Hi Hannah, all, I am getting lost here: by donors, I meant people donating money as a form of philanthropy, often as a unique contribution. What do you mean by funders? In my vocabulary, I tend to use the word "funding agency" or "funder" as organizations giving money to support research inside a regular programme of subsidies - think NSF or NIH in the US. Charities can be considered funders as they provide money on a fairly regular basis and within generally well-defined programmes - think Wellcome or Gates. Can you clarify? Thank you in advance. Jean-Claude > *From:*OpenCafe-l <[log in to unmask]> *On Behalf Of > *Jean-Claude Guédon > *Sent:* 08 March 2024 16:34 > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re: [OPENCAFE-L] > European Policy Shifts) > > The donor restrictions are also negotiable. The degree of restriction > is not relevant to this discussion. > > As for "conduit", I wonder how many librarians feel they are money > pipes between their institution and the publishers. > > Jean-Claude > > On 2024-03-08 08:56, Rick Anderson wrote: > > At the risk of being drafted into the monastic orders, I’ll > respond once more on this thread and then stop. > > Donor funds are actually a very interesting case in the context of > this discussion – because they’re usually far more restrictive > than institutionally-allocated funds are. Whereas a university > typically says to its library each year “Here’s $X for > collections, and $X for personnel, and $X for operations (etc.)”, > a donor is much more likely to say “Here’s $X which, in honor of > my late father, you may use to purchase 15^th -century Persian > texts in Greek translation.” (And if that sounds like an > exaggeration, I would suggest that you haven’t spent much time > raising money for libraries.) > > It's not unheard of, but relatively rare, for a donor (or a host > institution) to give money to a library and say “Do whatever you > want with this money.” Generally, both donors and host > institutions provide funds to libraries so that the library will > do things that the donors and the institutions want done. For the > library to accept those funds and then use them to pursue a > different agenda isn’t “courageous”; it’s dishonest and unethical. > > (In case anyone might find it interesting and/or amusing, I wrote > a brief piece in /Library Journal/ ten years ago on the vagaries > of gifts in libraries, called “Kitten in a Beer Mug: The Myth of > the Free Gift”: > https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/kitten-in-a-beer-mug-the-myth-of-the-free-gift-peer-to-peer-review > <https://www.libraryjournal.com/story/kitten-in-a-beer-mug-the-myth-of-the-free-gift-peer-to-peer-review>.) > > --- > > Rick Anderson > > University Librarian > > Brigham Young University > > (801) 422-4301 > > [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > *From: *Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Date: *Friday, March 8, 2024 at 1:50 AM > *To: *Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" > <mailto:[log in to unmask]><[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Subject: *Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re: [OPENCAFE-L] > European Policy Shifts) > > I have been involved closely enough with libraries and consortia > (CRKN in this case) to know the degrees of freedom libraries have > once they take hold of their budget from their overarching > institution. Arguing that libraries are not the source of their > money is Jesuitical at best. Yes, the money is allocated by > someone else - a university, whatever - and yes they have to > report to someone in the administration, once the money is spent. > But they can also raise money - my wife was doing that brilliantly > at McGill - and they are not just conduits. > > That is what lucidity (and courage) mean, > > Jean-Claude > > On 2024-03-07 08:51, Rick Anderson wrote: > > I realize that the differences between this odd caricature of > my previous message and what I actually said are obvious and > don’t require a detailed rebuttal. > > But I do want to emphasize that by pointing out the fact that > libraries are not the source of the funds that they inject > into the scholcomm system, I neither said nor implied that > librarians are either “powerless” or not “strong.” Nor did I > characterize examples of libraries “successfully redirecting > money towards various openness initiatives” as “marginal”; I > actually called them “very impressive.” > > Yrs. in lucid thinking, > > Rick > > --- > > Rick Anderson > > University Librarian > > Brigham Young University > > (801) 422-4301 > > [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > > *From: *Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Date: *Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 2:48 AM > *To: *Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, "[log in to unmask]" > <mailto:[log in to unmask]><[log in to unmask]> > <mailto:[log in to unmask]> > *Subject: *Re: [OPENCAFE-L] The source of money (Re: > [OPENCAFE-L] European Policy Shifts) > > On 2024-03-06 16:32, Rick Anderson wrote: > > /This is a very common misconception among people who > don’t work in libraries, and for some reason it’s proven > very difficult to dislodge. The actual reality is that > libraries are not sources of money at all; they’re > conduits through which money flows. The source of that > money is the libraries’ host institutions./ > > Rick makes a gallant attempt to demonstrate the powerlessness > of librarians within their institutions. What he is really > referring to is an instance of institutional politics where > librarians, while not in a dominant position, nonetheless > enjoy a degree of power and some ability to negotiate. What I > am referring to is that when librarians become aware of their > real power (which is not all that great, but, once again, is > not zero), they have to think lucidly on how they can put some > direction and coherence on their conduits. > > If I were to believe that librarians are truly passive > conduits, I would pity them deeply. I have too much knowledge > about, admiration for and faith in that profession to know > that librarians can do more than what Rick states. He himself > admits that it exists. He tries to reduce this to marginal > exceptions, but that is another question that some > evidence-based scholars can solve, I believe. One only has to > think about the book-banning efforts in the US and how > librarians react. This is a strong and generally courageous > profession. > > Jean-Claude > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives > <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L> > > > To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: > [log in to unmask] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives > <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L> > > > To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: > [log in to unmask] > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives > <https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L> > > > To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: > [log in to unmask] > ######################################################################## Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives: https://listserv.byu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=OPENCAFE-L To unsubscribe from OPENCAFE-L send an email to: [log in to unmask] ########################################################################