actualize fair dealing for its students.” The Court also explicitly endorsed “copyright’s public interest goals” and noted that “the public benefits of our system of copyright are much more than a fortunate by-product of private entitlement.” Instead, “increasing public access to and dissemination of artistic and intellectual works...is a primary goal of copyright.” As such, the Court concluded that “When teaching staff at a university make copies for their students’ education, they are not ‘hid[ing] behind the shield of the user’s allowable purpose

in order to engage in a separate purpose that tends to make the dealing unfair.’” Instead, they are fulfilling their mission to engage with copyright in a way that balances the rights of creators and of the public. As with the U.S. Georgia State decision and more recently, Google v. Oracle, this case is a powerful reaffirmation of the core public-serving character of copyright law and the special role that educational institutions play in copyright’s balance. As Professor Michael Geist wrote shortly after the decision was announced, “The decision removes any doubt that the Supreme Court remains strongly supportive of user’s rights in copyright and vindicates years of educational policy in shifting away from Access Copyright toward alternative means of ensuring compliance with copyright law.” QUESTION: A collections librarian asks, “What is going on with the recent Maryland eBooks bill?” ANSWER: Library struggles with licensing eBooks is nothing new. From disappearing copies of Orwell’s 1984 to titles that “self-destruct” after 26 checkouts, eBook access has often been confusing and fraught. Because libraries cannot rely on their rights under Section 109 to lend titles they have often been at the mercy of licenses that charge unreasonable rates for a single copy and that place burdensome limits on use by patrons. As a result, library groups from the American Library Association to Library Futures have advocated for sustainable models that support libraries and the public. One response to these challenges is a recent bill (SB432) passed in Maryland that requires any publisher offering to license “an electronic literary product” to consumers in the state to also offer to license the content to public libraries “on reasonable terms” that would enable library users to have access. The law does not define “reasonable terms” and publishers retain broad discretion to define how they license materials as long as they do not discriminate against public libraries. Publisher groups such as the American Association of Publishers (AAP) have objected to the bill and in particular, to state legislatures taking action in this area, which they argue should be left to federal lawmakers.

Legally Speaking continued from page 27 Gach, E. (2019). Fortnite lawsuits dropped: At least for now. Kotaku. Retrieved from https://kotaku.com/fortnite-dancelawsuits-dropped-at-least-for-now-1833208400. Hamandi, H. & Nelson, G. (2020). Dance-off ends: A (partial) resolution to Fortnite’s slurry of copyright lawsuits. A J Park. Retrieved from https://www.ajpark.com/insights/articles/ the-dance-off-ends-a-partial-resolution-to-fortnites-slurry-ofcopyright-lawsuits/. Kees, L. (2020). Copyright for choreography: When is copying a dance a copyright violation? Intellectual Property Watchdog. Retrieved from https://www.ipwatchdog.com/2020/11/19/ copyright-choreography-copying-dance-copyright-violation/ id=127455/.

28 Against the Grain / September 2021

Krakower, K. (2018). Finding the barre: Fitting the untried territory of choreography claims into existing copyright law. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal. 28(3). Kraut, A. (2016). Choreographing copyright: Race, gender, and intellectual property rights in American dance. Oxford University Press. Saucier, A. (2018). Dance and copyright: Legal “Steps” for performers. Center for Art Law. Retrieved from https:// itsartlaw.org/2018/10/30/dance-and-copyright-legal-steps-forperformers/.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

For libraries, this law offers one path for enabling their role as conduits for public access. As the AAP statement notes, it also highlights a strange intersection of public, primarily federal copyright law and private, often-state regulated contract law. Here, a state legislature is defining some of the terms for private agreements that exist in the shadow of federal and state copyright law. Whether this represents an inappropriate intervention by the state legislature that undercuts federal law or it represents an attempt to remedy private agreements that subvert copyright’s baseline balance may depend on your pre-existing assumptions about the purpose of copyright law itself. Either way, the Maryland eBook bill is not a silver bullet for the larger complexities of digital lending and information policy, but it may be a first step in recentering copyright’s public-serving role rather than leaving libraries at the mercy of private law agreements, as they too often have been for the past two decades. QUESTION: A graduate student asks, “What is legislative history and how does it impact copyright law?” ANSWER: Legislative history is a term that refers to the documents that are produced by Congress as a bill is introduced, studied, and debated. These legislative documents - including committee reports and debates as well as various versions of a bill - are often used by attorneys and courts in an attempt to determine Congressional intent or to clarify vague or ambiguous statutory language. The appeal of reliance on legislative history is obvious: referencing the discussions and materials that were involved in the passage of a law can potentially shed new light — or more cynically, produce support for an argument in favor of a particular reading of a law. On the other hand, legislative history can be limited and even misleading since it reflects the process of deliberation conducted by a large group of people with differing and often conflicting views. After all, the statutory language is the only thing that a majority of legislators have actually agreed on; everything else contained in the history simply documents the process used to reach that decision. For this reason, legislative history is generally considered persuasive authority, meaning that a court can consider it but is not bound by anything in the documents. In copyright, legislative history can be quite useful since so much of copyright law is governed by statutes. This is particularly true in areas that are rarely litigated such as library copying under Section 108 and educational use under Section 110. On the other hand, legislative history here contains the same pitfalls as in other areas of the law. For example, a practitioner seeking to understand whether the requirement that certain kinds of works copied under the Technology Education and Copyright Harmonization (TEACH) Act be “reasonable and limited portions” might turn to the legislative history of 17 USC 110(2). What they would find, however, is that there is language in the legislative history supporting both the idea that a “reasonable and limited portion” can never constitute an entire work and language that says exactly the opposite: that a “reasonable and limited portion” could, in some circumstances, include an entire work. Which language is more persuasive may ultimately come down to your policy preference on the issue.

Against the Grain / September 2021

Nevertheless, legislative history provides an important window into the process of creating the law and can be a useful tool for understanding and interpreting the law. One excellent resource for legislative history is the LIPA – Copyright Legislative Histories hosted at the University of New Hampshire: https:// ipmall.law.unh.edu/content/lipa-copyright-legislative-histories. QUESTION: A publisher asks, “I’ve been hearing stories about copyright lawsuits based on misuse of Creative Commons licensed work. What’s going on?” ANSWER: Copyright trolling — the practice of opportunistic threats of litigation based on copyright’s high statutory damages — has been a well-documented issue for years. In the past, however, trolls like Righthaven LLC generally purchased rights to existing all-rights-reserved works such as newspaper articles and photographs for the purpose of shaking down unsuspecting users. A recent variation documented by Professor Daxon Stewart, however, leverages openly licensed work to generate litigation. In his recent article “Rise of the Copyleft Trolls: When Photographers Sue After Creative Commons Licenses Go Awry” (see https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_ id=3844180) Stewart documents more than 30 cases “involving photographers suing after a Creative Commons license terminated.” These trolls have often targeted users who have used a Creative Commons-licensed photograph of dubious commercial value but failed to provide proper attribution as required by the license. Without appropriate attribution, users cannot rely on the open license and, the trolls argue, should therefore be liable for the large statutory damages provided under copyright law. The good news, as reported by Stewart, is that courts very often find that the users can still rely on fair use to support their use. Nevertheless, this opportunistic abuse of open licenses has raised concerns, including with the Creative Commons, which released a set of Statement of Principles Around License Enforcement for public comment in August. While the principles have limited legal weight, they are a strong statement from the organization that “enforcement of the licenses should be a way of making sure that creators are treated fairly, not a scheme to trap well-meaning reusers who would be willing to correct errors.” As of this writing, Creative Commons offers three core principles: 1. The primary goal of license enforcement should be getting reusers to comply with the license; 2. Legal action should be taken sparingly; and 3. Enforcement may involve financial recovery, but should not be a business model. There can be no disagreement that users of openly-licensed materials should honor the licenses they rely upon. The Creative Commons principles offer a path to assuring that fear of punitive and opportunistic enforcement will not be a deterrent for those seeking to use the materials in good faith. You can read the full set of principles and offer your own comments here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bunttwLFQmc4y-nhTX2w7hIX_5KgTZlgzlpNfwldWs/edit.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

The Scholarly Publishing Scene — For the Love of Books by Myer Kutz (President, Myer Kutz Associates, Inc.) <myerkutz@aol.com>

aturally, my first contact with Wiley was about a book. A potential book, actually. This was back in the mid-1960s. Ken Tong, a Wiley textbook sales rep, suggested to John Sununu, then a professor of mechanical engineering at Tufts, that he write a book on temperature control. Sununu knew Ed Hickey, my boss at the MIT Instrumentation Lab, where Hickey’s group was responsible for controlling temperatures on Apollo’s inertial guidance system. Sununu invited Hickey to join the book project, and Hickey, well aware of my desire to write (I’d published a technical paper under the Lab’s auspices) invited me. The two of them must have figured that I’d do most of the work. Anyway, that’s how I remember it all. Then Sununu decided, I surmised, that he would have bigger fish to fry than co-authoring a mere monograph. (He was that John Sununu — eventually associate dean of engineering at Tufts, three-term Republican governor of New Hampshire, George H.W. Bush’s chief of staff until a travel expense scandal brought him down, brawling co-host of CNN’s Crossfire, and principal of a consulting firm — so working on a monograph wouldn’t have satisfied his ambitions, although decades later he did write a book about Bush 41). Hickey dropped out of the project, as well. My hand was still raised, and Wiley signed me to write the book myself. Still in my twenties, I was over the moon. I don’t remember whatever difficulties I endured as I prepared the manuscript. I’m sure I could have used professorial advice from someone like John Sununu, who may be three months younger than I am, but had a PhD to my MS and was gaining teaching experience. I wasn’t about to ask for advice. I was a know-it-all twenty-something, possessed with what a friend, decades later and in a complementary way, called “easy arrogance,” so I remember that I never had much doubt about what the book’s contents should be, and I wrote fluidly without fear of putting down anything wrong. What’s stuck in my mind about that first publishing experience was the day I went to the Wiley offices, in a modern office building on Manhattan’s Third Avenue. The steel and glass box took up the entire block on the east side of the avenue from Thirty-ninth to Fortieth Street. It was a hot, humid day. Not realizing what I was in for, I dressed in an Oxford cloth shirt, knotted tie, and poplin suit. I was staying with friends in Brooklyn, and after a walk to the subway, a ride without air-conditioning in a crowded car, and a walk from the subway, I was drenched in sweat. But when I entered Wiley’s cool, comfortable lobby, my discomfort left me, for what I encountered were shelves filled with the publisher’s books. In my mind’s eye now, I see myself walking past the shelves, looking at book titles and author names, pulling a volume out at random to examine it more closely, and thinking that soon my book would join these others. Not the largest of ambitions, but more than half a century later, I can recognize it as my own. “Temperature Control” didn’t break any sales records, but it didn’t embarrass me either. I remember that when I met on that summer day with Bea Shube, one of my editors, she sized me up and said that there were other, non-technical books that I would rather write. A few years later, when I moved to New York from Cambridge, I became interested in the Rockefeller family and decided to write a book about them. My then wife, who worked for a paperback publisher, knew a guy who knew a literary agent. I wrote a few pages of a first chapter and sent

30 Against the Grain / September 2021

them to him. He called and said that he’d gotten bogged down on page three. I cut out pages three through nine and sent the rest back to him. He called again and said that he could get me a contract, which he did, with Simon & Schuster. “Rockefeller Power” was enough of a minor success that there was a Spanish edition, with photographs, a paperback edition, and, when Nelson Rockefeller was about to become Gerald Ford’s vice president, I wrote an op-ed about him and his money in New York Newsday. When CBS ran a program on the Rockefellers, the Today Show counterprogrammed with Barbara Walters interviewing me. My fifteen minutes of fame. After a year spent writing six paperback books three bios and three novels (Want to write a paperback detective novel in three weeks? Type ten pages a day for twenty-one straight days about a character with your own disposition et voila!) — out of the blue, in the summer of 1976, Wiley beckoned with a job as an acquisitions editor for professional and reference books in mechanical and industrial engineering. The basic performance goals were sign twenty contracts, put twenty manuscripts into production, and publish twenty titles. Piece of cake. Two successors later, I noted that the books I signed and published were still the core of that publishing program. I particularly enjoyed publishing books at the edges of the program: David Winter’s Biomechanics of Human Motion and Products Liability, by Al Weinstein, Henry Piehler, and Aaron Twerski, were two of my favorites. I should mention that my budget for travel and entertainment was as much as half my salary. I got to a lot of university campuses, roamed around a lot of engineering departments, and dropped in unannounced whenever I found a faculty member in his office (men in those days). I’d ask if there were any subjects where books were needed. One thing would lead to another and Wiley would be mailing a contract to an author. My visits didn’t always result in books, but I did meet many interesting people. At that time, journals were sequestered in a little fiefdom (Wiley-Blackwell publishes around a hundred times as many journals as Wiley did back then) presided over by Allan Wittman, a man fastidious in business, who favored sport jackets so loud, however, that his gruff, dour boss, Mike Harris, a man I revered, looked Allan over one day and told him, “I wouldn’t bury my dog in that jacket.” Not a nice thing to say about any dog, it seems to me, but those jackets were really something. Ever on the lookout for new opportunities, I proposed a journal on failure analysis. (Why a bridge fell down — that sort of thing.) Nobody wanted to admit that their design was a failure or that their calculations were flawed, I was told. I should have known better. Not too many years earlier, I’d proposed a book to Simon & Schuster to be called “Unnatural Disasters.” The proposal was rejected by one reviewer who wrote that reading just a list of man-made catastrophes, never mind any details about any of them, had ruined his breakfast. Of course, such topics and books are commonplace now. Times change. Sometime in the early 1980s, Mike Harris brought in Dick Zeldin, a McGraw-Hill veteran, to start a serious program in engineering handbooks. Thurman Poston, a textbook editor, joined him. Wiley had a venerable, but dated, mechanical engineers’ handbook — Kent’s. When Zeldin and Poston approached me, I thought they wanted an updated version of Kent’s. Instead, they signed me to edit an entirely new handbook under my own name.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

One major departure from old fashioned handbooks that I insisted on was to jettison the lengthy mathematical tables that were ubiquitous in such reference works. I reasoned that engineers owned calculators that could produce desired mathematical values quickly and easily. Pages with the tables could be put to better use. The Mechanical Engineers’ Handbook, now in four volumes, is in its fourth edition. Since the 1980s I’ve edited numerous handbooks in other engineering disciples — biomedical, transportation, farm and food machinery, environmentally conscious topics, etc. — for McGraw-Hill and Elsevier, in addition to Wiley. My last assignment at Wiley was as the head of scientific and technical publishing, including books and journals. When I took over in 1985, I knew that professional and reference book sales, on a per-title basis, were declining dramatically. So while it was important to maintain traditional scientific and technical book and journal publishing, I focused attention on new subscription-based services. The flagship was Protocols in Molecular Biology, published first as an updating loose-leaf service, then on CD-ROM. Other Protocols services followed. We even did some directory publishing, where manufacturers in a particular industry would pay premium prices to have technical details of their products included in a volume that would be given away to users of those products. A curious case of Open Access, no? Just kidding. For a while, after I started a publishing consultancy, I gave talks touting the premise that scientific and technical publishers were selling services, not products. I still wonder if I reached anyone. In partnership with a market research whiz, Carol Gold,

I published two books in the mid-1990s — multi-client market research studies (each client pays a hefty fee to get a copy of the study). They were The Changing Landscape for College Publishing and The Developing Worlds of Personalized Information. We printed and bound the hefty books on Xerox DocuTech equipment at the eleventh hour. About ten years ago, after giving up hopes of finding a publisher, I self-published a novel, In the Grip. Long gone were the days when I had an easy time finding a publisher for anything but my engineering handbooks. One thing you learn if you hang around long enough is that, for nearly all of us, the world moves on. But even with all the intense focus on journals and journal articles, professional and scholarly presses continue to publish books, sometimes in print, sometimes in electronic form. As a PROSE Awards judge, I continue to see many fine titles from both commercial and not-for-profit publishers. It’s evident that a great deal of time and money goes into making those books. I continue to find book advertisements from university presses in The New York Review of Books and The London Review of Books. I’ve seen that university presses are banding together to try to sell academic libraries subscription plans for electronic versions of monographs, which nowadays can have print runs in the low hundreds. Forty or fifty years ago, Wiley had such library plans for its professional and reference titles, especially series in chemistry and mathematics and statistics. That’s the other thing: if you hang around long enough, you might see a good idea come around again.

Table of Contents for Against the Grain Online Articles on Charleston Hub — www.charleston-hub.com Don’s Conference Notes Charting a New Course: The 43rd SSP Annual Meeting by Donald T. Hawkins — see https://www.charleston-hub. com/2021/06/dons-conference-notes-charting-a-new-course-the43rd-ssp-annual-meeting/

ATG Interviews Emre Hasan Akbayrak (Atilim University) by Matthew Ismail — see https://www.charleston-hub.com/2021/08/atg-interviewsemre-hasan-akbayrak-director-kadriye-zaim-library-atilimuniversity/

The Innovator’s Saga An Interview with Jake Zarnegar (Hum) by Darrell W. Gunter — see https://www.charleston-hub.com/2021/09/the-innovatorssaga-an-interview-with-jake-zarnegar/

Op Ed — “If You Ask Me” Censorship from the Left: Changing Perspectives on Intellectual Freedom by Robert Holley — see https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/08/if-you-ask-me-censorship-from-theleft-changing-perspectives-on-intellectual-freedom/

Wandering the Web Information available on Substance Abuse Disorders by Carol Watwood, MLS, MPH (Western Kentucky University Libraries). Column Editor: Jack Montgomery (Georgia Southern University Libraries) — see https://www.charleston-hub.com/2021/09/wanderingthe-web-information-available-on-substance-abuse-disorders/

32 Against the Grain / September 2021

Amazon’s Book Publishing Juggernaut Part 1- Amazon Expands Their Operations & Market Research by Nancy K. Herther — see https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/07/amazons-book-publishingjuggernaut-part-1-amazon-expands-their-operationsmarket-research/ Part 2- Perspectives From Successful APub Authors: Jeff Deaver by Nancy K. Herther — see https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/07/amazons-book-publishingjuggernaut-part-2-perspectives-from-successful-apubauthors-jeff-deaver/ Part 3- Perspectives From Award-Winning Writer Robert Dugoni by Nancy K. Herther — see https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/07/amazons-book-publishingjuggernaut-part-3-perspectives-from-award-winningwriter-robert-dugoni/ Part 4- Catherine Ryan Hyde Takes Her Readers on Journeys Across the Globe and Inside the Lives of Ordinary People by Nancy K. Herther — see https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/07/amazons-book-publishingjuggernaut-part-4-catherine-ryan-hyde-takes-her-readerson-journeys-across-the-globe-and-inside-the-lives-ofordinary-people/ Part 5- Amazon Opens New Opportunities For Writers, Readers and The Future Of Publishing by Nancy K. Herther — see https://www.charleston-hub.com/2021/08/ amazons-book-publishing-juggernaut-part-5-amazonopens-new-opportunities-for-writers-readers-and-thefuture-of-publishing/

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Stop, Look, Listen — New Wilderness in Orderly Markets Academic Publishing in Times of APCs and Transformative Deals Column Editor: Dr. Sven Fund (Managing Director, Knowledge Unlatched GmbH, Maximiliankorso 66, 13465 Berlin, Germany) <sven@knowledgeunlatched.org>

cademic publishing is an orderly market — the big players dominate the most profitable markets, while there is still enough room for medium-sized and small providers to make a living. Many publishers have survived the first two decades of digitization so well, although the need for investment has grown significantly, and the economic reserves have shrunk for many. The development of business models for the new digital reality, on the other hand, has remained manageable. In this situation, libraries and publishers are challenged to integrate Open Access (OA) into their work processes — an organizational challenge from various perspectives that is difficult to solve by just a few players.

central role in the more efficient organization of OA. Not just since the advent of Project DEAL in Germany and comparable deals around the globe, the players involved are striving to make deals that enable OA without requiring the same informedness from scientists as well as from librarians.

