<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for The Sizzle</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle</link>
	<description>Join the conversation! Read about Gale&#039;s latest promotions or just browse the latest news that affects your industry.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:11:16 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Equity of Access &#8211;  Join the Debate by Katie</title>
		<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/comment-page-2/#comment-16</link>
		<dc:creator>Katie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 21:11:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.gale.com/test/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/#comment-16</guid>
		<description>Yes, it would be nice to have a cooperative environment where unfettered access was the norm.  But what about the products where the price is determined by anticipated usage or a purchased number of seats?  When our subscription price doubles or triples how do I sell that one to City Council?
One idea that Nadar floated at a seminar was delayed authentication.  A patron can go in and search and see a small portion of the content before being asked to authenticate.  That would make more sense to me than all or nothing.
As for exclusive content, I have had an awful time getting our local newspaper anyplace but Newsbank.  They are very expensive and only include articles written by staff writers.  Patrons would still have to go back to Gale, Ebsco or ProQuest to get anything produced by AP, Reuters, Newswire, etc.  I really don&#039;t know how much a publisher gains by having an exclusive relationship with a single vendor.  But, when cost exceeded content value, they lost our business.  Now we have &quot;selected content&quot; online and, combined with microfilm, will have to do.  I expected complaints and have gotten none.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, it would be nice to have a cooperative environment where unfettered access was the norm.  But what about the products where the price is determined by anticipated usage or a purchased number of seats?  When our subscription price doubles or triples how do I sell that one to City Council?<br />
One idea that Nadar floated at a seminar was delayed authentication.  A patron can go in and search and see a small portion of the content before being asked to authenticate.  That would make more sense to me than all or nothing.<br />
As for exclusive content, I have had an awful time getting our local newspaper anyplace but Newsbank.  They are very expensive and only include articles written by staff writers.  Patrons would still have to go back to Gale, Ebsco or ProQuest to get anything produced by AP, Reuters, Newswire, etc.  I really don&#8217;t know how much a publisher gains by having an exclusive relationship with a single vendor.  But, when cost exceeded content value, they lost our business.  Now we have &#8220;selected content&#8221; online and, combined with microfilm, will have to do.  I expected complaints and have gotten none.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Equity of Access &#8211;  Join the Debate by Julie Gotch</title>
		<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/comment-page-2/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>Julie Gotch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 18:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.gale.com/test/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/#comment-15</guid>
		<description>I very much appreciate Gale&#039;s commitment to NOT go after exclusive contracts, trying to be the only vendor to offer a journal title.  It is very short-sighted on the part of database vendors and journal publishers to pursue these exclusive contracts. Publishers who pursue that route seem to be trying desparately to recreate the old exclusive print paradigm in digital format instead of adjusting to the new world in which they find themselves.  They are fighting the tide in this open access environment, and they will not only be seen as out of touch with the new realities of the information world, but will lose if they don&#039;t adjust.  They should attempt to make it easy for consumers to read them, making up lost revenue by expanding readership because of great access through multiple database vendors instead of cutting themselves off from potential readers out of fear of lost revenue.  With limited funding, libraries inevitably have to choose between databases.  Let the databases stand or fall on the merits of their interface, searching and sorting capabilities, and breadth of subject coverage.  Let the journal titles stand or fall on their content, not their exclusivity of access.  Exclusive contracts make more work for librarians like me as we try to provide consistant access to the same journal titles for our customers.  We have to monitor key journal titles year to year to see if the databases we purchase lost the rights to provide a title.  I resent more work.  I resent having to either purchase multiple print copies (which aren&#039;t as useful or easily accessible to our students) or buy access to another database because of the database vendors misguided attempt to monopolize.  I don&#039;t think the database vendors realize the ill-will they are cultivating (when Ebsco got exclusive rights to &quot;Harvard Busines Review,&quot; we decided to expand print temporarily, so it didn&#039;t gain them a customer, it just annoyed us) and I don&#039;t think the publishers realize how it makes them look like dinosaurs on their way out (I will prefer a similar journal title that is not so exclusive if at all comparable).  To publishers: Don&#039;t make me examine you because you are a problem, I will just drop you and find a more accessible substitute if I can.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I very much appreciate Gale&#8217;s commitment to NOT go after exclusive contracts, trying to be the only vendor to offer a journal title.  It is very short-sighted on the part of database vendors and journal publishers to pursue these exclusive contracts. Publishers who pursue that route seem to be trying desparately to recreate the old exclusive print paradigm in digital format instead of adjusting to the new world in which they find themselves.  They are fighting the tide in this open access environment, and they will not only be seen as out of touch with the new realities of the information world, but will lose if they don&#8217;t adjust.  They should attempt to make it easy for consumers to read them, making up lost revenue by expanding readership because of great access through multiple database vendors instead of cutting themselves off from potential readers out of fear of lost revenue.  With limited funding, libraries inevitably have to choose between databases.  Let the databases stand or fall on the merits of their interface, searching and sorting capabilities, and breadth of subject coverage.  Let the journal titles stand or fall on their content, not their exclusivity of access.  Exclusive contracts make more work for librarians like me as we try to provide consistant access to the same journal titles for our customers.  We have to monitor key journal titles year to year to see if the databases we purchase lost the rights to provide a title.  I resent more work.  I resent having to either purchase multiple print copies (which aren&#8217;t as useful or easily accessible to our students) or buy access to another database because of the database vendors misguided attempt to monopolize.  I don&#8217;t think the database vendors realize the ill-will they are cultivating (when Ebsco got exclusive rights to &#8220;Harvard Busines Review,&#8221; we decided to expand print temporarily, so it didn&#8217;t gain them a customer, it just annoyed us) and I don&#8217;t think the publishers realize how it makes them look like dinosaurs on their way out (I will prefer a similar journal title that is not so exclusive if at all comparable).  To publishers: Don&#8217;t make me examine you because you are a problem, I will just drop you and find a more accessible substitute if I can.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Equity of Access &#8211;  Join the Debate by Sandra Ramirez</title>
		<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/comment-page-2/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandra Ramirez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 12:47:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.gale.com/test/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Yes, you can purchase Literary Criticism Online or the Gale Virtual Reference Library directly from them.  We are evaluating a purchase through them right now.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, you can purchase Literary Criticism Online or the Gale Virtual Reference Library directly from them.  We are evaluating a purchase through them right now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Equity of Access &#8211;  Join the Debate by Jane</title>
		<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/comment-page-2/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Jane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 03:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.gale.com/test/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/#comment-13</guid>
		<description>YBP &amp; B&amp;T have online databases?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>YBP &amp; B&amp;T have online databases?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Equity of Access &#8211;  Join the Debate by Sandra Ramirez</title>
		<link>http://blog.gale.com/sizzle/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/comment-page-2/#comment-12</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandra Ramirez</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.gale.com/test/uncategorized/equity-of-access-join-the-debate/#comment-12</guid>
		<description>Actually, you can purchase Gale titles from others.  Contemporary Authors is available online through YBP and Baker and Taylor.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, you can purchase Gale titles from others.  Contemporary Authors is available online through YBP and Baker and Taylor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
