Unlocking the potential? – Australia's digital strategy and major public libraries

Abstract

This paper examines some implications for public libraries of the Australian government's 2009 strategy for the digital economy. Many countries have produced national digital strategies in recent years, but these key pieces of policy architecture have received little critical attention. The rhetorical framing of the Australian document indicates the shift of communication and information to the centre of economic policy. This has particular significance for public libraries, as the major public information portals and cultural storehouses of liberal democracies. The strategy's emphasis on productivity and economic competitiveness, boosted by a proposed high‐speed national broadband network, presents major opportunities for Australian libraries. However, libraries and other collecting institutions have voiced concern over assumptions that they can simply ‘unlock’ their collections and supply content for new broadband applications. In contrast to some other countries, the Australian strategy pays no attention to the profound implications for information integrity and cultural memory presented by the expansion of cultural and economic activity in the digital sphere. The challenge for public libraries, the paper argues, is to explore ways that orthodox library responsibilities and new roles can be articulated in this evolving policy framework.

Democracy, digitisation and public libraries

“…EReolen and Filmstriben had sound utilisation rates, while other licenses were used far too seldom regarding the expenses: “It is a challenge in many libraries and we are several [institutions], who have not broken the code yet”. (SJ, 11 March 2020, line 128-130; McShane and Thomas, 2010, p. 159).…”

“…Digital documents exclusively distributed via licenses for streaming services or subscriptions to databases are thus not covered by legislation why the public library is not allowed to participate in the interurban loan system with these media types (cf. Afori, 2013, p. 14; McShane and Thomas, 2010, pp. 152-154).…”

“…(2010), Ian McShane and Julian Thomas conducted a comparative study of the digitisation strategies of 6 OECD countries and show how several strategies, including the Australian one, promote the economic and competitive potential of digitisation. Culture and library institutions are considered from an instrumental rationale with a focus on functions such as content provision, secure access and accessibility and training in the use of digital tools and services (McShane and Thomas, 2010, p. 158). McShane and Thomas argue for a sustainable alternative to the market-oriented direction of the Australian digitalisation strategy, where the constitution, preservation and use of the common cultural memory and introduction to digital literacy, source criticism and access to open source platforms, are key elements.…”

“…In a library professional context, the term democratic accessibility covers citizens’ free and equal access to the media types found in the public library, regardless of form and content. The unique reproducibility of the digital document has the potential to significantly increase accessibility, but different business models are crucial for the realisation of this potential, as the analysis will show (Yeo, 2020; Afori, 2013; McShane and Thomas, 2010). Accessibility is a prerequisite for the citizen to be able to applicate the information, knowledge, or culture contained in the document in question to enrich their everyday lives, privately, as well as vocationally, and commercially.…”

“…The Danish public library does not carry out formal teaching activities, but offers various non-formal learning courses, like campaigns to promote the desire to read, expand citizens’ information and communication technology skills or provide guidance in self-service solutions (Engström and Eckerdal, 2016, pp. 154-155; McShane and Thomas, 2010, p. 159). It is these functions the committee propose intensified and expanded in collaboration with various educational associations (The public libraries […] 2010, p. 10).…”