Library Acquisition Behavior: Addictive Models

The inherently understandable need for simplification puts the structures of scholarly publishing under a burning glass: it’s a game of big with big. A quick survey of transformative agreements by Dufour et al. demonstrates this (see https://halshs. archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-03203560). Scholarly institutions first sign agreements that show high publication and usage volumes. The often-vaunted library diversity largely falls by the wayside, even with the most recent publishing models. Large publishers with broad portfolios are better able to manage the change in business model. This is all the more surprising since universities under considerable cost pressure — such as in the wake of the COVID pandemic and uncertain student numbers in, for example, the United States or the United Kingdom — have begun to dismantle the Big Deal and prefer to subscribe to journals individually (with the help of solutions such as Unsub.org).

OA represents a significant shift in the economic decision-making process of academic institutions. This mainly affects libraries, which in the past were not able to make decisions autonomously from scientific committees but were exposed to their influences in an organized form with relatively low decision frequency. Plans for collection development were discussed and developed in detail and implemented over several years. The offer of big deals for journals and eBooks by publishers, especially larger ones, encouraged this acquisition behavior — in libraries, acquisition and cataloging departments could be significantly thinned out as a result. The result is a relatively high level of dependence on a very efficient business model, which customers usually do not appreciate. On the other hand, publishers are traditionally accustomed in their processes to organizing highly fragmented target groups and content qualities through peer review, which is supported by academics and handled with the help of relatively efficient systems. In this way, they can even cope with high rejection rates of submitted papers.

Scientists as New Decision-makers While publishers can handle and scale the high volume of individual customer relationships quite well, OA poses a new challenge for libraries: instead of being made at the level of a journal subscription, purchasing decisions are now often made at the level of articles. What’s more, this decision-making process is not carried out by professionals in information retrieval but in the majority by laypersons in this activity. Classics scholars, biologists, Germanists, and representatives of all other disciplines have to make decisions about economics and licensing conditions, usually without being adequately trained and informed to do so. The result: a massive need for information, which many libraries have met in recent years by setting up OA departments. However, Knowledge Unlatched’s cursory surveys reveal that numerous scientists are overwhelmed by the task of selecting the right form of publication for them, while they practically universally welcome OA as a concept and would like to implement it in their work.

Transformative Deals: The Solution to OA’s Structural Problems? It is hardly surprising that, despite all reservations, the experience of the Big Deal in acquiring content quickly played a

Against the Grain / September 2021

Structure and Competition It is foreseeable that the Big Deal problems will arise in the same way as with traditional media acquisition, especially as read-only access and the ability to publish OA are combined. The Big Deal is getting even bigger.

Lack of Intermediaries Digitization in scholarly publishing is primarily a story of disintermediation: journal agents and specialized booksellers have been systematically cut out of the content acquisition process of big houses over the last two decades. They have been left with complicated and small-scale tasks and negative economic consequences. The advantages for publishers with their own sales teams are obvious, resulting in increased profits and better customer contact. To avoid misunderstandings: Intermediaries are not uninvolved in this development; too often in the past, they had failed to show or develop their share of value creation and, where this was not present, to reduce their costs accordingly. The consequences for libraries and the market as a whole have been severe: little has remained of the political agenda of OA of the early years, according to which the oligopoly of the big players was to be broken in the interest of more reasonable prices and maximum openness of research content. While the Budapest Declaration of 2002 called for a significant reduction in costs, many of the current contract agreements give the lie to such a development: “(...) experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, li-

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

braries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.”

Ways Out of the Impasse But beyond political, perhaps even illusory goals, OA is confronted above all with real operational problems. Libraries today face a multitude of legal peculiarities, requirements, and, above all, publisher-specific workflows. While a few large publishers can offer their customers dashboards that more or less summarize activities for that one service provider, the vast majority provide communication about publication activity in the form of emails and Excel lists. The entire administrative burden is transferred to scientists and libraries. Research-intensive institutions in particular report a sharp increase in administrative workload and a high degree of non-transparency. Large institutions have often had to create several staff positions for this purpose and can only account for the OA activities of their institution with considerable additional effort. Convenient systems for handling standard processes and reporting, which have long been the norm in other areas of library activity, are lacking.

cessing models at their institution that they were unable to act appropriately in decision-making situations. For example, when it came to the question of which journal by which publisher should be responsible for funding publication fees, the answer was unclear. Librarians showed a remarkable degree of agreement in their requirements, regardless of the institution’s size, their specific subject orientation, or their geographic origin. For example, the solution should be usable across publishers, media types, and contract types and enable users to trigger and monitor decision-making processes without lengthy training. In addition to process control, librarians also wanted to be able to standardize and simplify monetary processing. Finally, the interviewees wanted maximum integration with existing information flows, both with internal systems and external systems, such as administrative systems like Alma. Interoperability quickly emerged as a key factor.

Oable as a Specialized OA Solution

Against this background, Knowledge Unlatched (KU) was already contacted in 2019 by several libraries and scientific publishers from the USA, Great Britain, and Germany with inquiries whether a central software for handling OA could be implemented.

To avoid expensive mistakes, a development process was agreed upon with five participating libraries, which compared the state of development implementation against the requirements in bi-weekly iterations. Within about six months, a solution was programmed currently in daily use at six institutions worldwide. Another five libraries (and a consortium) are testing Oable under live conditions. In close cooperation with publishers and initiatives in the library sector — e.g., OpenAPC/OpenBPC — it was possible to create an offering for a vital requirement in the scaling of OA.

From Cockpit to Software Solution

Outlook

The concrete response to these requests was preceded by an extensive project to understand the requirements better. It quickly became clear that the development process would only make sense in close consultation with librarians. The prerequisites and requirements of publishers and, above all, scientists also had to be understood. In addition, the solution had to be usable worldwide and not become a special development for specific institutions.

Without question, the participation of as many publishers and libraries as possible is of central importance in implementing a common OA marketplace. Although publishers often point to their openness to innovation, they have shown little interest in change in recent years unless they could control it within their sphere of influence. The collaboration around Oable, on the other hand, is encouraging: with an entry-level solution that is not technically complex, both small and large publishers can be integrated quickly. The driver of the decision here is the library.

After about 50 interviews with experts, a list of demands emerged that in some areas impressively underscored the structural problems for the broad implementation of OA. In about 50% of the interviews, scientists, in particular, stated that they were so inadequately informed about OA funding options and pro-

OA will only continue to develop dynamically if technical barriers and a high degree of intransparency disappear from the cooperation between publishers and libraries. Oable contributes to promoting the emergence of processes that create decision-making security across organizational boundaries, contractual relationships, and media types and that exploit the potential of digitization much better than partial processes characterized by media discontinuities.

Reader’s Roundup continued from page 24 computer programming. Chapters five, six and seven detail the specific ways to collect data including clustering and social network analysis, predictions and forecasts and text analysis and mining. While this book is useful, it can make for challenging reading if you are not versed in statistics or coding. Many of the examples in the book reference statistical formulas and models and a background in these areas seem fundamental to really understanding data science. In addition, if you are looking for a

34 Against the Grain / September 2021

book that provides suggestions for specific data to collect in the library profession, this is not the book for that purpose. Although the author uses some illustrative library examples in the text, the book is not concerned with providing examples of data to collect rather it is focused on the ways to collect. ATG Reviewer Rating: I need this available somewhere in my shared network. (I probably do not need this book, but it would be nice to get it within three to five days via my network catalog.)

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Don’s Conference Notes Column Editor: Donald T. Hawkins (Freelance Editor and Conference Blogger) <dthawkins@verizon.net> Column Editor’s Note: Because of space limitations, the full text of my conference notes will now be available online in the issues of Against the Grain on Charleston Hub at https://www. charleston-hub.com, and only brief summaries, with links to the full reports, will appear in Against the Grain print issues. — DTH

Forecasting Changes on the Horizon of Scholarly Communication: A Charleston Hub Trendspotting Seminar The Charleston Hub Trendspotting Initiative was started by Katina Strauch about five years ago. The current seminar, a pre-conference event of this year’s Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) annual conference, occurred on May 18, 2021. Leah Hinds, Executive Director of the Charleston Conference introduced it and welcomed the attendees. The seminar was directed by Lisa Hinchliffe, Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Library. It attracted about 20 attendees. According to its announcement in the SSP conference program, “The Charleston Hub Trendspotting Initiative is a community-engaged process for collaboratively exploring social, policy, economic, technology, and educational trends and forecasting their impacts on scholarly communication, publishing, and academic libraries.” Jennifer Frederick and Christine Wolff-Eisenberg, Survey Analysts at Ithaka S+R, presented some findings and factors for futures thinking from Ithaka’s 2020 US Library Survey. The vision, strategies, and challenges of over 600 leaders of academic libraries were surveyed. Specific questions included management of the COVID-19 pandemic and equity, diversity, and inclusion policies. The COVID pandemic has affected much of society. In libraries it accelerated the investment in digital resources and services. About 80% of the survey respondents anticipated that this trend will continue after the end of the pandemic. The transition back to in-person teaching is not likely have a large impact on library services. Most libraries have experienced budget cuts in the past year, and recovery from them is uncertain. Personnel cuts have mostly affected those who work in physical library spaces. Digital materials will continue to be purchased, and spending on streaming media is predicted to surpass that for printed books and journals.

cannot purchase a product at the same price as last year, they will drop it. What are publishers doing to respond to cuts? They are working on their relationships, especially with societies. More than ever, relationships will matter at renewal time. Budget cuts also impacted publishers. There is a lot of empathy and collaboration to work together. Without publisher tools to facilitate diversification of collections automatically and efficiently, most institutions will not make significant progress in this area. How have users been struggling and engaging with library materials? Most libraries are completely closed to the public. Some have a pickup service. There are many questions at the beginning and end of semesters. Many people have struggled with campus VPNs and using their library accounts. They have trouble using the Hathi Trust because the platform is complex and hard to use. They also do not understand copyright and its limitations. E-books are generally challenging because every platform is different. Many users do not like reading online and want to be able to download books. They still want print materials and appreciate the assistance of librarians. What is the social environment of diversity, equity, and inclusion? How do we care for the community? Examine the metadata are you collecting about people. Many subject access terms are harmful (“illegal aliens”, etc.). Caring for a community means working with them. How will you use your future position as a librarian? Diversity, equity, and inclusion are calls to reorient our work. Think critically about what you do in your work and what limits it. Library programs are becoming more critical, so the call for social justice will be growing. What are the issues around peer review, etc.? Publishers are heavily involved and have their own staff. Some of our language must change and be tailored to researchers. We are not a homogeneous community, and publishers are becoming awakened to this.

A panel discussion followed; panelists were Nancy Kirkpatrick, Executive Director and CEO, OhioNET; Lori Carlin, Chief Commercial Officer, Delta Think; Aaisha Haykal, Avery Research Center for African American History and Culture, College of Charleston; and Sarah Appedu, M.S. LIS Student, UIUC.

Lisa Hinchliffe concluded the seminar with a presentation entitled “Peering Into the Future to Make Decisions Today.” She noted that we cannot predict the future, but we must deal with it; today’s decisions create tomorrow’s futures. Futures thinking offers ways of helping to shape the future, stimulates strategic Lisa Hinchliffe dialog, and strengthens leadership. An ARL report (see https://www.arl. org/resources/the-arl-2030-scenarios-a-users-guide-for-researchlibraries/) issued in 2010 contains 26 scenarios of what the future might look like. For example:

Libraries are experiencing a lot of budget cuts. How are they interacting with publishers?

• The research enterprise could become more aggregated or more diffuse.

They are doing many things they have always done, but are looking at e-resources closely. Some are saying that if they

• We will struggle to balance the mission and value of our libraries with the research enterprise of our institution.

Many libraries are planning for a fall start to in-person classes. The next year will be very significant in determining how well virtual classes will continue to exist. As e-readers have become more widespread, the demand for printed materials has decreased.

Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

• Working cooperatively is a driving activity for publishers and libraries. • Local collections and expertise will become increasingly valuable. • Technology will be ubiquitous. • A new financial model is necessary. The report envisions that by 2033 research libraries will have shifted from being knowledge service providers to become collaborative partners in a rich and diverse learning and research ecosystem. A “futures wheel” can be used to explore implications of a change by brainstorming consequences of actions and the consequences of the consequences. It is useful to apply this process to current events in our industry. A similar approach to futures thinking extends the futures wheel with speculations by imagining that if something happened, how researchers or students would react. For example, if Google Scholar ceased to exist, Federal funding agencies in the US implemented the Plan S guidelines, a major publisher was sold to a Chinese company, library memberships were available only to individuals who paid a fee, or everyone had a virtual intelligent assistant, what would this mean for libraries, researchers, publishers, and students? Our goal is to develop a desired future. Sometimes a look back is useful: • What would you have predicted a decade ago? • What was prominent that disappeared? • What services did we provide that we do not offer any more? 2020 showed us that we cannot predict the future, but we can think about what might be possible. For further information, see Lisa’s article (Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe (2020), The Futures of Scholarly Communications: Techniques and Tools for Futures Thinking, The Serials Librarian, 78:1-4, 28-33) available at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/ 10.1080/0361526X.2020.1739473.

Charting a New Course: The 43rd SSP Annual Meeting The 43rd Annual Meeting of the Society for Scholarly Publishing (SSP), held on May 24-27, 2021, was SSP’s first virtual meeting. It attracted a global audience of 770 attendees which exceeded all expectations. In her opening keynote, “How to Amplify Knowledge in a World of Information,” Dr. Laura Helmuth, Editor-in-Chief, Scientific American, presented an interesting look at issues with misinformation and how journalists meet it. Because of the enormous physical and psychological effects of the COVID pandemic, Scientific American is expanding its coverage into why science matters. Scientists must engage more with the public and explain what they do. We are in the most collaborative time in the history of science.

Educational Sessions: • The Glass Ceiling You Don’t Know About: Removing Barriers For People With Disabilities at Work • COVID-19 Changes in Scholarly Communication: What Pandemic Changes will Result in Permanent Changes? • Impact of COVID Lockdown Measures on Women Academics

36 Against the Grain / September 2021

• Mythbusting Preprints in a Pandemic • Walking the Rocky Road from Policy to Compliance • Lessons and Silver Linings in Research Dissemination: Should COVID-19 Provide a Push Toward Lasting Change? • A Cross-Industry Discussion on Retracted Research: Connecting the Dots for Shared Responsibility • AI and Library Discovery

Industry Breakout Sessions: • Scholarly publishing now: What’s hot, what’s not, and why you should care • Connecting Scholarly Communities: How the American Marketing Association (and others) Reinvented Their Conferences Online • Improving Speed and Quality in Journal Production Using Intelligent Editorial Workflows • How Corporations Use Research Output: What you Should Know and Why • What Works? Can Publishers Increase Citations for Their Journals?

Keynote — Fighting Racial Inequity in the Publishing Industry: Closing the Intention-Behavior Gap Dr. Joseph Williams noted that race is a central mechanism in which inequity exists, and racial equity means to guarantee of equal treatment of people of color. We must promote equity because it is the right thing to do. It has a cost; are we willing to pay it? We need to reallocate resources and take an anti-racism approach. The intention-behavior gap describes the failure to translate intentions into actions. Personal and professional obstacles exist; the scholarly publishing community has taken an important first step in trying to address these issues by preparing an anti-racist toolkit.

Closing Plenary: The Scholarly Kitchen Live. What’s Next for an Equitable and Sustainable Future? A survey of readers of The Scholarly Kitchen (TSK) was followed by a panel discussion with several of the TSK “chefs.” Many readers feel that TSK is relevant to their professional needs. TSK is seen as favoring open access, and readers like the increasing number of articles authored by guest authors.

Comments from the “chefs”: • We can and should do better to provide opportunities for all researchers and treat them with dignity. People are recognizing the issues, which is encouraging. The APC approach does not work for everyone. • Publishing models move us toward a more equitable future. 2020 showed us how to make the impossible possible. We must shift our resources toward a more equitable space. • We need to sustain scholarly publishing and make content accessible. Some journals are expanding their horizons. Virtual and hybrid conferences are available to a new global community. Have we seen an increase not only as attendees but also as content promoters? • Organizers are now looking for speakers from other countries which should continue after the pandemic is continued on page 38

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

And They Were There — Reports of Meetings 2020 Charleston Conference Column Editors: Ramune K. Kubilius (Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine) <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> and Sever Bordeianu (Head, Print Resources Section, University Libraries, MSC05 3020, 1 University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131-0001; Phone: 505-277-2645; Fax: 505-277-9813) <sbordeia@unm.edu> Column Editor’s Note: Thanks to the Charleston Conference attendees who agreed to write brief reports that highlight and spotlight their 2020 Charleston Conference experience. Out of necessity, the conference moved from on-site to virtual, and all registrants were given the opportunity to view recordings, to re-visit sessions they saw “live,” or to visit sessions they missed. Without a doubt, with 173 total choices, there were more Charleston Conference sessions than there were volunteer reporters for Against the Grain, so the coverage is just a snapshot. For the 2020 conference, reporters were invited to share what drew them to various themes and sessions, or what they learned, rather than report on individual sessions as they’ve done for “And They Were There” reports in past years when conferences were on-site. There are many ways to learn more about the 2020 conference. Some presenters posted their slides and handouts in the online conference schedule. Please visit the conference site, https://www.charleston-hub.com/the-charleston-conference/, and link to selected videos, interviews, as well as to blog reports written by Charleston Conference blogger, Donald Hawkins, https://www.charleston-hub.com/category/blogs/chsconfnotes/. The 2020 Charleston Conference Proceedings will be published in 2021, in a new partnership with University of Michigan Press: https://www.press.umich.edu/. — RKK

My five favorite concurrent sessions/presentations from the 2020 virtual Charleston Conference (and why) Reported by Cara Mia Calabrese (Acquisitions & Access Librarian, Miami University) <calabrcm@miamioh.edu> The Swift Shift to E: Acquisitions Complexities during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic Acquisitions and Electronic Resources have been working to sustain access, plan for budget cuts, and activate free resources, so there hasn’t been much time to reach out to colleagues to see how they were adapting to the rapid changes at their institutions. This session was able to give that check in. Librarians discussed how they approached this sudden shift. I really appreciated the vendor’s insight and their mention of the trends they had seen. I thought this session was as advertised, but had expected some more talk about evaluating the many resources vendors made available. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/ virtual/rkZcgwjNfTYisGrkY What would it really take to achieve a full OA transition? An “open” take from a publisher, librarians, and a funder This was one of my most anticipated sessions of the conference and it lived up to my expectations. The session had a well-rounded panel with varied experiences and knowledge. The panel touched on some changes in models and culture that need to shift in order for OA to truly be accessible to researchers.

