I wanted to inform you that GamePolitics ran a story from LA Times’ article, where this post is quoted.

Now I’ll repeat what I’ve said on GP : though I disagree with Steven Cohen’s opinions on video games, he has the right to have such opinions, and anyway, that’s not the problem. The problem is : do we need video games to attract children in libraries and make them read books ? And on that point, I understand (if not agree with) Mr. Cohen.

I love playing video games AND reading books (though not at the same time), among other things. But if I want to play games, I go to a games store, or a cybercafé. To me, libraries are essentially places where you go read a book. This being said, here in France, “bibliothèques” (“libraries”) were replaced by “médiathèques” (“mediaries”) long ago, with the introduction of VHS, then DVDs and CDs. I still don’t know if it’s a good thing or a bad thing. But I don’t like when so many “real” libraries close one after another.

That said, while I hear alot of skepticism where I am about Web 2.0 stuff up-to and including RSS, I hear very few complaints about the possibility of gaming programs.

Gaming programs can be a pro-active response to the shocking (to any librarian working in the 80s or 90s) fact that libraries are popular to teens all of the sudden. In a non-gaming programming world, the teens do their social interaction and gaming in amongst the resume writers and hard-core researchers, perhaps annoying the heck out of them.

In a gaming programming world, our front-line people can respond to alot of big concerns in the community: youth justice, displaced teens, internet safety, cyberbullying, education [yes, education], and social cohesion. Gaming programs can spark partnerships, and act as a buffer for these larger community problems.

And, just ask the parents of teens in our programs. They are happy to see finally that there are actually services for their teens, because otherwise they’d be getting kicked out of the local Walmart.

I guess I’m skeptical about video games in the library, but I also recognize that it’s a form of media that won’t go away any time soon.

Mark, I agree with your last comment about people and their agendas. What’s a young, wannabe hipster librarian supposed to do if they want to defend the old ways of civilization? Play Civ IV at the library?

(As for childishness, I think the charge can cut both ways. Wannabe Hipsters and Beleaguered Defenders Of Civilization can both be acting out personal agendas that have little to do with reasoned library service…)

Say a library has 100,000 books and 20,000 CDs, DVDs, videogames, art prints. Say the library has 300,000 book circulations and 150,000 non-book circulations. In that case, books represent the dominant service (2/3 of circulation), but the “average book” circulates three times a year, while the “average nonbook” circulates 7.5 times a year.

That’s wildly oversimplified, but the pattern’s probably right–multimedia *items* circulate more often, but the book collections are much broader and circulate more overall.

And, as one who’s even older school than you (I think) and a non-gamer (and who, for some reason, almost never uses our library’s nonprint collections), I’m satisfied that some public libraries are using games in ways that, I believe, suit their missions and enhance their overall service portfolio.

I’m also unclear on why this is only “cool” and why it’s candy. As I asked on “Library Attack,” is chess okay? Pokemon (which is *all* about reading? Scrabble? Is it all games or just videogames? I think we can have a friendly debate about these things, and I’d really be interested to hear your opinions on this, as you know I respect you, too.

If you just go by the loudest voices you might not stock Harry Potter or gay and lesbian literature in some places (like my previous place of work). If you just go by circulation numbers you will miss things that are seen as essential but are rarely checked out (car manuals at my current place of work).

I understand the impetus that is driving some libraries to try gaming. However, I also get what Steven is saying about possibly over-extended ourselves in terms of collections.

That said, luring teens into the library with video games just doesn’t sit right with me. It seems like a “can’t bet ‘em, join ‘em” approach, which I abhor and have never followed.