Scott Plutchak from UAB writes in his blog response
"We certainly don't need to keep the print to satisfy our user
base. Two years ago we stopped getting any print for our
ScienceDirect titles. I did not get a single question, comment,
or expression of concern from faculty or students. We've reached
the point where librarians tend to worry a lot more about the
print than the people who use our libraries do."
I am curious to hear whether this is a commonly held sentiment.
In other words, do the librarians on this list have the sense
that their patrons are operating in a post-print world (not in
the OA/PMC/Battle Royale sense of the term, but meaning have we
outgrown print)? If so, this would be a remarkable shift, and a
remarkably quick one. Certainly when I helped launch The
Berkeley Electronic Press in 2000, print was sacrosanct. The
idea of a viable electronic-only journal publisher was met with
feedback running the wide gamut from skepticism to scorn. If
this equation has indeed flipped in a matter of a half-dozen or
so years, this ranks as one of the most important periods in
scholarly communication history.
Best, Greg
Greg Tananbaum
gtananbaum@gmail.com
(510) 295-7504
On 3/28/07, T Scott Plutchak <tscott@uab.edu> wrote:
I've posted a reply to Mark's questions here:
http://tscott.typepad.com/tsp/2007/03/no_more_print.html
T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
tscott@uab.edu