Against the Grain / September 2021

The UNC-Chapel Hill pilot with Sage gave a positive example of how a library could directly help get research published OA and shined light on how regular assessment and communication play a role in success. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/ meetings/virtual/nhZJcJwoNBLH8Kzj7 Diving In ERM First: Re-thinking Electronic Resources and Print Materials Management With FOLIO This presentation was accurately described by its abstract. The presentation gave a look at how two libraries are making use of what FOLIO’s ERM offers and what additional tools they found useful. Missouri State leveraged the migration to overhaul their existing processes for a better outcome. Both libraries indicated that if they had to migrate again, they would. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/virtual/ jhryJb9QzpKgknyMW Close EnCOUNTERs of the 5th Kind Besides having a catchy title, this session was true to its abstract. It covers University of Florida’s track to a better usage system, from committee start to info gathering to workflow and final product. Communication was stressed as an important piece to make sure you are creating something that will be beneficial to its intended users. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable. co/meetings/virtual/8PQz9frgGAQLXSnGe Zombies! (just kidding, it’s e-resources) This was a good entry level introduction to ER Librarianship. Joe Marciniak covered duties related to ERs in an accessible way. He also gave examples of what positions might look like along with how to read in between job description lines and what questions to ask. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/ meetings/virtual/XW2BDxuf85cPPqg2M

My Five favorite concurrent sessions from the 2020 virtual Charleston Conference (and why) / My Five Big Takeaways from the 2020 virtual Charleston Conference Reported by Jenifer Holman (Hope College) <holman@hope.edu> The 2020 Charleston Conference presentations posed big questions and shared best practices. These presentations each had important takeaways for me as an electronic resources librarian. Change is Constant: Managing and Evolving Acquisitions Environment I was impressed with how the presenters — Jennifer Culley, Cory Tucker, and Annette Day (University of Nevada Las Vegas) — navigated a major reorganization of UNLV’s acquisitions department. Faced with retirements, personnel shortages, and

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

an impending systems migration, the authors redoubled efforts at building core skills among staff as well as managers, a strategy that enabled them to nimbly move staff into roles best suited to each individual. I was also heartened to learn about the priority given to staff communication, even with most working remotely. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/virtual/ nz8u6RNrpS5eChi7t A New Library Mindset: Long-Term Consequences of Library Collections at Times of Pandemic Julia Gelfand (UCI) and Tony Lin (Irvine Valley College) led a lively discussion about pandemic-related policy changes. Many attendees have seen an accelerated shift to electronic, a necessity as libraries pivot to support remote learning. With hybrid learning here to stay, supporting both print and electronic resources with ever-shrinking budgets will continue to be a pain point for many libraries. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/ meetings/virtual/rSfcaDaZZLaHh2zgz Latin American Collections in the Time of COVID-19: Rethinking Collection Development, Diversity, and Equity The presenters — Manuel Ostos (The Pennsylvania State University), Paloma Celis Carbajal (New York Public Library), Luis Gonzalez (Indiana University), Patricia Figueroa (Brown University) — cautioned that for scholars in disciplines that rely heavily on print (particularly Global and Latin American Studies), their long-term research needs may not be met if print acquisitions slow. Ostos highlighted that research in these areas is mainly disseminated in print. Librarians should note a recent resolution by SALALM (https://salalm.org/salalmresolution-collection-development-in-the-time-of-covid-19/) and an ACRL statement (https://acrl.ala.org/acrlinsider/ archives/20355) that further caution against de-investment in these areas. We must continue collecting print resources from the Global South to further decolonize our collections. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/virtual/ qPDjFAGHqweEgpPD2

Close EnCOUNTERs of the 5th Kind The University of Florida’s Electronic Resources Unit did not let the pandemic deter them as they adjusted their workflows to COUNTER Code of Practice (COP) 5, in this session presented by Erin Gallagher, Doug Kiker, Pauline Bickford-Duane, and Beth Zavoyski (University of Florida). The presenters walked attendees through their process, beginning with an overview of the spreadsheets they use to capture manually-gathered use statistics. After watching the COUNTER Foundation Class videos (https://www.projectcounter. org/counter-foundation-classes/), their remotely-working team re-imagined their workflows. They adopted these COP5 metrics: total item requests (TR_J1); total item requests (full-text databases) or total item investigations (non-full-text databases) (TR_D1); and unique title requests (TR_B1). COP5 is a huge change; the presenters gave an excellent overview of new best practices. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/ virtual/8PQz9frgGAQLXSnGe Zombies! (just kidding, it’s e-resources) Lastly, when I saw the session title, I was hooked. Joe Marciniak (Princeton University), provided solid advice for those aspiring to electronic resources work. He organized his talk around the e-resources lifecycle, offering suggestions for parsing job ads and fielding interview questions. He highlighted that e-resources responsibilities often cross departments, requiring excellent people skills. This session is a must see for anyone interested in learning more about the breadth of e-resources work. https://2020charlestonconference.pathable.co/meetings/ virtual/XW2BDxuf85cPPqg2M. That’s all the reports we have room for in this issue. Watch for more reports from the 2020 Charleston Conference in upcoming print issues of Against the Grain. Presentation materials (PowerPoint slides, handouts, etc.) and recordings of most sessions are available to Conference Attendees on the Charleston Conference event site at https://2020charlestonconference. pathable.co/. Or visit the Charleston Hub at https://www. charleston-hub.com/the-charleston-conference/. — KS

Don’s Conference Notes continued from page 36 over. Hybrid meetings are becoming more equitable. People have more access to conferences now, but we must think about what they will look like. • Many staff members are anxious to get back into the office; others are exhausted. The concept of the home office is not sustainable; people will go into their offices regularly but not every day. Offices are spaces for collaboration; it will take time to figure out how to make hybrid arrangements work. • Will we have more international travel for business deals, etc.? We have learned that things like editorial board meetings do not work well at conferences, but they work very well in a virtual environment.

Annual Business Meeting TSK has 14,500 subscribers. The future of SSP is bright and its finances are strong. The 2021-22 President of SSP will be Alice Meadows, Director of Community Engagement at NISO.

38 Against the Grain / September 2021

The 44th SSP Annual Meeting is planned to be at the Sheraton Chicago Hotel & Towers on June 1-3, 2022. Read the full report at https://www.charleston-hub. com/2021/06/dons-conference-notes-charting-a-new-coursethe-43rd-ssp-annual-meeting/.

Donald T. Hawkins is an information industry freelance writer based in Pennsylvania. In addition to blogging and writing about conferences for Against the Grain, he blogs the Computers in Libraries and Internet Librarian conferences for Information Today, Inc. (ITI) and maintains the Conference Calendar on the ITI Website (http://www.infotoday.com/calendar.asp). He is the Editor of Personal Archiving: Preserving Our Digital Heritage, (Information Today, 2013) and Co-Editor of Public Knowledge: Access and Benefits (Information Today, 2016). He holds a Ph.D. degree from the University of California, Berkeley and has worked in the online information industry for over 50 years.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Learning Belongs in the Library — An Interview with BibliU and Kanopy An E-textbook and Streaming Video Platform Discussion About Access Innovation for Learning Content Through the Library Column Editor: David Parker (Publisher and Consultant; Phone: 201-673-8784) <david@parkerthepublisher.com>

he pandemic massively accelerated online education. But hybrid and online courses have been part of the higher education landscape for several decades. In fact, in 2012, 69% of chief academic leaders indicated online education was core to their long-term strategy and 6.7 million students were enrolled in an online course in the United States.1 But something fundamentally new happened with the pandemic, and that is the place of the library and librarians in online course design. Librarians moved from peripheral to pivotal as faculty with no online course ready-to-go sought support across the university. eBook and streaming video platforms have been a staple of library collection development and patron services for more than two decades. The surge in demand, as campuses across the globe shut down physical attendance, pushed streaming video and eBooks to the top of materials required and delivered by the library. In this month’s column I will focus on two platforms that accelerated innovation in library access models in response to the pandemic: BibliU, an etextbook platform and Kanopy, a streaming video platform. Books and video have followed a similar evolution in terms of institutional access models in the move from physical to digital. The trajectory of access models as print moved to eBook and CD-Rom moved to streaming video has moved, if not in lock step, then predictably forward across the two content mediums so central to course design. The options across eBooks and video have both included single title sales with various user rights, evidence-based access, demand-driven access, subscription aggregation, curated subject collections, publisher collections, etc. With this shared history in mind, I put the following questions to the teams at Kanopy and BibliU after a year in which both companies introduced substantial access model innovation. How has your experience with or observation of the Book/ Video business impacted how you approach your current distribution strategy? BibliU: Our experience has shown that the promise of digital content for the library has not been realized. Often the most disadvantaged students depend on the library to access the textbooks on their reading lists. Yet, traditional digital content providers do not provide required textbooks from key publishers. As well, traditional providers don’t take into consideration how libraries and their budgets work. In contrast, BibliU’s catalog includes millions of textbooks from more than 2,000 publishers, including major publishing companies such as Pearson, Cengage, Wiley, Sage, etc. BibliU’s solutions were designed in direct response to how the library operates, lowering the costs of content and integrating directly with library systems and automating workflows.

Kanopy: Our collective experience in the books business has been incredibly helpful and informative to our distribution strategy. The most important takeaway from prior experience that we have adopted at Kanopy is to partner with our library

Against the Grain / September 2021

customers in developing and rolling out any material changes. The use of customer surveys, interviews, and advisory boards have been integrated into our internal workflows to ensure we are understanding and addressing our customers’ needs appropriately. “The surge in This approach was instrumental in the revision to our distribution stratdemand, as egy over the last two years.

campuses across

We leveraged this collaborathe globe shut tive approach to launch new busidown physical ness models and pricing strategies. attendance, With respect to business/access models, our prior experience with pushed books reinforces our commitment streaming video to providing choice to our customand eBooks ers and to launch Smart PDA that allows customers to give access to to the top a customized catalog curated by of materials Collection Workflow Consultants to required and support curriculum. We also introduced variable pricing and lowered delivered by the the annual license price for 70% of library.” the catalog. Going forward, we plan to launch additional access models that are designed to work in conjunction with existing models to maximize value to our customers by extending access to more films at more affordable prices. What are the primary access models you offer and how do you help librarians pick the right mix of these models for the institution’s unique situation? BibliU: We offer three main access models. The first is for campus-wide initiatives (not Library specific); the second and third are designed specifically to meet the needs of the library and to enable a digital textbooks reserve program. The Universal Learning solution is for campus-wide initiatives that allow colleges and universities to guarantee all students have the content they need, on the first day of class. BibliU partners with the college or university to give students their core content for a set “per student per class” price. Our analysis has found that our Universal Learning solution gives students a savings of 50% over bookstore prices and 30% over Amazon used book prices. The Learning Collections solution allows libraries to license a collection of eTextbooks at a predictable and cost-effective price to expand their digital reserves to include eTextbooks that were previously unavailable from other providers. With this solution, the library pays a set amount for a collection of digital textbooks, designed to support a population of students (for example, the library can decide to include the textbooks for a certain number of classes and a certain number of students). And the libraries have access to usage analytics so they can understand how their investment

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

in Digital Reserves is being put to use. On-Demand Learning allows libraries to give students access to a wide catalog and only pay for content students actually use. With this solution, libraries set up a deposit with BibliU, based on a data-driven projection of expected usage, and then draw down on the deposit as students activate the eTextbooks (activate means use past a certain percent of the book, varying by publisher). Libraries have access to real-time analytics to monitor usage, and can add and remove titles as and when they need to. Kanopy: We offer academic libraries a variety of acquisition models that work best together for the greatest return on investment. Many libraries use PDA as their base collection — including standard, capped and our new Smart PDA, where our team works with librarians to develop a custom program based on their budget requirements and curricula — then leverage one-or three-year Firm Orders for titles and curated packages in high-use subject areas. A growing number of libraries are also choosing our Perpetual Access model for “must-have” titles that they purchase and own in perpetuity. What did you offer libraries in response to the pandemic in terms of either free or reduced-cost access? And what pricing and access models did you introduce thereafter to assist with access and affordability? BibliU: We were just entering the U.S. market shortly before COVID-19 hit. The packages detailed above were created based on our learnings over the last 18 months. In the UK, where over 40% of universities use our solutions today, we partnered with JISC, an organization that promotes and enables digital education in UK higher ed, to provide cost-effective solutions that would be quickly rolled out. Kanopy: The pandemic presented enormous challenges, not just for Kanopy’s customers, but for its content suppliers as well. Thankfully, Kanopy’s content suppliers stepped forward to get creative and help libraries deal with the massive increase in resource requirements needed to navigate this truly unprecedented situation. In partnership with those suppliers, Kanopy was able to offer academic library customers a 33% discount on licenses for the entire catalog for three months, during the peak of pandemic usage. Kanopy also partnered with The Teaching Company to offer Kanopy’s entire collection of The Great Courses free of charge during that time. Additionally, we launched a Variable Pricing structure which tiers the cost of our videos based on usage, applicability to the curriculum, and other key factors including length and supplier. Variable pricing reduced the pricing of 75% of our catalog.

Kanopy: Yes. For the best ROI, customers mix and match Kanopy’s flexible acquisition models. Most use PDA as their foundation, then supplement with Firm Orders for titles in highuse subjects. Many choose perpetual access for the essential titles that they purchase and own. Does your company work directly with campus instructional designers, technology centers and/or faculty on course design and content integration? BibliU: We integrate directly with library systems, so students have a seamless experience. BibliU’s catalog of eTextbooks is housed in a relational database with an access point that enables library users (typically students) to search the entire catalog and select content to read. Librarians can manage content acquisitions through BibliU’s purchasing portal, as well as gain insights into content usage and student study habits through analytics offered by BibliU. Any acquisitions made through BibliU are deployed into the library’s cataloging solution through MARC records and WAYFless URLs. Kanopy: No. At this time, we do not directly work with campus instructional designers, technology centers, or faculty on course design and content integration. We work directly with the library who work with these parties. Are there features and functionality of your reader/player unique to content used for course delivery as compared to readers/players designed for use and consumption of research content? BibliU: We’ve been obsessively focused on the student experience, delivering what they would expect from a consumer app. Features include highlighting, adding notes and bookmarks, instantly syncing when online; single click access; ability to search across every book at once, even inside images; text to speech; and changing settings like background color. Kanopy: Our user interface comes equipped with features specifically designed for students and professors interacting in their coursework. Students are able to browse by curricular subjects and even see recommended titles that help peripheral exploration after assigned viewing is completed. For professors, we offer tools that help in curriculum design and instruction like the ability to create custom playlists. This tool allows professors to add clips of multiple titles to help in their instruction and assigned viewing. There will be more features that will help professors, students and faculty alike coming soon!

Do you recommend models differently that are aimed specifically at course assigned/required content versus course-reserve or reference only?

Authors, filmmakers and content creators push publishers and distributors for more usage and more royalty return. How do you resolve this requirement with the institutions/library’s need to manage a budget always under pressure?

BibliU: We don’t differentiate between course assigned/ required content and course-reserve or reference content. Libraries want to ensure students have access to the core content they need to be successful in a class, not just reference materials. Our Learning Collections and On Demand Learning solutions are focused on enabling this. Libraries can choose the approach that best meets their needs. Increasingly, we are hearing from Library Directors about their vision where they get other stakeholders on board, and transition their campus from a model where students have to scramble to buy their content (at the bookstore, Amazon, etc), to a model where all students pay the same fixed amount (and achieve considerable savings) for their required content — and all get access to it on the first day of class. This vision aligns with our Universal Learning solution.

Kanopy: The goal for most content creators and suppliers isn’t actually maximization of revenues at the expense of all else. Rather, it’s consistency and longevity. Other markets and windows, including theatrical and premium Video on Demand (VOD), are designed to provide the most meaningful returns in the fastest possible period, which establishes a film’s ultimate value in the marketplace, and the remainder of its distribution lifecycle. Library distribution, when done effectively, offers content suppliers the longtail longevity that previous windows do not. A strong film can provide consistent returns in the library

40 Against the Grain / September 2021

BibliU: As mentioned above, library budget management has been top of mind as to how we have designed our solutions. This isn’t in conflict with the needs of our publishers — we offer publishers a reliable and growing digital market for their content.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

market for years, even decades. And if that requires pricing or windowing adjustments that benefit libraries and their budget management, it’s well worth the give and take. By educating suppliers further around how to maximize this opportunity, a platform like Kanopy is able to work with customers to unlock value across the entire catalog. That, in turn, supports ongoing, consistent, dependable revenue for creators. That revenue can be earmarked to help independent filmmakers get their next project up on its feet and provide distributors with the ability to manage operating expenses, provide minimum guarantee spending for new acquisitions, and even secure additional funding. Additionally, the library system provides an expansive audience, so it’s a net win for the creators. If the film proves it holds value for a particular audience, filmmakers and distributors want to see that play out in actual usage by that community. That’s eminently achievable in the library market, regardless of budget pressures. Do you watch the consumer platforms and business models for inspiration? If so, which and why? BibliU: Absolutely. We have taken inspiration and learned lessons from companies like Spotify, Netflix, Apple, etc. In the same way that Spotify helped shift the music industry from physical to digital, we are looking to disrupt the physical textbook market by turning educational content digital, making it more accessible and affordable for students, and more profitable for publishers. Kanopy: We follow the typical UI/UX patterns those users have become accustomed to over the last few years from consumer streaming platforms. This helps students and faculty easily and quickly navigate and interact with our content. In terms of models, while we do not currently offer a subscription model, we do have plans to offer one in the future. We are currently not pursuing advertising-based models which are common among general public streaming platforms. How is open publishing (open access, open educational resources) and freely available streaming video content playing into your platform strategy? BibliU: This is one of our differentiators. We bring together millions of digital content assets from publishers, as well as OER sources — on a single unified platform that works on any device. Kanopy: It doesn’t at this time. Where will online learning be in the next 10 years? Feel free to answer differently for different regions of the world. BibliU: Universal Learning will be a reality at all universities and colleges, and the library will play a key role in its success. Universal Learning focuses on providing equitable access to content for students from all backgrounds, and removing the costs and constraints that too often accompany course materials. Core to Universal Learning is the idea that textbooks, journals, and other course materials are vital infrastructure to student learning — an idea that aligns with the vision of many libraries. With Universal Learning, course materials, for the most part, are digitally distributed through learning management systems. Students enrolling in a course automatically gain access to the digital materials on day one of the course. Universal Learning

Against the Grain / September 2021

solves a problem that has uniquely plagued higher ed: colleges and universities have largely equalized the costs of virtually every service they provide — except course materials. While colleges and universities charge different tuition rates from each other, they have for decades made an implicit judgment about costs within their walls: tuition is the same regardless of major. Universal Learning helps institutions ensure that textbook costs do not also impose differentiated burdens on students based on their chosen field of study. At the same time, Universal Learning lowers the cost of content for students. Kanopy: Geographically, so much of the expansion in online learning depends on reliable access to high-speed broadband. And that challenge isn’t exclusive to developing nations. Here in the United States, many smaller communities in rural areas struggle with internet speeds, or even simple access, thereby dramatically limiting their ability to take advantage of online learning resources. If you set bandwidth aside and assume that breakthroughs in technology and further investment in satellite deployment will slowly but surely resolve these issues, the future of online learning likely rests with resource bundling and integration. Both the entertainment and library technology industries are in the middle of a significant overhaul through consolidation. The players are coming together, and working to merge their technologies and content offerings into one, with varying degrees of success. The previous period of technological development was about diversity of choice. In entertainment and learning spheres, that became a myriad of options, an ocean of apps and online tools that strived to do one thing very well. This next phase is about bringing those apps into an interconnected web of tools. It’s not enough to be able to present a film in a classroom setting. As learning becomes even more global and distributed, educators need to be able to show a film, integrate materials, tie it into curriculum, embed links to online resources, show it in a group setting, and empower real time communication. Essentially, recreating the full, in person classroom experience for the virtual world. The best companies will figure out how to integrate all of these needs into a suite of tools, or best yet, a single offering, that empowers everything educators need to impact the next generation of learners. And the largest tech firms, warts and all, have proven that by bundling resources and services together, they can provide pricing that is accessible on a global scale. For online learning to continue to grow, educational programs will need to rapidly adjust their strategies to embrace this digital world, and unite around a set of mutual needs that can help guide the tech community towards the best solutions as rapidly as possible.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Let’s Get Technical — (Mostly) Automated Daily Record Management for a Consortial SILS By Lesley Lowery (Program Manager, Technical Services, Orbis Cascade Alliance) <llowery@orbiscascade.org> Column Editors: Kyle Banerjee (Sr. Implementation Consultant, FOLIO Services) <kbanerjee@ebsco.com> www.ebsco.com www.folio.org and Susan J. Martin (Chair, Collection Development and Management, Associate Professor, Middle Tennessee State University) <Susan.Martin@mtsu.edu>

or the past three years, the Orbis Cascade Alliance has taken advantage of their shared ILS and WorldShare Collection Manager to provide automatic updates to bibliographic records in their consortial catalog. The process is largely automatic, but requires a limited amount of daily maintenance to handle exceptional records. Some workflow implications of this process have required the development of policies, best practices, and workflow adaptation for member staff and central staff. Overall, the Alliance has found this update automation to be a low-overhead way of ensuring members have access to the most current record data.

