Category: vendors
Ten days ago or so I received an email from someone at Westlaw. It said, “Just wanted to send you a quick note… We’ll be revealing the new Westlaw on Feb. 1 at LegalTech New York… I’d like to get you some information about it… What’s the best address to FedEx you something?“ I sent my work address and didn’t think too much about it.
Flash forward to today.
My package from West arrived. There was some paper and a nice letter from someone, the details of which I don’t remember, because also included was what you see to the left. An iPod Nano, 8GB with video capabilities, retail value $149. I guess there’s a video or something on the iPod detailing the WestlawNext features, but I wouldn’t know as I couldn’t bring myself to open it.
Here’s the thing, y’all: I was absolutely livid when I opened this.
I’ve briefly mentioned before my feelings about accepting vendor swag. It’s advertising, I understand that. It’s built into their budgets and it’s not like they would charge less if they weren’t giving out the pens. However, I also don’t feel comfortable being a billboard for the legal information duopoly in front of my students who expect me to speak freely about the pluses and negatives of each service, so I don’t accept the little gifts of pens, coffee mugs, note pads, etc.
But an iPod? I don’t really like to take pens and here they’ve gone and sent me an iPod? As I said to one of my correspondents today, “this is just re-goddamn-diculous.” (Pardon my language, but I was really mad.) It does have “Compliments of WestlawNext” written on, but in super-tiny font. It feels like a bribe, frankly. Gross.
I guess I was expected to tweet/blog my “Thank you, Westlaw!” for it? Well, thanks but no thanks, Westlaw. I hate to seem rude or ungrateful, but I simply cannot accept this gift. (1) I’m an employee of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and we have rules about the monetary value of gifts. (2) Even if I disclose the iPod receipt before blogging about the info sent to me, I still wouldn’t ever feel right about saying positive things about WestlawNext. As I said to another one of my correspondents, “Congratulations, Westlaw, you just bought my silence.” (3) My usual rules of swag acceptance are in effect, no matter how much I love the way it looks or the fact that it shoots video or that my Zune seems to be dying and ZOMG IT’S SO PRETTY AND SHINY AND I LOVE NEW TOYS.
*sigh*
So, here’s the thing: I’m not keeping it. I’m auctioning my WestlawNext iPod and donating the proceeds to an appropriate organization or two. The details are still being worked out (my legal obligations as an public employee, whether or not my target charities will accept the donation, how to set up an auction, if other law librarians want to donate their iPods as well…details, people, details.) So, basically: WATCH THIS SPACE. I’ll have something hammered out by the end of the week. If you received a WestlawNext iPod and would like to get in on this action, contact me at Sarah dot Glassmeyer at gmail and we’ll work it out. And if you are Westlaw reading this (and I know at least someone at West does) and you’d rather that I not do this, I will gladly ship your iPod back to you. Seriously, I’m not trying to be rude about this.
I know my standards are higher than others when it comes to accepting swag from vendors. I have to admit to being a little weirded out by the trip to Minnesota some of my colleagues were offered. (Of course, I also wasn’t sure if there was some jealously on my part that I wasn’t asked to go, so I held my tongue. Some of us are just kinda bigger deals than others, I guess…. I KID BECAUSE I LOVE, JASON AND TOM.) I’m not entirely sure where to draw the line…coffee mugs? iPods? Drinks at the Bender Baby Dinner/Westlaw party? Trips to Minnesota? It not an easy line to figure out. Where does the appearance of impropriety show up? When does one start to feel a little like a corporate whore?
Despite all of my cheerleading for Free Law and complaints about pricing, duopolies, etc., I really don’t believe that vendors are the enemies. But I also realize that they are in business to make a profit and that will always take precedence for them. The vendor-librarian relationship is complicated enough…..please stop clouding the issue with over the top gifts of swag.
I’m starting to wonder how many times I can say to myself “…so that happened.” in a week.
I’ve just survived my first week of the fall semester. And if you’re one of my students reading this, let me assure you that the first week back transition is just as hard on law school faculty and staff as it is on you. I’ve had tons of ILLs to process, longer Reference Desk hours, lectures to prepare (oh, yeah, turns out I will be teaching 1L legal research this fall…there’s some sturm und drang about that too, but I”ll wait until another post to talk about the *dramatic pause* laptop ban) and welcoming receptions to attend, all while trying to navigate through a town/campus who’s population seemingly quadrupled in 24 hours.
Adding to the drama of the week, on Monday Westlaw sent out an advertisement aimed at lawyers with the headline “Are you on a first name basis with the librarian?” And then goes on to say, “If so, chances are you are spending too much time at the library. What you need is fast, reliable research you can access right in your office. And all it takes is West.” Screnshot here.
As my Grandpa Heller would say, that went over like a lead Zepplin with the librarian crowd.
There was outrage and pearl clutching on Law-Lib and twitter about it. I tried to not make too many comments until I saw the actual ad or heard an official response from West but I did get a screen grab of the ad and posted it on Twitter/twitpic in the interest of sharing information. You can’t imagine how freaked out I was to keep seeing “mentions” notifications on Tweetdeck with people all over the country retweeting it and then adding their own commentary. For the record, I never said Westlaw “sucked” or “was evil.” (Also, at about the 400th view of the pic, I noticed that the other two pictures visible were of me and a squirrel and me and the Butter Cow at the Ohio State Fair. *sigh* Professionalism! I haz it! ) So, anyway, it turns out it was in fact a real ad, and West feels terribly about hurting our feelings.
