A library opened today in Texas, but it doesn't contain any physical books. Instead, it has e-books, e-readers, computers, and iPads.
This video explains the concept:
The library will have an annual budget of $1.2 million, which will cover the costs of about 10,000 new e-books each year.
What do you think of this new concept? Many other libraries have instituted new technology and "e-" features. Do you think they will eventually become entirely bookless?
11 comments:
It is probably inevitable that paper books will decrease, and perhaps disappear.
Reading books on phones do have some obvious advantages. The books are available immediately, and take up no space. It is easy to search through ebooks. Want to locate each time Shakespeare used the word "ear" in Hamlet? Well, an ebook can easily do that for you. The peninsula library system does provide ebooks for checkout, although I have not heard talk of getting rid of paper books (which I sincerely hope does not happen).
Still, there is something special about the weight and presence of physical books. It would be sad for books to disappear.
Libraries are already disappearing. At least, the idea of libraries as a place for reading and browsing for books. It is sad, really. To give you some data from our own Aragon library, 177 books were checked out from August to November last year. But 4867 articles were viewed on Ebsco. https://aragon.schoolloop.com/cms/page_view?d=x&piid=&vpid=1222153301644
It could be said that words are words in whatever form. Maybe that is true. What do you think?
I really like your thoughts about this! I guess it's true that "words are words," but I personally like physical books. They've been around as long as written language has, and I don't see there being a time where paper books just don't exist anymore. I really hope not. I've never even read an e-book.
I agree with Brianne that paper books are bound to become scarce in the future, but I still can't see a library without real, concrete books on the shelves. Sure, ebooks don't take up space, and they're easier to access, but what happened to the days when kids read normal books in a library? This technological revolution is doing more than just pulling us closer towards the future; it's erasing parts of the past. I grew up reading normal books, and I can't imagine a world in which real books are no longer in existence. I know that technology has its pluses, but in this case, is it really necessary? Do we really need ebooks in the place of normal books? I don't know where other people stand on this issue, but I for one strongly oppose this new development.
Though digital books may become more popular and widespread in the future, I don't think that it will replace paper books. This reminds me of the discussion I had in one of my former classes about whether school textbooks are better off in the book form or digital form. Many students preferred the physical version due to its practicality and accessibility. I feel that the traditional aspects of a paper book is sufficient enough to be prefered over a digital book.
I'm pretty split on this issue. I believe that literacy and a love of reading are at the core of one's attitude toward learning. Americans should be encouraged to read as much as possible, whether it be novels, works of non-fiction, magazines, or newspapers. Making books and other works available digitally could lead to more people reading because it's easier and more convenient. Reading digitally is especially appealing to those who seek a more interactive experience, as Brianne detailed in the comment above. A last, and somewhat personal, argument in favor of digital books would be the weight. I have found that my tablet makes books easier to transport; since I take my tablet almost everywhere, I’m reading more frequently.
Conversely, one of the purposes of reading is that it is separate from technology. On average, Americans spend a reported five to seven hours looking at screens DAILY. Even if this screen time is being used productively, studies have found that it leads to an increased risk of obesity, difficulties sleeping, and negative media influence (for source, see below). If libraries become completely computer/technology-based, this would only propagate the issue.
It’s not disputable that reading has far more benefits than other past times, but let’s not promote it at the cost of further damage.
Interesting stats:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/patientinstructions/000355.htm
I think this concept of discontinuing print can be related to journalism today. Printed newspapers have been declining since the Internet, some newspaper companies have even started publishing only online content and stopped printing newspapers. I think there are pros and cons to this. The pros are that a great amount of trees would be saved, and printed books and newspapers would not take as much space. However, electronic books or online newspapers have the ability to change data instantaneously. It may not happen often, but information can change, and could alter the original text. It's nearly impossible to alter the text in a million of books, but it is quite easy to alter the text in an online book or article. However, as Annika said, electronic books are much more accessible and convenient, so it is only natural to turn to electronic publication rather than printed publication. I do like books and newspapers though, there's a sense of beauty holding papered information.
I think Annika brings up a really good point about the health concerns of constantly staring into a screen.
However, I think these health concerns can certainly be addressed to make ebooks more pleasant and safe to read. For one, eyestrain can be reduced if the font is a comfortable size and the background color isn't too contrasting with the font color--for example, black and white would be uncomfortable to read, but black and a light grey or brown would be more easy on the eyes. The problem of sleep depravation or difficulties is a matter of the screens disturbing our natural circadian rhythms; ebooks with the E-Ink technolgoy like the Amazon Kindle or the B&N Nook actually do NOT admit their own light, meaning that they do not have the bright screens and the issues that come along with them (insomnia, sleep difficulties, etc.). Since scientists find that using bright screens in the dark before going to bed disturbs our circadian rhythms, the E-Ink technology actually eliminates that problem since they can't be read in dim lighting. I think if there are going to be more libraries like these, they should implement E-Ink technology into their "'e-' features".
I'm not sure how ebooks would affect the risk of obesity or negative media influence. But from what I can tell and have researched, ebooks seem to be no less harmful than the average, paperback book. And as Annika had already mentioned, if ebooks make reading more enjoyable, maybe American literacy and education can really benefit from these sorts of libraries.
I totally understand what you're saying, Alex. Like in online articles, all an author has to do is edit the post with an "UPDATE," but with printed books, there has to be a whole new edition printed. Electronic updating takes almost no time or money, unlike printing new editions of books, which takes both a lot of time and a lot of money. New editions, however, would probably result in a good amount of profit, so that's an interesting look at both sides.
As for the health issues that Annika and Jackie discussed, I think that's certainly something that is strongly considered when it comes to electronic literature. I think there will be even more studies conducted on it in the future.
I definitely agree with Annika in that this new "library" could lead to Americans reading more, and that it could be a lot more convenient for people. However, as the article mentioned, libraries aren't just a place to read books. Nowadays when I think of libraries I think of a sort of hub for resources - for example, job seeking. I think it's good that this space has been provided for more people to have the opportunity to access the Internet, a skill and maybe even necessity in today's world.
I do wonder if this library will have support from taxpayers. Electronic devices are always quite expensive and need maintenance, and I'm curious to see if this new library will be popular amongst the people. Also, if big publishing companies aren't willing to go digital, will that affect the selection of books in the library? While I think this is really innovative and helpful space for people, I don't know if it will be used more for books or as a resource.
Can we just take a moment to acknowledge how sad this is? Maybe it's because I never really got into the whole iPad/Kindle hype, but I have to agree with Julia. There is nothing like a physical book. Granted, e-world saves more trees, but if you fall asleep with an iPad on your face, I think it gives you cancer or something. BOOKS DON'T GIVE YOU CANCER. I just think it's awful how technology is taking over everything. Pretty soon you won't be able to run your ringer along a bookshelf that seems a mile long. You'll just be scrolling...
I think that there are plenty of positives when moving towards e-books, but I hope that physical solid books never leave. Because there are some books that you just need to own and have to show and share wtih your friends. And what about that new book smell??? I think that physical book presence will decrease, but they will still be there, and e-books will take over. I find e books to actually be incredibly helpful. One of the reasons why is because I can press control f and find a phrase, quote or word, which can be helpful when studying or trying to find a quote for an essay.
Post a Comment