Background The Orbis Cascade Alliance (“the Alliance”) is a consortium of 37 academic libraries located in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. Its members represent a wide range of academic institutions, from large research institutions like the University of Washington and the Oregon State University to comprehensives like Western Washington University and Eastern Oregon University, as well as an array of community colleges such as Mount Hood Community College and Chemeketa Community College. Initially, the Alliance was formed to provide a regional network for sharing physical resources. This focus has evolved over time, and members migrated to a shared ILS platform (Ex Libris Alma/Primo) in 2013 to support both resource sharing and broader strategic goals. The Alliance SILS implementation takes the form of 37 local instances or Alma “Institution Zones,” linked to one central instance or Alma “Network Zone.” The Institution Zones contain local bibliographic and inventory records. From there, bibliographic records can be linked to the Network Zone for discoverability and use by other members. Early on in implementation, the Alliance developed a policy that most bibliographic records should be shared with the Network Zone to promote collaborative collection development and metadata management activities. It was also determined during migration that it would be beneficial to have the records in the shared catalog receive automatic updates from OCLC. This would allow members to take advantage of “crowd-sourced” metadata from a quality-controlled database, leading to better discoverability of records. WorldCat also contains controlled authority headings in many records, which reduce some of the need for local authority control work. Additionally, Alliance members were interested in having the shared ILS automatically respond (if possible) to the addition and removal of their title-level WorldCat holdings with the addition and deletion (respectively) of bibliographic records in the Network Zone. This automation was mostly desired in order to keep the shared Network Zone repository free from “childless” bibs not held by any member institution, and

42 Against the Grain / September 2021

to provide quick access to bib data for new materials entering the academic market.

Configuration To achieve both regular record updates and the (semi-) automated response to added and deleted holdings, Alliance staff decided to use Worldshare Collection Manager and several scheduled import processes in the Alma Network Zone instance. This ensures that the record updates and record additions/deletions are handled centrally and inherited by members, rather than requiring all 37 members to set up processes locally. In WorldShare Collection Manager, a collection was created to contain the full repository of the Alliance’s member institutions. This was achieved by creating a query collection that searches for any of the member institutions’ 51 holdings symbols. Each day, this collection is configured to deliver files of records to the OCLC FTP server as follows: • New: Records on which the first Alliance member has set holdings. • Updated: Records held by any member that have been changed in WorldCat. • Merged: Records held by any member that have been merged with another record. • Deleted: Records from which the last Alliance member has removed holdings. In the Alliance Network Zone, four distinct import processes, or “profiles,” are configured — one for each of the files outlined above. The profiles harvest the data from the OCLC FTP server and then import the bibliographic records to the Network Zone, matching on the normalized OCLC control number present in existing and incoming records. Incoming records in the “new” file will overlay matching records in the Network Zone, and records without a match are imported. Incoming records in the “updated” and “merged” files also overlay matching records that exist in the Network Zone, but incoming records that do not find a match are rejected. This cuts down on the creation of new “childless bibs” in the Network, which are largely due to inaccurate member holdings in WorldCat. In all three of these import profiles, incoming records that match multiple existing Network Zone records are skipped and must be resolved manually. Incoming records overlay the existing record in the Network Zone according to Alma “merge rules” that can be customized at a very granular level to protect existing field data. For instance, the rule currently in use protects a note field that identifies bound-with constituent titles and non-OCLC vendor ID numbers. As the need arises, additional MARC fields can be added to this “protected list.”

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

The final import profile is configured to process the “deleted” records. This profile neither updates nor imports records to the Network Zone. Rather, it performs the matching check and produces a report of the matching records. These records are then filtered and removed from the Network Zone via batch processes.

Daily Maintenance The import profiles do most of the heavy lifting, but they do produce a small amount of daily maintenance that is performed centrally. As mentioned earlier, incoming records identified as new, merged, or updated sometimes match on multiple existing records. This is usually due to an OCLC-initiated record merge, but can also be due to duplicate OCLC control numbers in the Network Zone. These cases are reviewed manually each day and the multi-match in the Network Zone is resolved either by merging the records, reporting a bad record merge to OCLC Quality Control, or reporting a questionable merge to the owning member institutions for review and reporting. If the merge was incorrect, the Network Zone records will remain separate until the WorldCat records are restored. Merged records were not processed regularly by Alliance staff until the spring of 2018. As a result, a large backlog of unmerged records remains in the Network Zone. These records are being processed on an “as time allows” basis, and any that turn up as multi-match errors in daily import reports are resolved at that time. Member staff are also encouraged to report any unmerged records they encounter during daily tasks to Alliance staff for resolution. As noted above, records received in “deleted” files need special handling, as it’s understood that not every title-level holdings setting is accurate. Members can sometimes neglect to add holdings, and other workflow issues can lead to “missing” holdings in OCLC, so the goal in processing deletions is to proceed with the utmost care, to avoid removing records that are in use at member institutions. To this end, Alliance staff gather the existing Network Zone records identified for deletion into an Alma set. The set of records is put through a batch process that removes any records with member inventory attached. The set is then filtered to remove any records that are bound-with constituent titles (these are identified based on the presence of a local note field). Remaining records are deleted from the Network Zone. Member staff are also encouraged to report any records without inventory or bound-with notes to Alliance staff for deletion. The main caveat in record deletions is that e-resource holdings are not uniformly managed in OCLC by Alliance members. As a result, our daily files of “deleted” records contain a high number of false deletes. Likewise, our daily “new” files do not contain all of the electronic resources that are newly activated by members. However, the current deletion process filters out the false positives, and members have several options for batch-importing MARC records for new e-resources to the Network Zone, and can export single records directly from WorldCat to the Network Zone via Connexion.

Workflow Implications Overall, the use of these automated record files from WorldCat with the Alliance’s shared ILS has been successful in helping central staff maintain a clean database. They do, however, result in some workflow considerations that have to be taken into

Against the Grain / September 2021

account. The main consideration for central staff is that while every effort is made to prevent the creation of new records in the Network Zone without inventory, this is sometimes unavoidable, due to the need to import records from the “new” file that don’t have an existing match in the Network Zone. To mitigate this effect, an annual cleanup process is performed that combines the review and “refresh” of bound-with constituent title notes with the removal of bibliographic records without inventory. Initial cleanup in 2018 removed 1.2 million records without inventory from the Network Zone, and annual cleanups since then typically remove approximately 150,000 records. Local workflow implications to automating record updates via WorldCat are more significant. Since record data from WorldCat overlays existing data each day, members are required by Alliance policy to make all changes to bibliographic records directly in WorldCat, and not in the Alma system. Localized data fields are an exception to this policy, since they can be added as “extensions” to bibliographic records in Alma, and those extensions are protected from overlay. Member institutions must also make every effort to ensure that their title-level holdings for physical resources are accurate. This ensures that record updates are received for as many member-held resources as possible. This standard of practice also minimizes false positives in the deletion file and “missing” records in the new record files. Since this entire process rests on the accuracy of the OCLC control numbers in our existing Network Zone records, members are prohibited from editing existing OCLC numbers in the MARC 035 fields of Network Zone records, and they are not allowed to delete bibliographic records linked to the Network Zone. Instead, they are required to report problems with OCLC numbers and/ or records with no inventory to Alliance staff for review and resolution. In another nod to this dependence on accurate OCLC control numbers, members are required to perform any vendor-supplied data loads into the Alma Network Zone with care, to prevent the creation of duplicate records (which can lead to multi-match errors when daily files from OCLC are loaded). Care must also be exercised to avoid record “hijacking” — when a record is matched using a vendor ID and overlays an existing record with a differing OCLC control number. Instances of this behavior are very difficult to identify in the Alma system, but are fortunately few in number following the development of best practices requiring vendor data to include either OCLC numbers or a qualified vendor ID for each record, as well as the implementation of a two-step import process for some problematic vendors and import scenarios. In summary, the Orbis Cascade Alliance has found that with policies and procedures in place to safeguard the accuracy of the OCLC control number, using WorldShare export and ILS import capabilities to maintain bibliographic record data has been successful in providing members with the most current bibliographic data available. It has also allowed central staff to take up the work of reconciling merged records and deleting records without inventory, thus freeing staff at member institutions from those routine and repetitive cleanup tasks. While the process is not without its caveats, it has been an overall success in maintaining our shared catalog’s integrity.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Emerging Tech: To Be or Not to Be? — Hum: A Unifying Tune for Societies and Associations? Column Editors: Deni Auclair (Editorial Director, Humanities and Social Sciences Journals and U.S. Partnerships, De Gruyter) <Deni.Auclair@degruyter.com> and John Corkery (Client Engagement Director, LibLynx) <john@liblynx.com> www.liblynx.com

f a machine is running well, it is said to be “humming” — meaning all things are running in unison and at optimal performance. Basically, this is the idea behind a new company started by Silverchair called Hum. It offers a new data analytics platform (also called Hum) that analyzes interaction across an entire organization, currently restricted to societies and associations, and helps engage and enrich the user journey. No data scientist required. This is a fairly new category in publishing technology called a CDP or Customer Data Platform (yay, another new acronym!) — and we will likely start seeing things like this with more frequency if recent polls from the annual SSP meeting are any indication. Hum is a bit more than a standard CDP, though, which seems mainly a place to gather data; they also have some cool tools that help with the analysis, like machine learning and the potential for smart discovery. There are several examples of CDPs outside of publishing that can be quite costly and come from familiar names like Adobe, Microsoft, and Salesforce. Some come with enterprise-sized, one-market-fits-all approaches, others are more in tune with the retail markets they serve. Hum seeks to be a better-fitting alternative to the publishing market, starting with societies and associations and a model that helps them scale and grow as they realize benefits from the product. They are also more aware of things that publishers have been paying attention to recently like GDPR and CCPA, having grown out of their sister company — and publishing industry stalwart — Silverchair. I recently caught up with Dustin Smith the President and Co-Founder of Hum, who spoke to me from his home office in the Charlottesville area, near Hum’s corporate headquarters.

John Corkery: Could you tell us a little about your background in technology?

Dustin Smith is the President and Co-Founder of Hum. He works alongside a fantastic team to make data-driven growth possible for societies and associations, building Hum’s next-generation Customer Data Platform (CDP) that’s tailored to publishers and member orgs. In his last act, he worked with startups and Fortune 500 companies on technology-driven innovation, turning cutting-edge research into commercial opportunities. A former client called him “a yoga instructor for the mind.” You can find him on LinkedIn at https://www.linkedin.com/in/ darsmith/ and Hum https://www.hum.works/.

44 Against the Grain / September 2021

Dustin Smith: Prior to joining Hum, I was Director of Innovation Programs for the Inovo Group, a boutique innovation consultancy in Ann Arbor doing super interesting work with Fortune 500 companies and startups, helping them succeed at strategic innovation. I really enjoy opportunity discovery, bringing strategy to life, and market development. JC: How did you come to join Silverchair? DS: In my previous position we would innovate, then hand the results off to others to develop. The opportunity to take the most promising thing out of the Silverchair opportunity discovery work and then build a business — to take it forward and make something happen with it — was of interest to me. With Silverchair, the journals and books hosting market is more mature and that’s why they brought me on initially, to find something complementary and adjacent, so I took them through the same sort of process I took the Fortune 500 folks. We conducted lots of primary and secondary research to uncover a whole lot of opportunities and invest time into the most promising ones. We also spoke with some of our clients in healthcare and the interesting things they were doing between the nexus of content and data. This seemed where the biggest opportunity might be: societies and associations have separate digital platforms, without much usable data, so the opportunity to unify their data into something useful was how the idea of Hum came into being. JC: Why societies and associations? DS: A very good question. The core of Hum is a Customer Data Platform (CDP). It’s not exclusively a CDP as people might define it, but at its core it is a CDP. Historically, CDPs come out of the consumer packaged goods and e-commerce industries where what you’re really trying to do are very crude sort of transactional sales — like trying to sell you Pepsi Cola, trying to sell you shoes — there’s not that much to talk about, you’re basically just a hawker standing on a box. Content marketing is a kind of cover for that sort of very commercial motive. They just want to talk to you so they can mention Pepsi or shoes. A CDP helps them target the right people for that message so they’re not just yelling at everyone. The thing about societies and associations is that content is the way they deliver value, particularly in digital forms. It is really high-quality content that is pure in terms of its motive. So they are already engaging with their audiences offering really great content. Discoverability is definitely an issue and I think you suggested [some of the tech is] long in the tooth, and some of the formats are maybe a little bit futsy and not so engaging. As you’re able to get away from the myopic focus on, say, the scholarly or the very long form, you get to a place where you’re developing more interesting, engaging, and general purpose content which then starts to open up a broader set of audiences, so it’s not just the sort of core membership you are able to engage. And that gives you a lot more options. As you’re engaging with more people, as you’re following those interactions, you are cultivating “first party” data [data

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

around observations about your audience] and you’re more attuned to what people are interested in. You can develop smaller product offerings, particularly on the professional association side, but also on the society side. You’re able to engage with sponsors better. Instead of saying, “We send a newsletter to 70,000 and 5% of those people open it,” it’s “We know there are 20,000 people who are extremely interested in thoracic surgery.” And we’re ultimately going to work with the people who are at the vanguard of medical instruments or in pharmaceuticals to reveal some of the interesting work that they’re doing, and to potentially connect some of those partners with the content. Ultimately, Hum allows you to serve your existing membership and constituents better as it also opens up new business model options for them. JC: From a technology standpoint, how was Hum developed? Does it sit on the Silverchair stack? DS: Hum was developed from scratch. We’re a sister company of Silverchair, so we integrate with the Silverchair platform but are not strictly part of it. Hum is a different organization, with a different technology stack altogether. We’ve developed Hum with a lot of knowledge from our CTO, Niall Little, who was Director of Architecture for Silverchair. He brought a lot of deep knowledge about how to handle content, how to create search and personalization recommendations, and discovery. We were able to bring that learning to a clean-sheet design, which has been very helpful. We looked at the landscape in terms of pulling an open-source CDP off the shelf. Unomi by Apache ended up being really the only option, but they are much more heavily focused on the sort of CPG [Consumer Packaged Goods] side of a classic CDP use (which is a retail and e-commerce technical methodology). We treat audience members (users) and content as first-class objects in our CDP, so ultimately we felt that we had to build something from scratch. It provides a lot of interesting context where you’re able to look at what sort of individuals are engaging with various pieces of content, and also look at segments or groups of individuals and what content items are of most interest to them or what topics are trending. JC: So Hum is a data repository and analytics platform that generally resources a broad spectrum of customer data, is that fair to say? DS: Yes, but there’s one point that’s missing there: Typically, a classic CDP has elements of data unification, analytics, engagement, and activation. Hum brings all of these together. For us, it’s how Hum brings all those together and gives you the ability to personalize both emails and onsite content, and so we have widgets that pull from that data, index content, and deliver sort of personalized content in a more automatic fashion. JC: So does Hum utilize artificial intelligence, machine learning, those types of things? DS: Increasingly so, and as we get more data we will be continually building our model library. We have a few dimensions of growth and improvement there. One is that a lot of the ‘grey literature’ (like blog posts, white papers, and some marketing literature) doesn’t necessarily get the taxonomy treatment that the scholarly content does and is somewhat invisible to machines. Hum enriches the content. This is one place where artificial intelligence exists and we’re using transformer models to make that more discoverable. JC: Does Hum work just with “grey literature”? What about the hard scholarly publishing content like journals, DOIs, etc. which many societies and associations publish? Is Hum more

Against the Grain / September 2021

focused on the marketing and grey literature side of the house or do you have something for the journal publishing side of the house as well? DS: We focus on all content. “Grey literature” and journals content really play different roles, so we really see a continuum of depth of content. At the shallowest end, you have a tweet or perhaps a notification email, and then you get deeper as you get through blogs, and then even deeper content pieces which may be a journal article or a white paper. You’re able to have a virtual event/webinar sort of thing through physical events and conferences that have deep signals about what people are interested in. From the Hum perspective, people interacting with content teaches you about their potential interests. We know that in some societies 90% of their data is generated by the journals division, so ignoring that would be very foolish. You’d be getting shallower, incomplete data. JC: Are you also pulling usage data from COUNTER? DS: We actually go for raw data and track at the individual level and then work to the sort of statistical aggregate level. We want to be able to know as somebody moves around the entire society or association, as they are engaging with various things, what that truly teaches us about that individual or groups of individuals. JC: Societies and associations have members, so they are knowns, I suppose, as opposed to unknowns. DS: We have knowns and unknowns, though we call them identified and anonymous. The members are identified, but you have profiles on anonymous users as well. These anonymous users have more shallow interactions over time. We can personalize for anonymous users, but ultimately, we want to nurture relationships and hopefully over time they become known users and people you’re able to have contact with, even by email. That’s a very rich sort of interaction even if you’re not monetizing them in any way — the ability to contact and engage regularly and deliver value on your own schedule — not just push something at social media — as well as the ability to understand membership and follow what they are doing and engage with them, especially if you care about the amount of money they’re spending or what that might indicate. It’s not just population and aggregate statistics, it’s all the way down to the user. The individual user is not the most useful way to engage with that data, it’s really the segment as the smallest atom or component that you want to engage with, providing the ability to create segments of different facets of data. Taking what people are topically interested in, their demographic data, other behavioral data, and having that reflected in real time or very near real time (basically within three minutes) ultimately means you can get direct insights as well as take another look at your membership structure. You might be able to look at the data and see what young people are engaging with and how we might reform a program or see what the “identified” non-members are engaging with and how we might be able to bring them into the membership fold. In terms of planning for events, knowing the most trending or searched-for topics provides the opportunity to ultimately create deeper and richer sort of event content. That real-time behavioral data of individuals, and not just what Google Analytics tells you, is quite rich. JC: So Hum is aimed very much at strategy, marketing — in that top layer of things like product development. It is not in editorial, publishing, submissions and subscriptions — although it may obtain data from those systems or data from journal usage. Is this right? So who uses Hum? Who is the use case for?

