Whether staff is good or bad at a task appears irrelevant to Dilevko
Who “dreamt of civic improvement, of turning a midwestern prairie town into something “beautiful” with “Georgian houses and Japanese bungalows”
Culture of distraction
Why can he not go further into this vein, and really dig into the cult of the expert—it feels like he tries, but keeps glancing away at other things that annoy him. And he doesn’t ever follow his argument to rational ends.
“ we lost the ability to gain meaningful knowledge and wisdom” (127) what can one say against such heated rhetoric? If you argue that you haven’t lost this ability, his condescending yet alarmist tone suggests that you are fooling yourself. Who knows—perhaps he’s right. All the usual complaints about Twitter. Another slow-moving target. But little of his critique is thoughtful, deep, or aware of possibilities. Or even reflective of tech-mediated reality we live in. His scorn of web 2.0, lib 2.0 particularly puzzling. He appears to be saying libraries should NOT know about online tech or seek to understand its relevance to their patrons/lives/world
Jaeger, P.T. (2010) Looking at newness and seeing crisis? Library discourse and reactions to change. The Library Quarterly, 80 (3), 289-300. Cope, R. (2010). The politics of professionalism: A retro-progressive proposal for librarianship [book review]. Australian Academic & Research Libraries, 41 (2), 156-157.