Weeding worries, part 2: journals

Abstract

Purpose

The discussions surrounding weeding print journals can be quite different from those involving books or videos. This paper aims to provide commentary and direction for library managers seeking insight on how to engage pragmatically in the weeding of print journal titles for a variety of reasons.

Design/methodology/approach

Drawing on recent press related to an all-digital bibliotech opening in Texas, and contrasting the book weeding perspectives from part 1 of this series, this article explores print journal culling projects from the perspective of the consciousness of library users and stakeholders.

Findings

Weeding journals in waves or phases over multiple years of time can be a way to cope with the pressure of needing to reduce print collections due to duplication in online databases and print formats. Surveying users' journal needs separate from book or video needs will produce a more accurate understanding of what titles to keep on hand, and will also draw importance to this information type as it may be at risk as e-books and videos dominate the consumer information landscape.

Originality/value

Reduction in print journal collections continues as the popularity of online article databases grows more and more. Educating users on the virtue of journal publications separate from books and videos is a way to build more understanding about this unique resource. If digital bibliotechs of the future become what users know as “libraries”, but do not contain journals of any type, a major information source will have disappeared from the consciousness of future library supporters.

Citation

Luther Cottrell, T. (2013), "Weeding worries, part 2: journals", The Bottom Line, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 135-139. https://doi.org/10.1108/BL-09-2013-0024