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

DS: Yeah, I mean you’re right in terms of the adoption scenario. We’re not at the level of maturity where we’re going to have a marketing coordinator say, “We’re going to adopt Hum.” It’s just not the model at the moment, but the use cases are quite wide.

your audience, and improving the way you configure your digital systems so you create the most value — you really need a stakeholder who’s able to take that broader look and not be confined by the whole membership and physical event legacy mindset.

The leading use case is probably on the marketing side of things. They’ll likely have the broader mindset of looking at more data sources, thinking beyond the membership or experimenting with business models, but also (and it sounds kind of trivial) the ability to create segments to power some of their email marketing as opposed to blanket campaigns. You know, the “spray and pray” approach. We’ve seen some people go from basically 5-20% open rates to 80%+ because they’re targeting the right people. That’s something that everybody can use because basically everybody’s sending blanket emails and it becomes so much noise. It’s only gotten worse during the pandemic. So that’s a clear place we can add value.

JC: Is Hum an all-or-nothing service or is it multi-layered?

We also unify things coming from the AMS (Association Management System) or CRM with financial information to look at some segments and match some of that financial information, not just how many members do we have or what their growth looks like, but the behavioral characteristics of that membership. We certainly see events as an interesting feature within Hum that allow the user to take the segment, (say, people who attended an event) and create a content fingerprint on those people and then match for people who are reading the exact same thing, and generate phenomenal open rates. Engagement and yields improve for events because you’re targeting people who are similar in character, but not just based on demographic characteristics. You’re not just targeting academics or doctors of a certain type. JC: Is Hum a service? How is the BI delivered? (e.g., dashboard, application, API, etc.?) DS: Hum is a SaaS platform. There are others that are more of a service or a BI dashboard, but that’s not us. If you’re a Hum customer, you share the same core SaaS application, but you get your own instance. Your data is sequestered and protected. Internal users are provisioned on the Hum dashboard, which gives them the ability to get a level of insight to monitor the integration and health of the widgets as well as do things like create segments and campaigns. Hum has an admin/superuser level type of role and a frontline person’s role, but you’re able to delegate access. There’s a lowest level where you’re able to see some things but not the deepest level personal user data. It’s more at the segment level or population level. Then there are widgets set up through initial onboarding and configuration. We’ve seen a real desire not to do a lot of the technical stuff so we’re bringing a simplified user experience to the table; we basically make it so that a relative technology novice marketing person can use Hum with very minimal training. Hum has kept the complexity on our side; we put a lot of time into that. JC: What is the Hum sales approach? DS: We’re finding that this is really a CMO, CTO, COO and CEO level conversation. If you want just slightly better email marketing orchestration, there are other solutions. If you want to double down on your membership, there are other solutions for that. But if you want to bring everything together in a unified approach — how you look at expanding your reach, building

46 Against the Grain / September 2021

DS: Our core, what we call a standard integration or quick start, consists of connecting with CRM/AMS, marketing/email system, and whatever the dot-org CMS uses. The dot-org website does a lot of aggregation and has a lot of content already. That gets a client started with data flowing into the platform. They will have profiles created, data enriched, and the ability to reach out to people. This is the basic Hum core implementation. At the same time, we work to find use cases where the client realizes value in the near term. For instance, some organizations will say we’ve had so much interest in these courses we’ve developed that are pandemic-related, and we want to help people find that content easier, or we are hosting a virtual event and want to create targeted activities to promote that. We build a plan and show results. So, there’s natural urgency internally to continue to grow beyond the core implementation. JC: How does Hum charge for their service? Is the relationship based on charges by event? How does that all work? DS: It is driven by the number of active audience profiles in Hum. We tried to get as close as we can to matching value. We want you to be able to build your audience, but we want you to build an engaged audience. Companies like HubSpot or Marketo charge if you have a record in the system, whether they’re active or not. For Hum, we charge on a monthly basis if you have an active individual who has interacted with your digital properties. It incentivizes us to help the society or association realize value. If they want to start small and have a small audience, that means it’s cheaper to get started. We grow with them, as opposed to saying this is a big enterprise deal. It makes it a bit easier for them to get started. JC: Who are your competitors? You mentioned Hubspot and Marketo, are these your competition, or is there somebody in the STM world? DS: Frankly, the biggest competitor is inertia. This is a newer category — there’s not another CDP in the association space. When addressing the ‘jobs to be done’ level you can have a Salesforce or Adobe monolith, but these are incredibly expensive. You can do a similar sort of thing with HubSpot if you go all in on the HubSpot platform and try to put as much as you can into their ecosystem. That keeps the data with them and allows you to draw on it. It also means you have to have connectors with society-specific systems, which you would have to build yourself. It’s a challenge with bilateral data and is very difficult to connect with things like journal platforms. This is not their sweet spot. JC: How does Hum deal with things like GDPR, CCPA and data privacy? DS: We have a composable contracts architecture and are in the process of getting our SOC 2 certification, which allows us to continually stay abreast of privacy concerns. But we’re finding we don’t really have to adjust agreements too much because individual applications are already collecting that sort of data and are compliant with cookie notices and the ability to opt in or out. We validate that everything is in place, but the ability to opt out is managed more through the society or association,

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

NOTE: This is the version without the landing page URL

8 Library Services That Will...

Make You Smile. 1) Publishing Sources - Almost 200,000 at our disposal 2) New Title Selection Plan - Immediate notiﬁcation 3) Electronic Ordering - Simple online ordering system 4) Early Release Program - Immediate availability guarantee 5) Cataloging - We do the busy-work for you 6) Comprehensive Reporting - Up-to-the-minute

“ Things always go smoothly with Emery-Pratt. Their people are knowledgeable, and always provide friendly, rapid service.” Cameron University Lawton, OK

order status

7) Duplicate Order Alert - We’re on guard, you avoid hassles

8) Paperback Reinforcement & Binding Avoid expensive wear & obsolescence

For more details, visit: emery-pratt.com

Dependability. Reliability. Smileability. 1966 W M 21, Owosso, MI 48867-9317 Phone: 800 248-3887 • Fax: 800 523-6379

emery-pratt.com

and we have the compliance process and machinery in place to maintain this. JC: When did Hum launch? DS: Quiet launch was in December of 2019, with the formal launch in early February 2020. We have been building out the early pilot customers and have now moved to our charter cohort. We’re being patient because we’re still figuring out the exact business model and go-to-market strategy. At the same time, we’re refining the machinery to make the solution for multiple stakeholders, but you know if you try to boil the ocean you’re going to fail. So we are being patient. We’re finding the entry point and a tractable deal structure and deal flow, then we’ll fine-tune and optimize the delivery model. Our target for this year is 10 to 12 customers. We’re trying to stay modest; as we figure things out we’ll start to accelerate. There’s a ton of interest but we’re being selective about our charter cohort because some potential clients may not fit the ideal profile. We’re looking for customers who have budgets, use cases, and internal capacity. We believe we can be viable and focused but also extensible and able to be integrated. We’re going to be powerful and valuable to the cohort for a CDP-plus orchestration, and the inside solution that we’re offering these cutomers will inevitably ask more of us in development, but it will benefit everyone. JC: Does Hum see other markets outside the society and association market space?

competitors are completely generic and say, “if you have data, we’re happy to handle it.” But they lack subject matter expertise. We know there are close adjacencies, for instance with alumni associations, foundations, and other not-for-profits. People with a lot of content or audiences they want to engage have use cases that are similar: like an alumni association that wants to keep engaged with their alumni and keep them updated, or a foundation that wants to see how they’re influencing audiences on various topics. Certainly publishers, and of course we’ve had some conversations with publishers who are interested, but it’s the same sort of audience-building notion for customers with an institutional business model, so this can be a potential for society publishers selling into libraries, for instance. I think there’s a broader opportunity for these high-quality organizations, institutions, and publishers to build out their audiences and you really can’t do that effectively if you don’t have the data side of things handled. Hum is going to focus on the thousands of organizations we can serve within the association and society market, as well as the adjacent markets where there are opportunities and folks with similar problems to solve. It seems Hum may have found an opportunity to help societies and associations hum a new tune — with the many disparate platforms they have been using for years, it may well be time. We will be watching as they grow. — JC

DS: There are already people coming knocking from outside, but we’re committed to staying focused. Many of the CDP

Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

The Digital Toolbox — Balancing Patron Needs, Librarian Interests and a Too-Small-To-Do-Everything-Budget with a Robust Digital Collection By Rebecca Walton (Acquisitions & Collection Analysis Librarian, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602) <rebecca.walton@byu.edu> Column Editor: Steve Rosato (Director and Business Development Executive, OverDrive Professional, Cleveland, OH 44125) <srosato@overdrive.com>

tah’s Brigham Young University (BYU) has partnered with OverDrive to provide additional eBook and audiobook options for our students since 2014. Our collection is small compared to the public libraries in the area, but the 11,300 titles we have available have been checked out over 379,000 times. As our collection has slowly grown over the past seven years, our usage has grown alongside it. In 2020 alone there were 87,257 checkouts by 9,445 unique users. OverDrive is especially useful for providing online access to popular material. Academic libraries may not see collecting popular materials as part of their core mission. However, there is a case to be made for such materials to connect with students at a level they can understand. Popular materials can not only support recreational reading but can also be used to support exploratory learning by serving as an introductory text to a complex subject. Some courses even use popular nonfiction texts as supplementary course materials to take advantage of this aspect. The titles with the highest demand are often tied to current events. Something as simple as a new movie or television release can lead to a buildup of holds on a title. On the other hand, it is important for librarians to stay abreast of current issues because something as significant as a political or social movement can also trigger patron interest. This was very evident in BYU’s trends during 2020 when the titles which saw the highest number of checkouts per copy were all related to social justice and antiracism.

Balancing Budget with Demand Choosing where to spend the relatively small budget we have for OverDrive purchases can be a challenge. It requires balancing patron demand for new titles expressed through recommendations, patron demand for existing titles measured by the number of holds, anticipated patron demand for titles associated with current events and popular culture, and the need to still have money left over to pursue librarian priorities. At BYU we have chosen to put higher priority on increasing the number of titles in our collection rather than on reducing wait times for titles on hold (though we do still order additional copies for those with the most demand). Although this can be frustrating to the patron, we have found that it also encourages them to discover lesser-used titles within the collection to check out while they are waiting. The front page of our OverDrive digital collection website features titles which are currently available so that patrons have a frictionless experience in discovering these titles

48 Against the Grain / September 2021

Curation Increases Exposure, Return on Investment Promotion is one critical tool to use to ensure that purchased titles continue to provide an appropriate return on investment. Within the OverDrive platform, the curation tool is an excellent way “Popular to customize the digital collection website to meet a library’s specific materials can priorities. BYU has implemented not only support banners that highlight different colrecreational lection aspects. Trending titles may have very high use when purchased, reading but but that use can also wane over time. can also be If we purchase multiple copies of a used to support title to meet initial patron demand, exploratory we may also be in a situation with a lot of underperforming titles a few learning by years later. To mitigate the impact serving as an of downward trending interest, we introductory text feature currently available titles which have historically been very to a complex popular. This increases the chance subject.” of these titles being seen by a user and continuing to generate checkouts even after their moment in the sun has passed. We also feature little-used titles in a similar way to enhance their discoverability by patrons. Promotion allows us to remain relevant by frequently updating certain sections of the digital collection website to focus on trending topics or highlight specific collections. Much of this can be automated through OverDrive’s curation tools to avoid a huge drain on staff time.

Meeting Students Where They Are What do these trends tell us about what librarians should do to meet student needs? Students are influenced by what is going on in the world, and as librarians we need to be constantly pivoting our collection strategies to anticipate and respond to changing demands. This is especially true in a collection comprised primarily of popular titles, such as BYU’s OverDrive digital collection. Additionally, the trends tell us that by doing these things to meet students where they are, we can build a user base that continues coming back for more. Overall circulation numbers compared to the number of unique users tell us that students who discover eBooks and audiobooks through OverDrive come back again and again.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Biz of Digital — Librarians Promoting and Supporting ORCID@Rutgers By Yingting Zhang, MLS (Research Services Librarian, Robert Wood Johnson Library of the Health Sciences, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, 1 RWJ Place, MEB 101, New Brunswick, NJ 08901; Phone: 732-235-7604) <yzhang@rutgers.edu> http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0757-1837 Column Editor: Michelle Flinchbaugh (Acquisitions and Digital Scholarship Services Librarian, Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 1000 Hilltop Circle, Baltimore, MD 21250; Phone: 410-455-6754; Fax: 410-455-1598) <flinchba@umbc.edu>

Introduction ORCID stands for Open Researcher and Contributor ID. It is an open, community driven non-profit organization that provides a unique and persistent digital identifier known as ORCID iD that can be used to distinguish an individual researcher from others.1 Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey adopted a university-wide implementation of ORCID in October 2017. Founded in 1766, Rutgers University is a large public research university with $750.8 million of research grants and sponsored programs, and a history of over 250 years.2 The university is located in three cities which are New Brunswick, Newark, and Camden. As one of the most ethnically diverse universities in the nation, Rutgers has over 71,000 students from 50 states and over 125 countries. It has 8,700 faculty, nearly 15,000 staff, and over 1,200 international scholars from more than 80 countries.3 By implementing ORCID@Rutgers, the university helps build an integrated research environment and joins the ORCID research community. In the process of planning, implementing, and promoting ORCID, Rutgers librarians played an important role in collaboration with other stakeholders. This article showcases the librarians’ experience and role in this initiative.

Rationale for ORCID Implementation ORCID provides many benefits to registered researchers. Name confusion has been known as a big problem for researchers. ORCID helps solve the name ambiguity issue by providing each ORCID registrant with an ORCID iD which distinguishes him or her from other researchers with similar names. In collaboration with various stakeholders in the research community, ORCID provides not only a registry of unique identifiers for researchers but also an API that allows research communities to integrate the identifiers in research systems. With its capabilities of interoperability with various other research systems, ORCID iD connects researchers and their research activities throughout their careers. Because ORCID iDs can be integrated with various research systems via its API, ORCID helps to ensure that a researcher’s scholarly works are properly attributed and recognized. Furthermore, many federal and other funding agencies require grant applicants to use ORCID iDs when submitting proposals. For example, The National Institutes of Health (NIH), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) require individuals supported by research training fellowship, research education, and career development awards have ORCID iDs effective FY 2020.4 Many publishers also require authors to use ORCID iDs when submitting manuscripts in their submission systems. For example, Wiley mandated the use of ORCID iD for authors for its biomedical journals in 2016.5 Our institutional repository SOAR (Scholarly Open Access at Rutgers) can be connected with ORCID through a university-wide implementation. The scholarly works

Against the Grain / September 2021

deposited in SOAR can be pulled into the researchers’ ORCID profiles. Grant applicants and progress reporters can use the data transported from ORCID into SciENcv (Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae), a researcher profile system,6 to create NIH or National Science Foundation (NSF) biographical sketches, reducing much repetitive and tedious data entry work. By joining the Big Ten Academic Alliance (BTAA) ORCID Consortium, Rutgers is able to be an institutional member of ORCID at a discount rate.

Implementing ORCID@Rutgers Rutgers University Senate charged the Researcher, Graduate, and Professional Education Committee (RGPEC) to investigate ORCID, identify benefits, and make recommendations for implementation in terms of processes, timeline, personnel, and expenses. In February 2016, after reviewing the RGPEC report, the University Senate unanimously passed a resolution for a university-wide implementation of ORCID.7 The Senate Resolution was soon signed off on by then University President, Dr. Barch who was “persuaded of the value of issuing ORCID iDs both to individual researchers and the university.”8 Afterwards, the ORCID Implementation Working Group was established and Rutgers joined the BTAA ORCID Consortium. The ORCID Implementation Working Group was chaired by the then Vice President for Information Services and University Librarian, Dr. Krisellen Maloney. It was comprised of representatives from these key units: Office for Research, Office of Information Technology (OIT), Office of Institutional Research & Academic Planning (OIRAP), Office of Enterprise Risk Management, Ethics, and Compliance, Rutgers University Libraries (RUL), School of Graduate Studies, and University Human Resources. With collaboration and hard work, the Implementation Working Group had a soft launch of the project in April 2017. During that period of time, ORCID@Rutgers was tested and improved based on feedback. On October 18, 2017, it was officially launched. While the Working Group was planning and implementing ORCID iD, an Outreach Team was formed with three librarians who served on the University Libraries Research and Scholarly Environment Working Group (RaSE WG). These librarians were the Scholarly Open Access Repository Librarian (Jane Otto who is retired), the Open Access Specialist (Laura Bowering Mullen), and the Health Sciences Research Services Librarian (Yingting Zhang) who chaired RaSE WG at that time). The Outreach Team worked diligently to make plans for advocating, promoting, and supporting ORCID iDs implementation at Rutgers. The Team made comprehensive communication plans with the RUL central communications office. It created an ORCID website (Rutgers University Libraries 2021) posting information related to ORCID for RU researchers — https://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/researchtools-and-services/research-impact/orcid.9 To promote ORCID@ Rutgers, the Team prepared brochures and handouts to introduce

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

what ORCID was, what benefits researchers could get from ORCID, how to register for an ORCID iD, and how to populate the ORCID profiles, etc. These promotional materials were posted on the website and also distributed via email lists. The Outreach Team conducted brown-bag and train-the-trainer sessions for other librarians to reach out to the researchers of the schools and departments that they liaise with. The Team also prepared boilerplates for the liaison librarians to adapt and develop presentations and instructional sessions on ORCID. We also gave presentations to the research development professionals at the Office for Research, and to the research administrators and assistants in various centers and institutes within the university. For researchers, we provided one-on-one consultation and troubleshooting for specific problems. With one librarian retired, the two remaining librarians of the Outreach Team are the contact people to answer all kinds of questions concerning ORCID raised by faculty, students and staff. Recently, several workshops were taught specifically on how to populate ORCID data in SciENcv to develop NIH and NSF biosketches for grant applications and progress reports.

Integrating ORCID iDs in Rutgers Systems The technical aspects of implementing ORCID iDs were managed by Rutgers OIT who integrated the ORCID API with the university personal information application by inserting an additional tab for ORCID in the platform which requires users to log in with Rutgers NetIDs. When they click the ORCID tab, users are prompted to either create an ORCID account if they do not have one yet or to connect their existing ORCID iD to NetID. After the two sets of IDs are connected, a federated single signon to access ORCID using Rutgers NetID is enabled. Users are able to log in ORCID with either the ORCID login information or Rutgers NetID. The single sign-on option makes it easy for researchers to access and update their ORCID profiles and this saves them time. The integration also enables the researchers’ ORCID iDs to be displayed in the Rutgers public online directory, which increases their research visibility and enhances opportunities for research collaboration. To provide the researchers with an easy-to-follow process for connecting their ORCID iDs to NetIDs , the Outreach Team created several step-by-step tutorials with illustrations. These instructional materials are made available on the ORCID@Rutgers website — https://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/ services-for-researchers/orcid/faq-and-help.

