Colleagues,
I appreciate the suggestions and comments of Judy Austin and Susan Nance. As
Judy says, "the advantage for this particular newspaper is that the on-line
archive is a great deal more readable than the ancient and overused
microfilm." And it is word searchable.
 The larger issue, as Susan said, more eloquently than I, is "the privileged
ownership of access to electronic newspapers is troubling, and it means that
more information is available but to a much more exclusive audience."
 I do have access to UA Anchorage library, not to mention U.of
Arizona, and though both have part of the historic newspaper package from
Pro-Quest, neither includes the SF Chronicle. I have been in e-discussion
with the head of the UAA library today, the cost to add to the package would
be something in the order of $2500 per year. Universities in this day and
age of budget cuts just cannot afford all of these subscriptions. And, as
Bob says below, under their licenses, libraries who do have it are
restricted from granting access to anyone else, ie, historians not part of
that particular university.
Thus, although technology allows these digital newspapers, and it is very
exciting, what is the point if no one can get access? While my library may
try to get a "one month trial" from Pro-Quest, I just wanted to bring up the
larger point.
 Jane Haigh

Humanities & Social
Sciences Online

Copyright © 1995-2006 - Contact Us
RSS | Validate: XHTML | CSS