Comments on: The Greatest Library Funding Idea Ever Written

By: Andy

Andy — Sun, 01 May 2011 22:34:50 +0000

My apologies! The way your comment came across seemed more sarcastic than actual praise. In that light, I appreciate your comment and offer my apologies again for the mistake.

By: Richard Kearney

Richard Kearney — Sun, 01 May 2011 21:45:04 +0000

Only 15 words separates your longest paragraph above from my comment, but I’ll concede your point.

And I’m not actually being snarky. Your idea (shared by many) deserves a considered response, but not within the confines of the blog comments section.

Carry on.

By: Friday Reads – Challenges Editon « Matt Phillips

Friday Reads – Challenges Editon « Matt Phillips — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:42:05 +0000

[...] The Greatest Library Funding Idea Ever Written [...]

By: In Which I Defend Archivists and Proclaim One Author a Ninny | In Which…

Wed, 27 Apr 2011 20:15:17 +0000

[...] The Greatest Library Funding Idea Ever Written [...]

By: Bohyun

Bohyun — Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:36:47 +0000

I can see sponsorship being used at a library to make certain programs available which cannot be offered within its own budget, and it is a good idea to leverage external funding sources. But when you say that this is an option for closing libraries, are you suggesting that sponsorship / advertising should be considered as a source for a library’s operating budget? A library being an entity that aims at providing public goods, there is something very jarring about the idea of getting its operating budget from the private sector. I don’t think you are suggesting this but the thought popped up in my mind…

By: Jillian

Jillian — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:42:52 +0000

ALTAFF offers a sample policy for handling corporate sponsorship:

http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/altaff/trustees/orgtools/policies/index.cfm

(Click on “Sponsorship Policy & Procedures.”)

By: scooterkitty1992

scooterkitty1992 — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:26:58 +0000

There are public-private partnerships out there (http://www.theunion.com/article/20100213/OPINION/100219895) so in a way this is already happening. I think, there definitely needs to be a balance when it comes to taking corporate sponsorships and this is definitely making me think about it more. Thanks for the post.

By: Tim

Tim — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 15:57:01 +0000

Librarians are going to have to get MUCH more business savvy to convince me that this would be a good idea. Of course, if they were more adept at making deals, they might not need to be making these kinds of deals at all. :-/

ps: “Fox News Non-Fiction Wing.” Case closed.

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 13:01:10 +0000

One more thing-politics might enter into a companies decision not to advertise/remove funding. What if a company took exception to an increase in GLBTQ literature, or accused the library of (perceived) political bias due to the types of programming offered? A worse case scenario for me would be advertising as a kind of censorship.

By: Jane

Jane — Mon, 25 Apr 2011 12:57:26 +0000

My major worry is that Gale/Playaway would insist on exclusive (or first preference) use of of their products, and librarians/libraries would not have the option of selecting products that would better suit patron needs.

That said, Playaway at the public library where I used to volunteer (before I moved 650 miles away for my MLIS/job) was extremely popular and the advertising idea could take root there.