Current Status Many researchers at Rutgers have registered for ORCID iDs. At the time of writing, the total number of registrants using Rutgers emails was 9,631, and among them 4,171 researchers have connected their ORCID iDs to Rutgers NetIDs. Registered researchers have their ORCID iDs displayed in their profiles in the databases that are integrated with ORCID via APIs, such as Scopus, a bibliographic database covering multiple disciplines, and other research systems such as Pivot which is a resource of funding opportunities as well as researcher profiles. More and more researchers or their delegates are utilizing the data from ORCID in SciENcv to develop biosketches for submitting NIH or NSF grant applications or progress reports. Our Institutional Repository SOAR has recently been migrated to a new Research Information System (RIM). Integration of ORCID API in the new SOAR platform is in progress. The university continues to explore opportunities for potential integration of ORCID. Even though we have nearly 10,000 researchers who registered with Rutgers emails, only about half of them have connected their ORCID iDs to Rutgers NetIDs. This does not meet our goal of an 80% participation rate as recommended in the RGPEC report. Reasons for not connecting varied according to a faculty survey conducted by the Implementation Working Group in April 2019 to evaluate the success of this initiative. The survey results revealed that 57.40% of the 730 respondents had registered; only about half (46%) of the respondents who registered had their ORCID iDs connected to NetIDs. This near 50% participation rate is still the current status. Some respondents commented that they did not know what ORCID was. Some were not convinced why they should want an ORCID iD. Some others indicated that they would need help. Clearly not all the researchers are clear about the benefits of ORCID. More outreach efforts will be made to raise awareness of ORCID.

Conclusion With collaborative efforts from the key stakeholders of the university, ORCID@Rutgers was successfully implemented. The university libraries and librarians played a major role in the outreach and promotion of ORCID@Rutgers to make researchers aware of ORCID iDs and adopt them. We will continue making efforts to advocate and promote ORCID. We hope that with more outreach and promotion, more researchers will better understand, appreciate, and adopt ORCID iDs. Acknowledgement: This article is based on a presentation at MLA’20 and an ORCID US Community Showcase Webinar.

Endnotes 1. 2. 3. 4.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

ORCID. 2021. “ORCID: Connecting Research and Researchers.” Accessed April 27. https://orcid.org/. Rutgers, The University of New Jersey. 2021a. “About Rutgers.” Accessed April 17. https://www.rutgers.edu/about-rutgers. Rutgers, The University of New Jersey. 2021b. “Rutgers, By the Numbers.” Accessed May 5. https://www.rutgers.edu/about/by-the-numbers. National Institutes of Health (NIH), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2019. “Requirement for ORCID iDs for Individuals Supported by Research Training, Fellowship, Research Education, and Career Development Awards Beginning in FY 2020.” [Notice]. National Institutes of Health (NIH). Last Modified July 10, 2019. Accessed March 12. https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/ NOT-OD-19-109.html. Citrome, L. 2016. “Open researcher and contributor ID: ORCID now mandatory for Wiley journals.” Int J Clin Pract 70 (11): 884-885. https://doi.org/10.1111/ ijcp.12912. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/ijcp.12912?download=true. National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine. (2021?). “SciENcv: Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae.” Accessed March 12. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sciencv/. Rutgers University Senate. 2016. “S-1505 on Implementing ORCID Identifiers.” Accessed April 25. https://senate.rutgers.edu/report/charge-s-1505-onimplementing-orcid-identifiers/. Barch, Robert. 2016. “Response to S-1505.” Accessed May 9. https://senate.rutgers.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/RLB-Response-S-1505-May-2016.pdf. Rutgers University Libraries. 2021. “ORCID.” Accessed May 6. https://www.libraries.rutgers.edu/research-tools-and-services/research-impact/orcid.

50 Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Optimizing Library Services — Are the Top Institutions in the U.S. Acquiring Diverse Content? By Ms. Caroline Campbell (Director of Author Services, IGI Global) <ccampbell@igi-global.com> and Ms. Brittany Haynes (Sales and Marketing Coordinator, eBook & eJournal Collections, IGI Global) <bhaynes@igi-global.com> Column Editor: Mr. Nick Newcomer (Senior Director of Marketing and Sales, IGI Global) <nnewcomer@igi-global.com>

iversity and Inclusion. These two words seem to be everywhere, from the news headlines around the most recent shootings to higher education institutions noting their commitment to diversity, equality, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. However, for many, these words have truly come to the forefront over the past year due to factors including the COVID-19 pandemic, social unrest, and civic rights movements (#BLM, #MeToo, Pride Month, #StopAsianHate, etc.). In the previous issue of Against the Grain, we discussed exactly how libraries and publishers can collaborate in encouraging diversity and inclusivity through partnering together on acquisitions efforts and through diversified and comprehensive e-Collections. This included providing opportunities to acquire research on DEI, as well as research being produced by underrepresented groups and developing countries, providing OA opportunities to underfunded departments, accessibility of resources, and more. Based on these solutions and the argument noted in our previous article, we wanted to dive deeper into libraries’ holdings to review the breadth of diversity in single title acquisitions and continue the discussion of how e-Collections enable institutions to increase diversity in their holdings.

The Problem: What Are the Barriers to Producing Truly Diverse and International Research? According to a report completed by UNESCO Institution for Statistics, from 2009 to 2017, the overall global spending in research and development grew by more than 40% percent with the United States and China dominating nearly half of this spending. ExLibris (a ProQuest Company) and Researcher Professional expounded on the above report and statistics in their “Global Funding Trends” report and found that, unsurprisingly, the larger economies are the largest funders of research, development, and higher education with increased gross-domestic product from private institutions and governmental initiatives in support of public and private research. The majority of the countries that are increasing their funding included regions throughout the United States, European Union, China, and isolated countries in Asia (including Japan, South Korea, etc.) (Bisson, Robin, 2020, p. 2). Through this, naturally, more research output is coming from these regions as they have more resources for scientific advancements. However, this result can cause a vacuum throughout the academic landscape, where only developed countries are funded in research, scholars from these regions have the most recognition, and publications/research coming from these regions have the highest reach. One of the direct ways that publishers can contribute to the resolution of this issue is to not only put together coalitions to combat this but also publish quality research coming from developing nations. This will in turn support not only the individual researcher but provide additional opportunities to the institution through the researchers’ efforts. Oppositely,

Against the Grain / September 2021

when libraries assist and acquire research from these areas, it increases the overall citation impact of the titles, helps support publishing the research, as well as provides additional potential collaborations between researchers from developed and developing nations. To review if libraries are actively acquiring research from diverse nations, we reviewed the top 15 prestigious United States institutions that are currently acquiring IGI Global reference books (print and electronic format).

The Analysis: Are Institutions Acquiring Titles from Underrepresented Research? For context, IGI Global has been an international academic publisher for over 30+ years, and we work directly with over 100,000+ authors and editors to publish the latest, peer-reviewed research across 11 core subject areas, including: • Business and Management • Computer Science and Information Technology • Education • Environment and Agriculture • Government and Law • Library and Information Science • Media and Communications • Medicine and Healthcare • Science and Engineering • Security and Forensics • Social Sciences and Humanities Through these content areas and our vast network of authors and editors, we have been able to publish over 6,000+ reference books and over 175+ scholarly journals represented both individually and through our e-Collections that contain research from nearly every country across all continents, including North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania, etc. Through our steadfast pledge to put the research community and underrepresented research concepts before profit, we also ensure that there are diverse perspectives in every title that we publish with a deep regional diversity in our edited publications, as well as diversity in the reviewers that are conducting the double-blind peer review process. Understanding the current limitations of many serials’ budgets, this analysis was conducted reviewing our current reference book customers. Annually, we are publishing up to 600 titles across the noted regions above, and the diversity of our editor- and authorship is noted as the following: • 20% of titles are edited/authored by researchers in North America. • 10% are edited/authored by researchers in South America. • 20% are edited/authored by researchers in Europe.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

• 10% are edited/authored by researchers in Eastern Europe. • 15% are edited/authored by researchers in the Middle East and Africa. • 15% are edited/authored by researchers in Asia and China. • 10% are edited/authored by researchers in Oceania (Australia and New Zealand). • < 1% Other or Not Identified Through analyzing the 15 institutions’ holdings, each institution has acquired on average 200 titles of our overall reference book collection with most of their holdings spanning across 2005-2021 copyright years and across all of our 11 subject areas. Utilizing the noted regions above, find in Table 1 the percentage breakdown of the acquisitions of the libraries in correlation to the regions of the leadership of the publications acquired. From the chart, individuals can see that the highest percentages of acquisitions across all institutions include titles coming from North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, with the lowest percentages being reported for China, Latin and South America, and Oceania (New Zealand and Australia). Understanding that this is a smaller data set, it is important to note that one of the factors that can affect the data is that this analysis includes both our authored and edited reference books. Our edited reference publications have chapters that have been contributed to by various scholars around the world to provide a diverse perspective. For example, for institution one (1), the majority of their reference book acquisitions are titles that are edited by researchers from the Middle East and Africa, but upon a deeper dive into the titles that they are acquiring, over 50% of the contributions of the titles are coming directly from North America and Asia (including China, Japan, and South Korea). Although these percentages may not correlate directly to the report noted above, it is clear through these holdings specific regions are more largely represented through single title acquisitions. Therefore, it important for libraries to analyze their overall collections for true diversity and inclusion through their individual title acquisitions, perhaps by looking more closely at e-Collections acquisitions options.

The Opportunity: How Can More Institutions Ensure That They Can Acquire Underrepresented Research? Librarians Rhonda Kauffman, from University of Connecticut, USA, and Martina S. Anderson, from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA, explain in their open access chapter, “Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in Library Technical Services,” how librarians are able to review their collections for diversity and inclusion and work directly with their staff to promote diversity not only within their outreach programs but also their acquisitions. Kauffman and Anderson explained (2020): In 2020, MIT libraries created a task force to review and implement DEI values through their archives, technical services, preservation, scholarly communications, and collections strategy staff. Through this, they create definitions for diversity, inclusion, and equity to provide a common understanding of these terms within their institution. Additionally, they did a review of how this institution directly correlated with: 1. The scholarly publishing and academic library marketplace: exploring ways in which our actions can affect changes on the academic library marketplace that has increasingly seen intrusions of the market and corporate values that are in conflict with library missions and goals of advancing equitable access to knowledge and social justice. 2. Representation of marginalized perspectives: exploring ways in which libraries and archives can expand the breadth of information resources to include voices that have been historically marginalized. 3. Community inclusion and outreach: exploring ways to more accurately reflect the diversity and connect more genuinely with the communities we serve. 4. Building organizational infrastructure for diversity, inclusion, and social justice: exploring ways in which library staff at all levels, and especially administrators, must allow time and provide support to effectively shift to a DISJ framework (p. 221).

Additionally, they created a questionnaire to instill thinking about these topics in their staff ranging from “Do my current workflows favor one ethnic group, perspective, language, or type of resource over another?” and “Can I use vendors that represent Table 1: Regional Breakdown of Acquired IGI Global Reference Books local, smaller, family-, minorifor 15 Top United States Institutions ty- or women-owned businesses” (Kauffman & Anderson, 2020, p. 222)? Through these initiatives, MIT libraries were able to critically review their holdings and find gaps in their literature as well as acquire additional resources to ensure that representations are widely applied. Various reports and studies have been completed by the academic community at large on ways to increase overall diversity in collections and acquisitions. Tactics include task forces, like the MIT libraries, as well as “diversity audits” (reviewing the cultural backgrounds of authors and editors in a sample or the full collection and cross-referencing with the United States census) have

52 Against the Grain / September 2021

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

been implemented (Mortensen, 2019). However, one of the large barriers to acquiring additional titles and fully enacting these initiatives is overall library resources, including staff, time, and money. Through this, e-Collections provide a streamlined opportunity to acquire fully diverse research and partnering directly with the publisher provides a streamlined opportunity to ensure that collections are focused on DEI. Companies including EBSCO, ProQuest, and Gale provide a “Diversity and Inclusivity” e-Collection to help streamline the process of diversity audits by cultivating research from multiple perspectives and backgrounds. These collections are specially curated by LIS professionals to assist in streamlining collection development and acquiring inclusive content. Additionally, IGI Global specifically offers their e-Book and e-Journal Collections, which provide opportunities to acquire all of our research from the above regions to enhance current e-Collections, which is especially pertinent with the recent shift in demand for electronic resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Through these e-Collections, libraries cannot only ensure that diverse backgrounds, international perspectives, and research on the topic of diversity and across all core subject areas are acquired, but it also provides cost savings to enable them to acquire resources at a fraction of the individual list price. For example, IGI Global’s average title costs are US$ 250; whereas, in our e-Book Collection it is as low as US$ 8. Taking the analysis above as an example, each of the institutions has acquired over 200 of our titles, which would average to over US$ 50,000. Whereas, the institutions could have invested in the e-Book Collection for a better overall value with a much larger number of titles for the same or lesser price (when considering credits) and had all regions fully represented through the research. It is also important to note that through having a larger pool of research available to institutions and libraries more readily acquiring underrepresented research through e-Collections, there is a larger opportunity for the research to be utilized and cited, which drives the indexing of publications and, as we know, the overall advancement of that research and their research. Comprehensive e-Collections also cover a more diverse ground in research topics, ensuring institutions’ researchers in niche or underrepresented areas have more options in access to resources they can utilize for course development, research, professional development, and more. It can also pave the way for additional open access funding for institutions through models like IGI Global’s OA Fee Waiver (Read and Publish) Model that matches the libraries’ investment in any IGI Global e-Collection to go towards 100% OA APC Waivers and support OA publishing for researchers. Through this, we have seen libraries be able to assist in funding underrepresented groups in their institutions to publish under OA, as well as utilize the funding to go towards departments that are underfunded. In a CHOICE webinar (2019) on creating an inclusive collection, Ellen Bosman, Head of Technical Services of New Mexico State University, stated, “If we [libraries] only purchase the popular materials we are just going to encourage publishers to ignore the niche topics within GLBT and also authors from underrepresented groups, so if we [librarians] can push back through our purchasing options that will reinforce our commitment to the publishers for diversity and will increase the likelihood that diverse voices will be published and have a place in the long-term scholarly record” (Doherty, Anne, Bosman, Ellen & Jonson, Timothy, 2019).

Against the Grain / September 2021

Through this mindset, it is important for publishers and libraries to work together to ensure that international research as well as research from underrepresented groups continue to be published and accessible. This can be attained through open collaborations between libraries and publishers of varying sizes to have deeper conversations about the content and comprehensive e-Collections that promote the use and representation of this research. Publisher Note: To learn more about how libraries can support diversity and inclusivity through e-Collections and publisher collaborations, view our last column in Against the Grain. Additionally, for libraries interested in our e-Book Collection (6,600+ e-books), featuring international research across 11 subject areas, including business, computer science, education, and social sciences, visit: www.igi-global.com/e-resources/e-collections/e-book-collection/. All of our electronic content is hosted on our advanced InfoSci platform, which provides accessible features including no DRM, no embargo of content, remote access options, and more.

References Bisson, Robin. (2020). Global Funding Trends: Insights and analysis on the patterns that have shaped global funding over the past decade. Research Professional News. http://online.fliphtml5. com/qetge/qcwn/#p=3 Doherty, Anne, Bosman, Ellen & Jonson, Timothy. (2019, May 21). Creating an Inclusive Collection: Selecting and Evaluating Diverse Resources. Choice. https://www.choice360.org/webinars/ creating-an-inclusive-collection-selecting-and-evaluating-diverseresources/ Kauffman, Rhonda & Anderson, Martina. (2020). Diversity, Inclusion, and Social Justice in Library Technical Services. In Stacey Marien, Library Technical Services: Adapting to a Changing Environment. Purdue University Press. https://www.opencommons. uconn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1070&context=libr_pubs Mortensen, Annabelle. (2019). Measuring Diversity in the Collection. Library Journal. https://www.libraryjournal. com/?detailStory=Measuring-Diversity-in-the-Collection

Recommended Readings Berg, G. A., & Venis, L. (Eds.). (2020). Accessibility and Diversity in the 21st Century University. IGI Global. http:// doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-2783-2 Management Association, I. (Ed.). (2021). Research Anthology on Empowering Marginalized Communities and Mitigating Racism and Discrimination. IGI Global. http://doi:10.4018/978-1-79988547-4 Management Association, I. (Ed.). (2019). Scholarly Ethics and Publishing: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice. IGI Global. http://doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8057-7 Jeffries, R. (Ed.). (2019). Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity in Contemporary Higher Education. IGI Global. http:// doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5724-1 Swayze, Susan, editor. Optimizing Data and New Methods for Efficient Knowledge Discovery and Information Resources Management: Emerging Research and Opportunities. IGI Global, 2020. http://doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-2235-6

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

ATG Interviews Colleen Campbell Coordinator of the OA2020 and ESAC Initiatives, Max Planck Digital Library By Tom Gilson (Associate Editor, Against the Grain) <gilsont@cofc.edu> and Katina Strauch (Editor, Against the Grain) <kstrauch@comcast.net> ATG: Colleen — We first met you during the Fiesole Retreats. Can you tell us about your involvement in the Retreats? What were the highlights for you? CC: The Fiesole Retreats have had an enormous impact on my professional journey from their very inception. I was working at Casalini libri in the 90’s and I vividly recall Katina and Bruce coming to the offices in the villa Torrossa to discuss the idea of the Retreat with the company’s founder, Mario Casalini. If I remember correctly, there was a small painting of a very personable cat involved, but that is another story. While the Charleston Conferences at the time were more or less oriented around the operational aspects of the business of library acquisitions, the Retreat was conceived as an opportunity for leaders in the library and information industry to come together, scan the horizon, and share their perspectives on the new directions in which the sector was moving. In the end, it was the current leadership team, Barbara and Michele Casalini, who served as hosts of the first Retreat in Fiesole in 1999, and, Boccaccio references aside, the Torrossa, perched on the hillside above Florence, could not have been a more fitting location for scanning the horizon! Looking back at the report1 of the first Retreat, themed “What is the likely shape of the library in 2005 and how do we build collections for it?,” it is fascinating to reflect on the ways that the landscape has changed — and the features that persist! Not all of today’s readers will remember some of the names in the report, such as Blackwell Academic Services or Faxon, but surely everyone will find Peter Boyce’s prognosis to be an understatement: “The new thinking in many scientific circles is, ‘If it’s not on the Web, it doesn’t exist.’” The highlight of that first Fiesole Retreat for me, personally, and the many others that followed, was the opportunity to connect with and learn from so many amazing thought leaders. Which relates to the next question…. ATG: When did you decide to move to Italy and work for Casalini? Before becoming so active in the OA movement, what other employment opportunities did you have? CC: I feel as if my career has unfolded through a string of serendipitous moments — all connected with the Fiesole Retreats in some way! Context: I am originally from Indiana (Indianapolis) and have always had an affinity for the book world; the day I turned 16 was the day I started working at a bookstore. I earned my BA in Theatre from Indiana University and, to help pay my way, I took a part-time job as a receiver in the acquisitions department of the Herman B. Wells Library. Every box I opened was a new window into a wider world: rare Tibetan manuscripts, maps from Russia, pamphlets from across Latin America, art books from Italy.