Well, okay then!
I’ve mentioned before that I have complicated feelings about the vendor/librarian relationship. I personally try to not accept vendor swag but I don’t think less of my librarian compatriots that do. I don’t think that Wexis are evil, nor do I think that there’s anything wrong with running a for-profit business. I do wonder why we rely on commercial vendors for information that tax dollars have already paid for and how much profit is “enough” when libraries and law firms are facing massive budget cuts.
As I tell my Legal Research students, I think of Lexis and Westlaw as the Crips and Bloods of Legal Information. They’re in it to make money. And, like drug dealers, they’ll give you the first taste for free while you’re in law school in hopes that you get hooked. But they’re also engaged in a to-the-death battle with each other over the finite customer base and if any one was clearly better than the other, the other would cease to exist. (And if you think I’m mistaken about the battle part, how many people got sent the West ad by their Lexis rep? ) So, basically, keep your eyes open and try to not be a casualty in the war…look out for yourself.
There’s always going to be tensions between librarians and vendors, especially as they expect people to pay for things that we want to give away for free. (There’s another analogy here that I keep coming back to, but there are some things that even I won’t put in print.) Here’s the thing…they’re not on our side, they’re not our enemies…we’re all just pieces of the same puzzle. And as soon as we get rid of worrying about being offended by them or always having to play defense or expecting them to kiss our rings for allowing them access to our patrons, we can start thinking about the future. I really like the ideas that Meg and Tom put out earlier in the week about the West ad issue. There are some concrete steps that law librarians, as individuals, can take and things to think about with regards to vendors and the role of librarians.
For better or worse, AALL is currently the major unified voice for law librarians. If you’re unhappy with the vendor/librarian relationship, perhaps AALL can be used as a conduit.
(Okay, Gentle Reader, I’m sure bitter laughter just rang out amongst some of you. I know lots of people that I respect and like have major issues with AALL. Personally, they haven’t really done me dirty yet, so I’m trying to keep an open mind. I’ll try to work for change within the system, and if that fails, I’ll go outside of it. I have no problem with going outside of the system and being a lone wolf and in many ways it’s easier, but maybe not as effective or fast. Like I said, right now AALL has the body count of law librarians that makes it the best bet to effect change. Refusing West’s funding for the Annual Meeting becaues they wouldn’t give up pricing information was a great start. So I’m hopeful, but in the meantime I’ll also keep paying my dues to SLA and the Legal and Academic Divisions. BUT I DIGRESS…)
Perhaps not coincidentally, in the middle of the West brou-ha-ha on Law-Lib, there was a brief message about AALL beginning the process of revising and planning for new stratgic directions for 2010-2013 since the current 2005-2010 strategic directions expire next year. They’ve set up a blog for AALL membership to add its comments. There are three questions that are asked:
- How do we seize the moment and make it our own?
- Where do we, as law librarians, want to be in the next three years?
- What is required of us to create the world we envision?
Okay, those are really broad questions. And yes, generally “strategic directions” and “mission statements” and things of that sort are often just “feel good” messages that aren’t easily transitioned into action and otherwise set off my BS meter. But maybe they don’t need to be. Respond to this call for input. Add concrete ideas. I need to think more before I figure out exactly how I want to answer these questions. When I do figure out what I want to say, I’ll definitely post my answer here and there. I encourage you to do the same.
Yesterday there was uproar in the law library community over this charming ad Westlaw sent to some of its subscribers:
Click to enlarge; the fine print punchline reads "If so, chances are, you're spending too much time at the library. What you need is fast, reliable research you can access right in your office. And all it takes is West."Yes, I agree. It's insulting and offensive. But beyond the outrage, I'd love to see it lead to more discussion of the positive things we as law librarians are going to do to change things so that next time a major legal publisher makes such a blunder, we all just laugh it off. And more important than discussion, action. What do we, the legal information experts, do to take more control of legal information back from vendors?
Do we start at home, encouraging our in-house reviews and journals to publish in accordance with the Durham Statement (have you signed yet?): commiting "to keep the electronic versions available in stable, open, digital formats"?
Do we continue to advocate for better and easier access to government information that ought to be free anyway? How many law librarians have signed the Improve PACER petition yet? There are definitely more than 682 of us.
Do we get more active finding creative ways around such shortcomings, like creating RECAP?
Do we help come up with more tools like handy LibX, the brainchild of a Virginia Tech librarian collaborating with a VT computer science professor?
Do we go continue to call for better user interfaces from vendors? How about going beyond critiquing the vendors to become expert interface designers on our own, making more useful library websites, less sucky OPACs, and engaging institutional or regional repositories?
Do we support our local legal information institutes and figure out ways to make them even better for research?
There's obviously not any set answer here, just lots of possibilities we need to get serious about exploring and implementing so we don't have any reason to get freaked out next time a vendor encourages users to make an end-run around us.
I'm not big on sports metaphors, but in his AALL 2009 keynote, Jonathan Zittrain mentioned the concept of library defense. Even I know enough about sports to know that you can't win only playing defense. So what's our offense?






