Library systems in the electronic era

The ‘traditional’ academic library system model – i.e. a central system constructed around a common catalogue record that also dictated the end‐users' view – is breaking down. Systems that were constructed to handle the processing and lending of printed items are no longer capable, on their own, of dealing with the variety of different information resources handled by modern academic libraries. A great deal has been written about how end‐users expect more ‘Web 2.0’ features than library catalogues currently provide. New front‐end services have been designed by libraries and library system providers to cater for this need. However, not much has been written about the needs of internal library staff who struggle with processing, handling, and supporting the huge volume of electronic resources subscribed to by libraries. Electronic resource management systems have been developed to cater for these needs, and new standards for data interchange with such systems have been developed. Just as standards were important in encouraging electronic data interchange (orders, invoices, claims, etc.) between libraries, publishers, and agents in the last century, so new standards are evolving for such transactions in the electronic era.     

Book Review

Peer Review: The Challenges for the Humanities and Social Sciences A British Academy Report British Academy, 2007, 61 pp. Freely available online at http://www.britac.ac.uk/reports/peer‐review/index.html ; print copies available on request from Ms Vivienne Hurley, The British Academy, 10 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1P 5AH, UK; tel. +44 (0)20 7969 5268; email v.hurley@britac.ac.uk     

Editorial

This issue of the Journal contains three interesting articlesabout central aspects of public opinion research, as well asan equal number of research notes that reflect the range oftopics that interest all public opinion researchers. Toshio Takeshita takes a turn at reconceptualizing agenda-settingstudies, using a taxonomy     

White lies: a racial history of the (post)truth

In the aftermath of the 2016 election of President Trump, a veritable cottage industry of opinion pieces, blogs, and articles emerged overnight, most of which seemed to agree that only the post-truth could explain how a racist, misogynistic, neo-nationalist member of the economic elite could win a presidential election. This article, in contrast, is inspired by Barbara Christian’s injunction that we question why a given statement, concept, or theory is now acceptable when before it was not. Operating in this spirit, we critique post-truth critics for neglecting the material tradition of ideological criticism in favor of epistemological explanations for understanding post-truth literature; we then offer two case studies—American drug policy and housing policy—to illustrate the racial amnesia required for claiming that only now do we live in a post-truth era.     

Contesting Communities

This introductory article to the combined special issue of Journalism Studies and Journalism Practice provides an overview of some of the key contemporary approaches to studying journalism and social order. It argues the need to step beyond a functionalist framework when considering the news media’s central role in shaping social connections, community and cohesion. To advance our understandings of social order, our paper suggests a greater emphasis of the significance of journalism’s relationship to the wider social sphere along with three other key considerations, including (1) a critical focus on the relationship between media, politics and social order, especially in defining and/or negotiating “anti-social” practices and social disintegration; (2) a more refined focus on the “imagined” and geographic boundaries of news audiences in digital spaces; and (3) the changing relationship to norms and conventions of journalism practice from trust and legitimacy to the role of journalists as arbiters and connectors across social spaces.