54 Against the Grain / September 2021

Serendipitous moment #1: One morning one of the acquisitions librarians called me over to her desk. She knew that I happened to be studying Italian for my language requirements and thought I might enjoy exchanging a few words with a real Italian. Our library supplier for Italian materials had come to pay a call, and so it was that I had the incredible fortune of meeting Mario Casalini, years before I would even dream of moving to Italy and, eventually, end up working for him! It was not until a couple years later, after a summer session in Florence, that I decided to abandon my dreams of a career on Broadway for the drama of everyday life in Italy. My MA in Italian with Middlebury College got me to Italy, but then I wanted to find a way to stay there permanently. Having already gotten a flavor for bookselling and libraries, I was keen to explore another facet of the information sector. This lead to a stint in the editorial office of a small children’s book publisher. Serendipitous moment #2: One of the books we produced was a fine art edition of Pinocchio, bound in Florentine marbled paper and in the triangular shape of Pinocchio’s nose. I was presenting the volume at the Frankfurt Book Fair and it happened to catch the eye of a librarian from the U.S. Discussing how he might acquire a copy for his library, it came to light that he was a close friend of Mario Casalini, the distinguished founder of Casalini libri whom I had met years before. It was Mario’s son, Michele, who came to our publishing offices in person to retrieve the copy for the library’s order. What a joy to reconnect, personally, with the company whose boxes I had received back in Bloomington. Some time later, when the Casalini’s were looking to hire someone to work alongside Patricia O’Loughlin, it felt to me as if it was meant to be! Oh, and that librarian from Yale who reconnected us? That was none other than Michael Keller, Vice Provost & University Librarian at Stanford University. Aside: While Mike’s opening and closing remarks at the first Fiesole Retreat in 1999 were illuminating, the words that held most meaning for me at the time were those he spoke as we gathered around a newly planted olive tree in the Casalini’s garden, in memory of Mario. Serendipitous moment #3: I had been working at Casalini libri nearly 20 years when the Retreat returned to Fiesole for the fourth time. Thanks to the insightful leadership of Barbara, Michele, Joachim Bartz and Patricia, I had grown, professionally, and it was time for a new challenge. Talking with Bruce Heterick at one of the social gatherings of the Retreat, we established a connection and I soon became ITHAKA’s first Director of Institutional Participation and Strategic Partnerships in Europe. While at Casalini Libri I worked primarily with research libraries in North America and Australasia, the role at ITHAKA gave me the opportunity to work with libraries across the UK and Europe and develop a sense of their unique needs and perspectives.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Serendipitous moment #4: It was at the 17th Fiesole Retreat in Berlin, three years later, that I heard Ralf Schimmer, from the Max Planck Digital Library, first present the data underlying his 2015 White Paper “Disrupting the subscription journals’ business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access.”2 The open access transition was something keenly on the minds of the European library and consortium partners I had been working with at ITHAKA, and I could observe tension growing around subscription journals. To see the evidence that there was a viable pathway to transition scholarly journal publishing to open access business models was incredibly inspiring. Gaining that insight at the Fiesole Retreat in Berlin prompted yet another career move for me, as shortly thereafter Ralf recruited me to coordinate the Open Access 2020 Initiative.

order to reach that goal. Up until that point, efforts to enable openness revolved around creating new open access journals and platforms, like PLoS or Gates Open Research, and developing new infrastructure for scholarly communication, such as pre-print servers like arXiv and institutional repositories. But while these strategies are important pathways to openness in their own right, they have not had any significant impact on the subscription system that dominates the bulk of today’s scholarly journals. Perhaps more importantly, while some authors or discipline communities may be enthusiastic about these newer alternatives for open dissemination of their research, a vast proportion of researchers prefer to publish in established journals. After nearly 20 years of open access advocacy, around 80% of new research articles published today are in subscription-based journals.4

ATG: At which point did you decide to devote all your efforts to the OA movement? What is it about open access that you find compelling?

OA2020 was established to fill the gap in the open access landscape, focusing on strategies to transition today’s scholarly journals to open access.

CC: Rather than framing open access as a movement, I prefer to talk about open access as a logical and necessary evolution in scholarly communication. Living through the COVID-19 pandemic, I think there is no doubt in anyone’s mind of the value in openly sharing scholarly knowledge nor of the urgency with which authoritative knowledge should be shared. The process of science hinges upon sharing, discussing, challenging and reproducing the results of research, and for that process to function optimally, research results need to reach the widest audience possible.

As for my own role, I lead external engagement in the OA transition at the Max Planck Digital Library (MPDL), the central digital library of the Max Planck Society. In this role I coordinate OA2020 as well as the ESAC Initiative, which is a global community of practice of libraries and consortia promoting efficiencies and standards around the negotiation and implementation of transformative and open access publishing agreements.

Researchers today heavily rely on journals to provide the scholarly communication services of organized criticism and dissemination of their results, but the subscription business model that underlies the bulk of scholarly journals is actually creating drag on the advancement of science. What I find compelling is to consider what researchers could accomplish if they were able to finally interact with an open corpus of peer-reviewed research, instead of limiting their interactions to those journals their libraries happen to be able to subscribe to this year. ATG: Colleen — You have been involved with the global Open Access 2020 (OA2020) Initiative since the beginning. For those who are not familiar with this initiative, can you tell us about it? And what exactly is the OA2020 initiative’s partner development effort, and what are your responsibilities in that effort? CC: The Open Access 2020 Initiative (OA2020) is an international effort that aims to transition today’s scholarly journals to open access publishing models. OA2020 grew out of discussion among key stakeholders in the global research community at the 12th Berlin Open Access Conference. It had been more than a decade since the Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities3 was issued in 2003 (and subsequently endorsed by nearly 700 research and library organizations globally, including ARL, ACRL, CARL and IFLA, just to name a few). At Berlin 12 there was strong consensus that while some slow and steady progress toward the vision of an open knowledge environment had been made, new efforts were necessary in

Against the Grain / September 2021

I am also closely involved in external affairs and communications relating to the implementation of Germany’s nationwide DEAL5 agreements, which are the instantiation of OA2020 in Germany… Editor’s note: You can continue reading Colleen’s entire interview on the Charleston Hub website at: https://www. charleston-hub.com/2021/07/atg-interviews-colleen-campbellcoordinator-of-the-oa2020-and-esac-initiatives-max-planckdigital-library/. In it, Colleen elaborates on issues like the funding of the OA 2020 network, key challenges to OA strategies, the upcoming 15th Berlin Open Access Conference, and the future of the OA 2020 initiative.

Endnotes 1. https://www.casalini.it/retreat/1999_pdf/cook.pdf 2. Max Planck Digital Library Open Access Policy White Paper: “Disrupting the subscription journals’ business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access.” http://dx.doi.org/10.17617/1.3 (28 April 2015) 3. https://openaccess.mpg.de/Berlin-Declaration 4. https://github.com/subugoe/oa2020cadata/blob/master/ analysis/paper.md 5. https://deal-operations.de/en/

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

ATG Interviews Greg Eow, Part 1 President, Center for Research Libraries, Global Resources Network By Tom Gilson (Associate Editor, Against the Grain) <gilsont@cofc.edu> and Leah Hinds (Executive Director, Charleston Library Conference) <leah@charlestonlibraryconference.com> The following is a lightly edited transcript of an episode of “ATG: The Podcast” that aired on June 1, 2021: https://www.charleston-hub. com/podcast/atgthepodcast-114-interviewwith-greg-eow-president-of-crl/. TG: Greg, welcome to ATG the Podcast. We’re delighted to have you chatting with us this morning. GE: Well, thank you so much. I’m delighted to be here. TG: Let’s start off with our first question, and for those listeners who may not be that familiar with CRL, or the Center for Research Libraries, can you tell us a little bit about CRL and its function and its role in the research community? GE: Sure. When I think about the Center for Research Libraries, I think of the collective collection. It’s really just a cooperatively owned, cooperatively stewarded, collective collection that’s been built for seven decades by the research library community. It was created in 1949 by largely the “Big Ten” libraries to be a shared storage facility for collections here in Chicago and the value proposition of that cooperative collection building was so persuasive that it grew really quickly and so by the early 60s we had members across the U.S. and even Canadian members, and so what CRL is now — it’s a membership organization of 200 research libraries across the U.S. and Canada that are cooperatively building and stewarding a research collection at the network level. TG: I remember when I was working in the Reference Department at the College of Charleston, we used to borrow materials from the Center for Research Libraries. Back then, though, it was microfilm, and I suspect you may still have some microfilm collections, but I don’t imagine that you’re lending them out all that much. GE: Yeah, that’s right. We have a large microfilm collection, and of course lend them out, but now they’re largely digitized or, if folks want to borrow the microfilm, we digitize on demand, so we’ll have someone request them, but then we’ll digitize them and deliver them digitally. LH: Greg, you’re now 18 months into your tenure of being named President of CRL. Can you share any initial observations or lessons learned? How has the transition from MIT libraries to CRL gone for you so far? GE: Well, it’s been an extraordinary transition. It’s a big leadership transition, anyway, going from Cambridge, Boston to Chicago and going from an AUL position to president of a consortia position, but, of course, I was only at CRL for about six months before COVID arrived. So, I had scarcely begun my tenure as president of CRL before I was leading in the context of crisis management. Given the context of my onboarding into the

56 Against the Grain / September 2021

role at CRL: leading through the COVID crisis, while simultaneously getting to know the organization, getting to know the community, doing culture change, bringing on new staff — all of the leadership changes that you would expect in any transition — it’s been great. I am unbelievably appreciative and impressed at how resilient the CRL community has been through this leadership change. We just had our annual CRL meeting a couple weeks ago and in my report to the CRL community, I said that I can honestly report that CRL is a stronger organization today than a year ago and the fact that we were able to do that in the context of COVID is just extraordinary, and really it is a testament to the resilience of the CRL staff and the CRL community. So, I’m deeply appreciative of that. But it has been a wild leadership transition, that is for sure. But the way that we were able to navigate the challenges as a team and grow a really strong internal organizational culture and build stronger relationships and come out of it a stronger organization. That’s just, that’s been really heartening and it makes me feel really optimistic and appreciative for the future. One thing I got drilled into me when I was at MIT was that one of the responsibilities of leadership is to always look for opportunities to “hack” challenging situations to continue forward progress. Always be optimistic, and always be problem-solving and moving forward. As I tell my staff, optimism is a choice, and the right one. TG: Well, it really is a remarkable accomplishment, too, to be able to say that and to have made it happen, and we know that you have had some extensive experience in collection development in a variety of libraries, but could you tell us which one of these experiences best prepared you to take over the leadership of CRL? GE: Well, maybe I’ll tell a story here. You know, my first fulltime, post grad school career job was when I was history librarian at Yale. I finished grad school at Rice, took my PhD in history at Rice, finished in 2007, and I landed this dream job at Yale that I was so excited about. I had just scarcely begun settling in at Yale and, lo and behold, we had the financial crisis, and the financial crisis was terrifying, and we were thinking about “What does this mean for staffing and possible reductions in staff? What does this mean in terms of collection budgets and reductions in collection budgets?” And being in the very, very early phase of my career and navigating this financial crisis — that was incredibly helpful for me. I think it helped me develop some comfort with extreme ambiguity in highly anxious moments. Another result of the financial crisis was that I developed a deep and abiding appreciation for the traditions and traditional workflows of research libraries. At the time I was so new to my career that I was seen, rightly, as being a change agent because

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

I had new ideas and new perspectives. Some of this was born of enthusiasm, but also probably born of naiveté, too. Right? But so, I was really thinking about the future and hoping we could change things, and in the wake of that financial crisis, we really had a whole generation or multi-generations of staff retire. I saw this sudden loss of institutional knowledge and professional knowledge and I was afraid, and I thought, I don’t really know a lot of these traditions. I don’t know why we have some of these workflows. I don’t know why do we do serial reviews like this? What are slips? What are standing orders? Why do we have these? And so, what I did was I decided to really study collections and collection development in a disciplined way and really interview folks that were retiring, really read a lot of literature that was seen as being maybe out of date, but I just — it taught me to really respect tradition and learn from tradition while understanding my role in the profession to be one of being a change agent. That that’s what I learned. TG: It really is amazing how a crisis like that and being challenged to meet it can teach you so much and it sounds like in this particular instance that really held true for you. GE: Yeah, it’s interesting, you know, when I think about my career. I graduated from library school in 1998 and then I was working as an archivist for a few years before I went back to grad school for history and in between there, there was the dot com bust, so I was trying to get my first archivist job while navigating the dot com bust, and then I came out of grad school and started working at Yale and then there was the financial crisis. TG: Right. GE: And then I come here and it’s Covid. TG: You’ve just been hopping from one crisis to the next. GE: And having some familiarity with crises and developing the tools to remain productive while simultaneously existing in the emotional space of deep anxiety has been helpful. Essential, really. I’m used to being anxious. TG: Anxiety as a plus. That’s an interesting concept. LH: Using it as a tool. GE: When you think about libraries as well, I have never known a day as a professional librarian that wasn’t informed by the scholcomm crisis and as an historian I’ve never known a moment as an historian that hasn’t been informed by the crisis to humanities though, so it’s just this is in some ways that’s been very helpful because it is just routinized. It is not really a crisis. It’s just sort of the condition of my work. That’s been helpful. Covid, however, has been a genuine crisis. We’re doing all right. LH: So, at MIT you were active in finding ways for the MIT Libraries and MIT Press to collaborate on exploring new business models for open publishing. So now that you are at CRL, do you see possibilities for CRL to pursue similar partnerships with university presses and publishers? GE: Yeah, absolutely. This is one of the things that I’m really keen for CRL to do, and here’s why. So, to use MIT as an example, as a microcosm, at the MIT libraries, the MIT Press is part of the libraries and so organizationally it actually reports into the libraries. They are actually the same administrative unit. So, same

Against the Grain / September 2021

institution, same commitment to creating great research-based knowledge, and disseminating it and preserving it and part of the same organization. And at MIT I thought, “Well, the MIT Press is creating really fabulous research content and one of their challenges is getting that content to libraries in ways that are financially sustainable, a business model of distribution.” And then I was thinking, “Well, at the libraries we’re trying to make our collection budgets go as far as they can go and trying to be as efficient and as effective with the management of our collection budgets.” So, the question was, how can we at the MIT Libraries actually work directly with the MIT Press because they’re our colleagues, they’re literally in the same organization as we are. So, we started reserving parts of the library collection budget aside to subvent publications, OA publications, so we would set funds aside to subvent publication of MIT Press books, we created a committee that would have librarians and members of the press that would work on how to manage those and prioritize those funds and so really create structures to bring the librarians and the publishers together to create and disseminate content. That model worked so well in that microcosm at MIT that I thought, “Well, what a great opportunity at CRL to do that at scale,” because when you think of CRL we’re just one giant research library. We’re just one giant co-op. Right? We’re not “.com”; we’re not even “.org.” CRL is CRL.edu, with a business model and governance structure that we are one big research library cooperative. So if university presses and scholarly societies, so publishers and scholars or authors, want to partner with research libraries on innovative business models, we can really do that using CRL as a platform for research libraries at scale. So, I definitely want to use that model that we had at MIT libraries and see if that works at a consortial level, at the network level from CRL. I would love to do that and that’s what we’re exploring now. LH: That’s great. Can you give us any previews of any projects that may be coming down the road or is it too early to speak to that yet? GE: Well, there is one that I’m working on later today. We’re putting together a webinar to talk about exactly this issue. How can scholars and publishers and librarians, so sort of this threelegged stool, how can we work together to find new models for creating and disseminating and preserving content that works for all of these communities? We’re going to have representatives from PLoS come and talk about their new business model exploring Community Action Publishing which is similar in some ways to the MIT Press Direct to Open Model. And then we’re also going to talk about the Global Press Archive which is a collaboration between CRL and Eastview which is similar to a Direct to Open publishing model but for newspaper content. So, those are some things that we’re doing later this month but that’s something that we want to build on in the future. This concludes Part 1 of our two part interview with Greg Eow, President at Center for Research Libraries, Global Resources Network. Part 2 of this insightful and fascinating interview will be published in the November 2021 issue of Against the Grain.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

ATG PROFILES ENCOURAGED

Tim Butzen-Cahill

Colleen Campbell

General Manager Doody Enterprises, Inc. 1100 Lake Street, Suite LL25 Oak Park, IL 60301 Phone: (888) 342-1939 Fax: (312) 546-8010 <tim@doody.com> www.doody.com

I lead external engagement in the open access transition at the Max Planck Digital Library where I coordinate the Open Access 2020 and ESAC Initiatives. Max Planck Digital Library Amalienstr. 33, 80799 München, Germany Phone: +49 160 9725 1536 <campbell@mpdl.mpg.de> https://www.mpdl.mpg.de/en/; https://oa2020. org/; https://esac-initiative.org/

Born and lived: I was born in Park Ridge, IL, where I currently live and have also lived in Chicago and Minneapolis, MN. Early life: I’d like to think that I’m still in this part of my life! I earned my BA at the University of Minnesota – Twin Cities and my MLIS at Dominican University in River Forest, IL. Professional career and activities: I began my post-collegiate career working with biomedical and clinical researchers to optimize their research spaces and to maximize the uptime of academic health facilities. When I transitioned to earning my MLIS, I began working for Doody Enterprises and have stayed there ever since, working my way from Customer Service Specialist to General Manager. Family: My husband and I are blessed with a large family spread out across the Midwest but we get particularly jazzed about our nieces, nephews, and grandparents. In my spare time: If I’m not reading a book, I’m likely watching or gabbing about RuPaul’s Drag Race, taking long walks around my neighborhood, visiting with family, volunteering at my local public library, or failing at trivia at a local hot spot. Favorite books: The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho and The Starless Sea by Erin Morgenstern. Pet peeves: Bad drivers. I learned how to drive in Chicago but most people did not. Philosophy: “When you want something, the whole universe conspires in order for you to achieve it.” — The Alchemist, Paulo Coelho Most memorable career achievement: Forthcoming, I hope!

Goal I hope to achieve five years from now: I’m kind of approaching the end of a five-year period right now so it’s hard to picture what the next five will bring. One thing I know for sure is I hope to be owning a home by then. How/where do I see the industry in five years: I expect to see the achievement of critical goals toward equity, diversity, and inclusion in health sciences librarianship and publishing. I also expect to see a more comprehensive approach to developing Open Access content among health sciences publishers. What I hope for is a revitalization of and greater market share taken up by small, association/society, and university presses.

Born and lived: Grew up in Indianapolis and, after completing a BA with a double major in Theatre and Italian at Indiana University, I moved to Florence, Italy to complete a Masters degree with Middlebury College and have been living in Italy ever since. Early life: Singing and dancing on a community theatre stage or curled up on the couch with a classic. Professional career and activities: Best characterized as mission driven. Starting at Casalini Libri, then as Director of Participation and Strategic Partnerships in Europe for JSTOR and Portico and now at the Max Planck Digital Library, my work has always been about bringing people together to accomplish something meaningful. This extends to my work as a member of the Board of Trustees of UKSG, the LIBER Open Access Working Group and a number of other community initiatives and industry boards. In my spare time: I practice with my band, take tap dance lessons, go running in the countryside around my small town, cook meals and listen to music with my daughters, go into Florence for a film, a caffè, an exhibit or an apertivito with friends. Favorite books: Recent favorites: Bernardine Evaristo’s Girl, Woman, Other and Jumpha Lahiri’s Whereabouts. Alltime favorites: Cormac McCarthy’s Border Trilogy and Patti Smith’s Just Kids. Philosophy: Use your voice.

Most memorable career achievement: So far, directing the 14th Berlin Open Access Conference which resulted in decisive alignment among global takeholders in scholarly communication, but there is a lot more to do! How/where do I see the industry in five years: When talking about the open access transition, librarians that are just beginning to approach transformative agreements often ask how long the transition will take. But shifting today’s scholarly journals to open access business models and — more broadly — creating a fully open information environment requires a restructuring of the processes, workflows and financial streams of both libraries (and their institutions) and publishers. Where I see the industry in five years is not really relevant; the more interesting question is what steps can I take right now toward an open, sustainable, equitable, inclusive and diverse scholarly communication ecosystem.

Rumors continued from page 18 coming in November. It’s great fun! I love Charles Watkinson’s clip especially. https://youtu.be/84-yTT2yB_s We’re excited to be co-sponsoring some of the presenters for the upcoming Frankfurt Book Fair Academic Conference, to be held virtually on October 11. There’s going to be an amazing line

58 Against the Grain / September 2021

up of speakers doing 10-minute talks on a variety of topics, interspersed with audience Q&A, along with several Master Classes and Case Studies as well. Be sure to check out all the details at https://www.buchmesse.de/en/highlights/professional-programme/ frankfurt-conference.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Debbi Dinkins

Associate Dean of the Library Stetson University 421 N. Woodland Boulevard Unit 8418 DeLand, FL 32723 Phone: (386) 822-7179 <ddinkins@stetson.edu> Born and lived: Born in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. I have lived in Alabama and Florida. Professional career and activities: My first career was as a mechanical engineer in the aerospace industry. After receiving my M.L.S. from the University of Alabama in 1993, I took a job as a cataloger at Stetson University. I have been here ever since. How/where do I see the industry in five years: After completing the annual report for my department recently, I was surprised, although I should not have been, to see that 94% or the library’s resources budget was spent on electronic formats. I see that trend continuing in the next five years. Librarians and library staff need to be comfortable with technology. In the next five years, technology will influence everything that libraries do for users.

David Gibbs Interim Associate Dean Sacramento State University Library 2000 State University Drive Sacramento, CA 95819 <david.gibbs@csus.edu>

Born and lived: I was born and raised in Ohio and have since lived in (in order) Auburn, Alabama; Durham, North Carolina; Boston; Paris; New York; San Francisco; Los Angeles; Washington, DC; and now sunny Sacramento. Early life: Midwestern nerd/band geek transplanted to the South

Professional career and activities: My first profession was as a serial grad student. Since that wasn’t very well-paid, I moved on to book publishing, then web publishing, finally landing in academic librarianship. In my spare time: Reading, streaming media, piano, clarinet, travel, cooking, languages. Favorite books: I don’t have favorite books, but I have favorite writers: Edmund White, Alan Hollinghurst, David Sedaris, and Alice Munro. I’ll read anything they write. Pet peeves: Loud talkers, close followers.

Philosophy: Something between carpe diem and moderation in all things. How/where do I see the industry in five years: Hopefully libraries will be spending less on journals and more on monographs. Publishers will sell books to libraries as print+E bundles, thanks to an influential article published in Against the Grain.

Ramune K. Kubilius Collection Development / Special Projects Librarian, Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine 320 East Superior Street Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (312) 503-1912 <r-kubilius@northwestern.edu> www.galter.northwestern.edu

Born and lived: Born in Montreal Canada, have lived in the Chicagoland (Illinois) area since grade school. Professional career and activities / Most memorable career achievement (combo): As a longtime academic health sciences librarian, it’s been very satisfying to be professionally involved not only in health science and special library associations’ activities, but also the Charleston Conferences. Through the years, each one has been, as billed, “a collegial gathering of individuals from different areas who discuss the same issues in a non-threatening, friendly, and highly informal environment.” Involvement in providing content for Against the Grain has been gratifying, too. In my spare time: I try to keep active and meaningfully occupied.

Favorite books: Those with an engaging plot and flow that makes me want to keep reading (as opposed to skipping to the end). How/where do I see the industry in five years: Hopefully — continuing and collaborative dialog and roles for all who care about the idealistic (as well as practical) aspects of the scholarly communication and publishing ecosystem!

Keri Prelitz Collection Development and Management Librarian California State University, Fullerton 800 N State College Boulevard Fullerton, CA 92831 <kprelitz@fullerton.edu>

Born and lived: California – Born in Orange County; Lived in San Diego, San Francisco, Oakland, and back to Orange County again. Family: Twin 5-year-old boys and two dogs keep me rather busy.

In my spare time: I’m at the dog park or perfecting my coloring skills with my kids, and when it’s not too hot to turn on the oven I’m experimenting with my sourdough starter. Favorite books: I’ve enjoyed anything by Haruki Murakami, and Roald Dahl will always hold a place in my heart. Currently I’m rereading all the DogMan series with my kids for the 100th time. How/where do I see the industry in five years: I hope we will see greater diversity in the profession and our collections and a continued focus on OA and OER.

Back Talk continued from page 62 with nothing but kiosks for weird skin creams and phone cases, turn into something more like the town square — more people sitting and talking and eating and drinking and just hanging out? And will people change the way they organize their workplaces as well? I think they could be bored with cubicles (I know I

Against the Grain / September 2021

was) and everyone can use more collaboration, conversation, and just comfort in their working spaces. I think I’ll mosey on down to the library to see if it’s open — and if it too has adjusted its social mission, inclusiveness, service provision? Rip Van Winkle is going to need a few more naps before checking that one out!

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

COMPANY PROFILES ENCOURAGED Doody Enterprises, Inc. 1100 Lake Street, Suite LL25 Oak Park, IL 60301 Phone: (888) 342-1939 Fax: (312) 546-8010 (email is preferred) <csr@doody.com> www.doody.com Affiliated companies: Doody Consulting, LLC

Officers: Daniel J. Doody (President, CEO, Owner) Association memberships, etc.: MLA

Key products and services: Collection development tools for health sciences librarians. Our product line is comprised of Doody’s Review Service, Doody’s Core Titles, Doody’s Collection Development Monthly, and most recently, Doody’s Special Topics Lists. Core markets/clientele: Doody Enterprises serves the collection development needs of health sciences libraries worldwide at academic medical centers, hospitals, community colleges, four-year universities, and in industry. Number of employees: 6

History and brief description of your company/publishing program: Since 1993, Doody Enterprises has been the most trusted source of timely, expert reviews of newly published books, print

and electronic, in the health sciences. We specialize in timely, targeted information update services for health sciences librarians that combine customized weekly literature update emails with content-rich websites. To provide these unique information services, Doody Enterprises has forged successful relationships with more than 100 book publishers in the health sciences and established a network of more than 9,000 academic health sciences professionals as expert reviewers. Over 5,700 librarians around the world rely on the timely bibliographic and evaluative information in our comprehensive database of health sciences books to help guide their collection development decisions. Further, dozens of publishers and book intermediaries have purchased licenses to our content. Is there anything else that you think would be of interest to our readers? Doody Enterprises is a small business owned by Dan Doody, who has been the company president and CEO since establishing it in 1993. The company’s success is directly due to the goodwill of literally thousands of people: healthcare professionals who serve as expert reviewers; health sciences librarians who subscribe to Doody’s services, volunteer to select Doody’s Core Titles and write articles for our newsletters; staff from publishers and intermediaries who actively participate in the enterprise; and most importantly, the staff that carries out Doody’s mission with conviction and enthusiasm. The entire Doody’s team is incredibly grateful to members of these communities who have supported and partnered with us since 1993.

LIBRARY PROFILES ENCOURAGED Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center

More information: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/news/NNLM_Cooperative_ Agreement_Announcement_Statement.html

Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine 320 East Superior Street Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (312) 503-8126 http://www.galter.northwestern.edu

https://www.nucats.northwestern.edu/news/2021/nnlm-evaluation-center. html

Background/history: The Galter Health Sciences Library & Learning Center fosters the creation and sharing of knowledge among the faculty, staff, and students of the Feinberg School of Medicine and its affiliates. In September 2013, the Galter Health Sciences Library joined the NU Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (NUCATS), allowing both entities to provide more integrated support to students, clinicians, and researchers. NUCATS launched in 2007, while the history of Galter Health Sciences Library extends further back (as outlined in our website). Is there anything else you think our readers should know? In April 2021, Northwestern University’s Galter Health Sciences Library and Learning Center was named the National Evaluation Center for the Network of the National Library of Medicine (NNLM), a five-year award. The NNLM Evaluation Center is a collaborative effort, with leadership from numerous groups represented on its advisory council, in addition to prominent national leaders in program evaluation, libraries, health disparities and health equity, data science, rural and medically underserved areas, and social change.

60 Against the Grain / September 2021

Max Planck Digital Library Amalienstr. 33 D-80799 München Germany https://www.mpdl.mpg.de/en Background/history: The Max Planck Digital Library (MPDL) in Munich is a central unit of the Max Planck Society that supports scientists from all Max Planck Institutes with a broad portfolio of services in the fields of information provision, publication support and research data management. In the era of digital information, big data, the World Wide Web and webbased collaboration, MPDL makes a substantial contribution to the Max Planck Society’s competitiveness in the international science community. The MPDL and its predecessors have featured as one of Europe’s largest purchasers of scientific information for more than 10 years now. The MPDL arranges for access to a wide range of scientific journals, eBooks, specialist databases and extensive open access publication services. Together with the libraries at the Max Planck Institutes, it takes care of an excellent supply of scientific information and opportunities for publication.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

6180 East Warren Avenue • Denver, CO 80222 Phone: 303-282-9706 • Fax: 303-282-9743

Subscribe to The Charleston ADVISOR Today!

The Charleston

ADVISOR

Critical Reviews of Web Products for Information Professionals

comparative reviews...reports from “The Charleston Advisor serves up timely editorials and columns, the field...interviews with industry standalone and comparative reviews, and press releases, among other features. Produced by folks with impeccable library and players...opinion editorials... publishing credentials ...[t]his is a title you should consider...” comparative reviews...reports from the field...interviews with industry players...opinion editorials... — Magazines for Libraries, eleventh edition, edited by Cheryl LaGuardia with consulting editors Bill Katz and Linda Sternberg Katz (Bowker, 2002).

• Over 750 reviews now available • Web edition and database provided with all subscriptions • Unlimited IP filtered or name/password access • Full backfile included • Comparative reviews of aggregators featured • Leading opinions in every issue

$295.00 for libraries $495.00 for all others

✓Yes! Enter My Subscription For One Year. ❏ Yes, I am Interested in being a Reviewer. ❏ Name_____________________________________________ Title_________________________________________ Organization___________________________________________________________________________________ Address________________________________________________________________________________________ City/State/Zip__________________________________________________________________________________ Phone_____________________________________________ Fax_________________________________________ Email_________________________________________Signature_________________________________________

Teams from the MPDL have been playing an active role in preparing and supplying research data and research results from the 80 Max Planck Institutes since 2007. The MPDL has been working for many years with both Max Planck Society born data collections and commercial resources, developing cyberinfrastructures and specialist applications for research data. It regularly combines data flows from more than a hundred different sources and performs ongoing analyses of usage statistics and constantly growing, complex data pools with entry volumes in the order of 1011 or more. The MPDL conceives itself as one of the four central IT service units of the Max Planck Society (MPDL, MPCDF, IKT und GWDG), together with which it provides the overall portfolio of IT services for the Society. At the same time, MPDL forms together with the institute’s libraries the librarian system of the Max Planck Society, in which the MPDL — pursuant to the subsidiary principle - takes on only those tasks which achieve true additional value creation. Sacramento State University Library California State University 2000 State University Drive Sacramento, CA 95819 https://library.csus.edu/ Background/history: Founded in 1947, Sac State is part of the California State University (CSU) system, the largest public university system in the country. We serve around 30,000 students, many of whom are first-generation and/or BIPOC. We are a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HIS) and an Asian American & Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institution (AANAPISI).

Against the Grain / September 2021

Number of staff and responsibilities: 28 librarians, 26 staff. Overall library budget: $6.4M

Types of materials you buy (eBooks, textbooks, DVDs, video streaming services, databases, other): All of the above.

What technologies does your library use to serve mobile users? Mobile-friendly version of the website.

Does your library have an ILS or are you part of a collaborative ILS? We share an ILS (Alma) with the 22 other CSUs.

Do you have a discovery system? We just switched from Primo to Primo VE. Does your library have a collection development or similar department? Yes, Collection Management Services. If so, what is your budget and what types of materials are you purchasing? Print or electronic or both? $1.7M: print books, ebooks, physical media, streaming media, serials, databases.

What do you think your library will be like in five years? We are taking on a larger role in scholarly communications and faculty research management. This fall we are launching the Esploro-based Sac State Scholars, a combination IR/faculty profile system. What excites or frightens you about the next five years? The unpredictable, feast-or-famine nature of California state budgets.

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Back Talk — Rip Van Winkle Awakes Column Editor: Ann Okerson (Advisor on Electronic Resources Strategy, Center for Research Libraries) <aokerson@gmail.com>

hat was quite a nap! Oh, sorry, you don’t know me, but my name is Rip Van Winkle, and I lay me down in the late winter of 2020 for a little rest and just started stirring around and trying to go back to my routines. It’s been confusing. When I go walkabout, the world is oddly empty in some places and mobbed in others. Why are there so many people in the mall walking back and forth past so many boarded up storefronts? Is it just my imagination, or are there suddenly a lot fewer bank branches open? Why are some people wearing masks and some of them not? And what’s with the couples where one has a mask on and the other doesn’t? I’ve only been up and around for a couple of weeks, but already I have a lot more apps on my phone and many more streaming services on my TV, and the confusion is amazing. I went into a favorite little café of mine, and they wouldn’t give me a menu — made me scan a code and squint — and I mean squint — at my phone to scroll through a four-page menu in type too small (on the phone) for the human eye. “You can zoom it,” the server said — oh, good, so I can see half an entry at a time! The TV confusion is a lot worse than before. Before I went to sleep, Google had taken over the world with its search engine, but now I look for the next episodes of that Canadian series I was watching last year and there’s no front end search engine for videos at all — I’m framming through one app after another, looking at one streaming service or another. And, when I want to pay for stuff to watch, I usually can’t do that on the TV — I have to go get another device and mess around there for a while. These people should learn from librarians about metadata, consolidated search, and single sign-in! But you know, I’ve been catching up with so much on my TV that I find myself wondering if I’ll ever go to movies in a theater again. In our big mall the other day, I could swear they were deliberately piping in the smell of popcorn from the multiplex theaters a couple of hundred yards away to try to entice me. And, right now what really puzzles me is that I spend so much time trying to figure out what’s on my phone, that I barely have time to call anybody — but whenever I do, they’re experiencing

ADVERTISER’S INDEX

2 ACS Publications 13 APA Publishing 61 The Charleston Advisor 11 The Charleston Report 5 Cold Spring Harbor Lab Press 64 De Gruyter 47 Emery-Pratt

3 GOBI Library Solutions from EBSCO 31 INFORMS 63 International Monetary Fund 23 The MIT Press 7 OSA – The Optical Society 15 OverDrive

FOR ADVERTISING INFORMATION CONTACT

Toni Nix, Advertising Manger, Against the Grain, Charleston Hub <justwrite@lowcountry.com> Phone: 843-835-8604 • Fax: 843-835-5892 62 Against the Grain / September 2021

— everybody is experiencing — higher than normal call volumes. I called an airline that said they were so backed up they could call me back — in four to five hours! I do have to admit, though, that it seems easier than ever to do my shopping from home, and wherever I go, they seem to have discovered take-out and home delivery and show no signs of giving up on that business. This afternoon, when I came home to my condo with my take-out, I had trouble getting into the parking area because of the line of Amazon trucks idling outside and the mountains of packages in the lobby. One apartment complex I know well appears to have permanently installed its own gigantic set of Amazon-style lockers, because of so much trouble receiving packages and keeping them secure. I do read the news, but my print newspaper has stopped coming — I wonder what happened to it? It appears that Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates seem to have gone to splitsville, and their publicists are having a hard time making them look like responsible adults (Melinda and MacKenzie always seemed to me to be people who’d be easier to be around), and there was this entirely weird story, written by somebody (was he dreaming?), that said that Kanye West had run for president last fall! When I find anything in the news that affects me, it seems that life has gotten hugely more expensive: house prices have shot up, car rental prices are through the roof — but Uber/Lyft has also gotten expensive. Even those annoying scooters are more pervasive and way more expensive than ever — and I can’t tell if that has to do with rational government measures to stop global warming or just goofy startup business plans coming home to roost. And, everybody seems to be complaining about supply chains — as if home renovation contractors didn’t already have enough excuses for getting behind on their schedules! My quarter-collecting piggy bank was kind of empty, so I took my wallet to my local convenience store to pay for my orange juice in cash, in order to start replenishing her (when she’s full, she donates the quarters to her favorite animal charity). But the convenience store made me pay my $1.49 via AmEx, claiming that change is in short supply! And did people really make do with a whole year of no Broadway, no Metropolitan Opera, as well as no movie theaters? You know, a person could worry that things people were able to do without for over a year might not be as utterly vital to our survival as a society as we thought. OK, this is still me, Rip. On another note, lots of tall buildings and parking lots seem very empty, and my doctor’s office just offered me a telemedicine appointment! What that tells me is that everything that can be done more or less as well remotely as it could be done face-to-face is going to have a boom of virtuality. People seem to be doing things in person when there’s a good reason to do so, not just out of habit. But haven’t we gone to some of those places for the human interaction? Will the anonymity of the mall, all that blank space between the stores continued on page 59

<https://www.charleston-hub.com/media/atg/>

Introducing IMF eLibrary

Essential Reading Guides

IMF eLIBRARY

Essential Reading

America Latina ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Capital Flows Climate and Energy COVID-19 Gender, Inclusive Growth, and Inequality Legal IMF Digital History Risk Management

• curated lists of publications in high-interest subjects • links to select full-text publications on the IMF eLibrary • essential material for a quick start on research projects eLibrary.IMF.org/essential global economic knowledge at your fingertips

eLibrary.IMF.org I N T E R N A T I O N A L

M O N E T A R Y

F U N D

PR ESS

TY I S

DE G R U Y T ER

The University Press Library is the latest innovative model by De Gruyter – a digital library of eBook collections 

17 prestigious university presses



Complete frontlist selectable by press and by copyright year



Multi/Unlimited use



DRM free eBooks



One-time purchase with perpetual rights

degruyter.com/upl

Partnerships are central to everything we do at De Gruyter. We are equal partners in the work of the scholarly community and have forged partnerships with over 200 scientific communities and academics, as well as individual scholars.

Volume 33#4, September, 2021 Table of Contents

Articles inside

Acquiring Diverse Content?

Back Talk — Rip Van Winkle Awakes

Biz of Digital — Librarians Promoting and Supporting ORCID@Rutgers

Consortial SILS

And They Were There — Reports of Meetings

Too-Small-To-Do-Everything-Budget with a Robust Digital Collection

Don’s Conference Notes

Stop, Look, Listen — New Wilderness in Orderly Markets Academic Publishing in Times of APCs and Transformative Deals

Reader’s Roundup: Monographic Musings & Reference Reviews

Booklover — Not a Greek Tragedy

Health Sciences eBooks in 2021: Availability, Challenges, and Trends

Toward a P+E eBook Model for Academic Libraries

Ten Years of Demand-Driven Acquisition

Licensing and Interlibrary Lending of Whole eBooks

Bet You Missed It