And the results are in...

First item of business: Book Clubs. How did yours go? The book clubs I participated in were interesting. We had great chats about death. Really, it was a fun experience. My group went first, and so I think everyone was a little shy at first, and we were a little unsure of ourselves, but we got good feedback. It was interesting to watch the dynamics of each group. I have been part of a book club before, but I never gave the process a lot of thought before. I read the book and discussed it and that was that. So it was an interesting experience to approach it from a planner's perspective. I picked up on things I had never considered before. For example, the way you introduce characters into the discussion can limit how the discussion about them progresses. Pretty obvious, but not something you'd give a lot of conscious thought to unless you were in a situation where you had to--like this one. Also, (and I know this wasn't something that could be helped in our situation), the seating arrangement is pretty important. I have a new appreciation for sitting in a circle to discuss a book.

On to this weeks readings. Just to recap (yes, I reviewed the guidelines, and remembered why I was reviewing the readings. I have seen the error of my ways and am getting back on track), here's this weeks readings:
First, the ALA Code of Ethics. This document contains the guidelines for library professionals. They give a very useful definition of an ethical dilemma as a conflict of values. One of the points that stood out to me was that this is a framework that professionals can use to guide their behavior and make it ethical. I thought it worth noting that personal beliefs should remain separate from professional responsibilities. It is definitely something that every professional or future professional needs to contemplate and prepare for. I found the emphasis on continuing education exciting and encouraging.

The next article, by Mosley, was about the workshops for faculty. This was a really cool article. First, I think it was great that they included the role plays and materials. I think their approach to conducting these workshops was so logical, and I appreciate logic and common sense. The assignments were really practical. I actually wouldn't mind going to this workshop. In relation to the Code of Ethics, I noticed that throughout the workshop, they emphasized the importance of being respectful of faculty and not trying to demean them. I think it also demonstrates the mission of the profession and their guideline to be organized, make information accessible, and so on (Guideline I).

On to the hot topic: HarperCollins and their decision to limit use of e-books. I decided to read the HarperCollins letter, the statement released by OverDrive, the response by the ALA, and the article from CBC (Canadian news). I think the general response to HarperCollins' decision has been pretty negative, and I found their statement vague. If you knew absolutely nothing about the subject, you'd think they were trying to do the best thing for everyone, and maybe they really perceive themselves in that light. But they don't really say anything--it is very political, in the sense that they say something without saying anything. OverDrive seemed to be more to the point. I noticed they were still very diplomatic, but they seemed to explain their position a little better. I also note that their response was fairly level-headed. They expressed their concern, and their solution, but their response wasn't rash. The ALA was somewhat indefinite as well. Their overall response seemed to be, "We're looking into it." I don't think that's a bad thing, necessarily. While it would be nice to get a firm stance, I appreciate that this is unprecedented and it does require thoughtful study. The trick is to study it within a reasonable amount of time. Last of all was the CBC article. It was interesting to me that they didn't necessarily disagree with HarperCollins theory, but they did feel that the implementation was inappropriate. They were able to acknowledge HarperCollins perspective, but they make a very valid argument about the 26 uses idea.

It was interesting to read these perspectives on the issue and to read it in terms of ethics. I can understand HarperCollins reasoning--they are a business and they are concerned with the bottom line. Particularly if digital books do take over, then the effect on publishers has to be considered. However, I don't think HarperCollins has chosen the best option. I tend to think they chose the option that they liked best and that liked their bank accounts best, and then tried to present it as rational. I sympathize more with libraries and honest patrons. This is definitely an issue, and I think it's great that the discussion is taking place. I'm not sure what the best solution is, but I am sure this isn't it. What are your thoughts? Any solutions?