The Broken Publib Listserve or Control through Incorporation

I have come here not to bury Publib, but to praise it.


Ghost of Publib

Ghost of Publib

Last year, OCLC announced that they would graciously host the popular Publib listserve.  With 10 thousand + subscribers representing libraries throughout the world, it certainly represented a win/win situation.  OCLC – which sells its products to libraries would host and subscribers – who buy products from OCLC could continue to subscribe.  OCLC would benefit from the feel-good PR and the ability to data-mine and Publib subscribers could continue to enjoy the communication resource they have contributed to since the early 1990s.

While being hosted by UC Berkeley and Webjunction, Google and Yahoo! and all of the other major search engines readily indexed the discussions by Publib contributors. Even now, a quick engine search of almost any topic regarding public libraries renders a link to a Publib posting from previous years.  

But, all of those links are now broken and the provenance of indexing has been destroyed.  Although you may still view cached files, the only way to get live files is to go behind the wall set up by OCLC.  Access to the root directory is by subscription only, so the search engines would no longer index the content:   So, everyone who searches any topic ever posted on Publib must now go through OCLC and search the files that they exclusively control. 

What a great benefit this must represent to corporate interests of OCLC! Thousands and thousands of postings on every topic regarding public libraries, created by uncompensated authors, and they now control all of the content and its indexing for almost no associated cost and can monitor and data-mine all usage by the library community.     OCLC established and litigated ownership and control of Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) in OCLC v The Library Hotel  and was recently accused of antitrust by SkyRiver and Innovative Interfaces.  Does OCLC now effectively have intellectual property rights to all of the work by Publib contributors?

Hosting a listserv is really not a big deal.  It is fairly low level technology and relatively easy to manage.  With a bit of server space, Open Source programs such as Mailman can be set up that can manage a huge number of subscribers:

Hosting by a non-corporate entity such as a library school or a large library system would have made much more sense.  The original iteration with UC Berkeley hosting nested the conversation in a bastion of free speech.  Is removing and blocking indexing censorship? Is vetting all new subscribers appropriate?  Does the ability to restrict access represent ownership? Does hosting a listserve  and controlling access to everything previously written grant intellectual property rights and equate to ownership? Is Publib just another example of intellectual outsourcing?

Time will tell. But, at this time Publib is a ghost of what it once represented. 


Please join us on BestofPublib Facebook

The Publib Archives

The Publib archives from the Webjunction listserve are available here: Archives  (Waitthey really aren’t anymore).

Archives compiled after Dec. 7, 2011 are available here: Archives


5 Responses

  1. I was very unhappy about OCLC hosting Publib, right from the beginning. They have a very questionable ethical record when it comes to intellectual property. I try to avoid dealing with them as much as I can.

  2. PubLib archives 1993-2012 are here

    New subscribers are auto-added, not vetted, BTW

    Sara Weissman, moderator

    • No, Sara. The way that you have it set up – new subscribers all go into limbo with their posts referred to Karen Schneider for ‘moderation’. That certainly means they are vetted.

      The transition of Publib to behind the OCLC wall with nothing being indexed externally is a huge failure – ethically, professionally, and technologically – effectively destroying the meaning of Publib as a collaborative resource.

  3. >>new subscribers all go into limbo with their posts referred to Karen >>Schneider for ‘moderation’. That certainly means they are vetted.

    No, it means they are sending to the wrong (former) address. Yes, there are old, stale instructions on the PubLib web page… it’s being edited.

    • No, Sara.

      I am not sure why you are unable to comprehend that new people are not allowed to post without being vetted. I have sent you screen shots of what happens.

      Publib is set up by default to moderate all messages by any new person who signs up. All messages are forwarded to Karen Schneider’s email address – then nothing happens.

      But, this is only one of the problems with the list now -since you decided that all new postings and all old postings could no longer be searched on the open web.

      It seems ironic that you would tell me that all of the external links to Publib are broken because some people did not want what they have written to be read by others outside of the profession. The reasoning behind distributing an email to 10,000 + people that you don’t know and expecting it to be kept private and confidential defies all logic. The logic behind breaking links to everyone else’s contributions to the listserve to appease illogical paranoia is troubling.

      If we have people so illogical and paranoid working in the public library profession that they would destroy public access to everyone else’s work to secret their own writing, perhaps trustees and other employers should be able to see what they are writing. It could even be a public safety issue!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: