Comments on: ALA, relevance, and the almighty dollar

By: Information Wants To Be Free » Blog Archive » What could ALA do?

Information Wants To Be Free » Blog Archive » What could ALA do? — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 23:50:00 +0000

[...] A little over two months ago I wrote about the issues I have with the ALA. This was in light of Jenny’s complaints about the ALA charging her registration for PLA when she was flying to Boston just to speak at the conference. For me, it was pretty much the straw that broke the camel’s back. A few months before I had reluctantly paid my ALA dues — which my employer does not cover. I didn’t even know why I was doing it. I guess I wanted to hold onto a glimmer of hope that ALA could get better. Between Michael Gorman, speakergate, and a whole host of other issues, I have pretty much lost hope. Two months ago I vowed not to speak at an ALA conference until speakers are better appreciated for their contributions (and not just those who are A-list bloggers/celebrities). And now I’ve pretty much decided that I no longer want to be a member. I just don’t feel like it represents me, and I don’t want to continue to support politics as usual. I especially don’t want to pay more (in light of the dues increase) to support politics as usual. [...]

By: Thomas

Thomas — Wed, 04 Jan 2006 01:29:47 +0000

I just renewed my ALA membership today, after a year-long lapse. I gave the ALA $110! I am a young librarian, and am interested in the LHRT (library history roundtable) and also the ACRL and its publications C&RL, C&RL News and RBM (Rare Book and Manuscript Journal.) I am not interested in the ALA as much as I am in the ACRL, but in order to join one I have to pay for the other. I appreciate this post Meredith, as it raises awareness about how the ALA is overpriced and more importantly, alienating. But perhaps there are just too many librarians for all of them to have an equal voice within its professional organization? I do not expect to attend any ALA meetings anytime soon, but for some reason I read about them and hope that some day, my professional situation might allow me more room for conference attendence. I am also a graduate student where my master’s thesis might be about library history in America, if so, I hope to submit to the LHRT for award considerations. For this reason, I sent off my 110$ today – so that I can join the weird club that is the American Library Association and its mysterious round tables. At the end of the day, one must really admit that the ALA is a fairly respectable force in American culture? Perhaps its good that it has lots of money, so that it can continue to raise awareness and be strong. My 2 cents.

By: Lisa

Lisa — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 04:28:43 +0000

I could be mistaken but re: the comment about the ACRL staff. I don’t think that ALA dues is paying for those staff – I think it is ACRL dues and the various revenue-generated activities of the division. In fact, every time I have been involved with planning an ACRL event, we have to budget in something like 20% that ACRL pays to ALA for “indirect costs” …. clearly the financial set-up of ALA and its divisions, roundtables, etc. is not as well known as it could (should?) be?

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:34:35 +0000

When I was a member of ALA’s Office for Information Technology Policy steering committee, we had twice-yearly retreats that were completely paid for by ALA. Even though I was working for an organization that would have paid my way!! Perhaps that’s where the money is going . . . we had some mighty fine dinners and swanky hotel rooms. And I can’t say that the work was any more important than some of the other committees I have served on.

By: jen

jen — Wed, 21 Dec 2005 01:00:42 +0000

If you want to know where all that money goes, check out the ACRL staff list in their latest issue of C&RL news. I don’t begrudge anyone a job, but they have a huge staff and it just seems to promote a lot of bureacracy, in my opinion. I really wonder about this. I don’t want ALA to necessarily run on a shoestring but I don’t know what is going on here. I think this debate about ALA and money is, like other commenters said, only the tip of the iceberg.

And yet, there is something really nice about the face to face interaction, once you find a place at ALA (not that easy). I hope this organization can somehow get a clue.

also, ALA is really important to some people in the profession (I am thinking here about academic librarian catalogers). there’s no reason, though, that they couldn’t go off on their own.

My biggest problem with ALA conferences is the incredible redundancy. There are the same sessions every time. its too big for anyone to keep track.

By: Christina Pikas

Christina Pikas — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:47:41 +0000

Bravo! I dropped my ALA membership earlier this year for political reasons, but also because it’s not really doing anything for me. I think the most important part of this post is where you compare the operating expenses of ALA to those of NASW. That says a lot!

By: Leigh

Leigh — Tue, 20 Dec 2005 16:03:44 +0000

Jenny’s point was clear and well taken and Meredith’s comments capped it extremely well. ALA is too monolithic; too concerned with social issues that should, at most, be sidebars to their pressing need to address real library problems in one of the most crucial times of change libraries have ever faced; and they’re far too concerned with their almost divine right to the meager earnings of librarians rather than in crafting an effective plan to improve the social and financial standing of its members (that’s a real and pertinent mission that needs to addressed in something other than talking points).

Here’s the deal for me. ALA members are predominantly liberal in their stands concerning government. All you have to do is read through a few sites put up by librarians and you’ll get a lot of knocking of big government. Bush is knocked regularly because he’s an oil man and makes his decisions about the government because he’s taking care of his cronies and letting down the little people. Now my statement isn’t about Bush so everyone relax. Let me put on my commenorative Che beret and say that ALA is big government. They do not represent librarians’ needs anymore; they represent their corporate interpretation of our needs.

It would be nice if ALA paid librarians to speak at conferences, but that’s not my point here. And it would be nice if all librarians wanted to participate by donating their time to the worthy work of ALA. . And I’m not saying that they should even cover the cost of transportation and housing for speakers–though everyone agrees that would be nice. The issue is the statement that is being made by an organization when it charges its members (which it acknowledges as underpaid) for participating in an activity that generates sizable cashflow for the organization.

ALA is a dinosaur and needs to change dramatically and quickly or they will be replaced by the evolving ability of librarians to communicate quickly and effectively with new technologies. As someone mentioned above, in the past the primary reason for participation was their uniqueness in providing a means of intercommunication. They can kiss that goodbye. Blogs and RSS feeds are only the tip of what’s coming and if ALA doesn’t get serious about a real mission pertinent to the professional needs of librarians and a purpose for themselves that working librarians can relate to–then the only word that comes to mind is “dodo”.

By: Meredith

Meredith — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 20:24:04 +0000

Awww shucks…

By: Rikhei

Rikhei — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 20:18:42 +0000

This post made me want to stand up and applaud!

By: Jill Hurst-Wahl

Jill Hurst-Wahl — Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:07:34 +0000

I like your #3.

Also, I think we need to remember (part of your #1) that not all organizations can afford to pay to send people to conferences AND some of us are self-employed. For the last seven years, I have paid for me to go to conferences, even those that I have spoken at. There is no massive organizational budget behind my efforts.

BTW — slightly off topic. In SLA, the board (I believe this is still true) is not paid anything, not even money to cover expenses. I would like to run for the board, but can I afford ($) to do so? No.