Will Google Books destroy local libraries?

In the long term the answer is "Yes". It's not just Google Books that will do this, it's other digital developments as well. History tells us that digital markets converge into a few large players, and that is precisely what will happen in this "market place". Libraries may wish to think of themselves as a public service, but ultimately they are a part of this digital "information" market place.

The question is, what should local libraries and archives do to combat this trend? And how long do they have?

The answer to the last question is easier than the first. History tells us that it will take longer than you might imagine for the digitisation of "everything" to occur. Digital developments generally take longer than the pundits/experts would have you believe. So, there is time for these local services to do something.

The question is, in a digital world where all books are free to access via the internet, what is the role of a local library or archive? If everyone can find what they want on line, free of charge, from the comfort of their own home, why should they bother travelling to a library?

The answer can only be that local libraries offer something which the "net" does not, in some form of added value. It will probably not be any one thing.

Certainly, the advice and assistance of knowledgeable librarians and archivists will always be valued in terms of educating the public and new librarians, and also in assisting the public with their research. Retaining experienced and knowledgeable staff is thus a critical success factor for libraries. Currently, their cost cutting initiatives seem to lead to some of their best staff seeking early retirement or redundancy. This appears to me to be the wrong direction of travel. Councils would be better advised to divert some of the funds they apply away from headline grabbing initiatives like building new libraries, and towards investment in people, services and books.

In addition, libraries should also be trying to add value to the holdings they have. My own web site shows what can be done to add value to printed archival material by digitisation (i.e. producing digital copies, and using optical character recognition software to make it searchable). Where local libraries and archives have local holdings which are unique, I think they should be doing what I am doing. That would at least give them some advantage in the digital marketplace.

Libraries and archives already have extensive catalogues and indexes which could be used to build local "knowledge bases" to answer research questions. In addition, it would be a good idea if every time a member of staff answered a query from a member of the general public that this response is added to that knowledge base. Over time, a substantial body of material would be developed specifically aimed at addressing local research questions, and this would become a valuable resource. Many companies already do this - IBM has for decades had a database of engineering problems and solutions to assist its field engineers; Microsoft has its own "knowledge base" for developers.

There must be many other responses that local libraries and archives could make.

You might think that the government would have an answer. They don't. They utter platitudes about "needs based services" and have a strategy of fewer bigger archives. That means centralisation, inevitably with a concentration on London. It all points to the marginalisation of local libraries and archives.

My own web site is therefore just an exemplar of one of the responses that local libraries and archives could make to the impending digital threat. My plea is that they should do something other than sleep walk to oblivion - please.