schaffner.p65


Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?  239

Electronic Resources: A Wolf in 
Sheep’s Clothing?1 

Bradley L. Schaffner 

This article examines the impact of electronic technology on libraries 
and scholarship. It focuses on some of the challenges of using elec­
tronic resources in research libraries, which include the cost of acquir­
ing electronic formats and the effect that such expenditures have on 
other library services and collection development practices. The article 
also explores how electronic resources have changed the way students 
and scholars conduct research. The goal of this essay is not to criticize 
or condemn electronic formats but, rather, to illustrate that electronic 
technology is simply one tool, among others, for the dissemination of 
information. As such, electronic resources should complement rather 
than replace other formats. 

volving electronic technolo­
gies, including powerful and 
inexpensive personal comput­
ers, scanners, the Internet, the 

World Wide Web, Telnet, electronic mail, 
and other advances are rapidly changing 
the library’s approach to collection devel­
opment and the storage and retrieval of 
information. Advances in hardware and 
software for the digitization of informa­
tion have made electronic publishing a 
viable format for scholarly communica­
tion. The rapid success of electronic re­
sources has raised expectations among 
publishers, librarians, and scholars for 
such formats. The technology is develop­
ing so quickly that it is difficult to ascer­
tain what impact future electronic re­
sources will have on libraries. In “The 
Changing Nature of Collection Manage­
ment in Research Libraries,” Joseph 
Branin, Frances Groen, and Suzanne 
Thorin wrote that “technical advances in 
digitization are truly revolutionizing the 

way scholarly information is published, 
organized and maintained, and both the 
scope and extent of this change are diffi­
cult to comprehend and manage.”2 The 
authors also stated that because scholarly 
communication is changing daily, it is 
difficult to predict what will happen in 
five to ten years. 

Although digital technology does 
benefit library collections and 
services, it also creates major 
challenges to the future vitality and 
health of research libraries. 

The rapid success of electronic re­
sources raises many misconceptions 
about their capabilities. There is the un­
substantiated presumption that all infor­
mation will be universally accessible to 
everyone via electronic resources. An­
other expectation is that electronic for­
mats are (or will be) cheaper than paper 
publications. Furthermore, some assume 

Bradley L. Schaffner is a Slavic Studies Librarian and Coordinator for International Programs at the 
University of Kansas Libraries; e-mail: bschaffn@ukans.edu. 

239 

mailto:bschaffn@ukans.edu


240 College & Research Libraries May 2001 

that electronic formats are superior to 
paper publications. 

This article examines the impact of 
electronic technology on libraries and 
scholarship. It focuses on some of the 
drawbacks of using electronic resources 
in research libraries, including the cost of 
acquiring electronic formats and its effect 
on other library services and collection 
development practices. The article also 
explores how electronic resources have 
changed the way students and scholars 
conduct research. The goal of this essay 
is not to criticize or condemn electronic 
formats. Rather, it intends to show that 
electronic technology is simply one tool, 
among others, that can be used in the dis­
semination of information. As such, elec­
tronic resources should complement 
rather than replace all other formats. 

Electronic formats have many advan­
tages. First, they are more versatile than 
paper publications. Second, using full-
text or key word indexing, they provide 
excellent searching capabilities. Unlike 
paper publications, these formats allow 
simultaneous user access. In addition, 
information can generally be accessed 
from remote locations, such as an office, 
home, or dorm room. This technology 
enhances the collections of research librar­
ies by providing patrons with access to 
information that is not available in, or is 
more accessible through, hard copy. 
Therefore, it should come as no surprise 
that most research libraries have em­
braced this technology. 

Although digital technology does ben­
efit library collections and services, it also 
creates major challenges to the future vi­
tality and health of research libraries. 
Ironically, widespread use of electronic 
resources in academic libraries may result 
in more restricted access to information. 
Many electronic products have license 
agreements that severely limit how this 
information can be used, particularly in 
the area of interlibrary loan. Depending 
on how copyright and fair use laws are 
revised and modified for digital technolo­
gies, it is possible that libraries will have 
to implement restrictive policies on how 

electronic resources are used in their col­
lections and by whom.3 Thus, librarians 
must carefully consider the impact that 
restricted use will have on the future of 
research collections. 

A second major challenge to the vital­
ity of research libraries is that, although 
they are racing to keep up with the latest 
technology, they also are defending their 
future existence in the electronic age. Pro­
fessors and students now have options 
other than the library, such as the Web and 
the Internet, to access information. These 
new information technologies have led 
some people to question the value or need 
of “traditional” libraries. A 1996 survey 
showed that Americans between the ages 
of 18 and 24 do not support maintaining 
or building new libraries; instead, they 
believe libraries will be of little value in 
the digital future.4 Writing for the Coun­
cil on Library and Information Resources 
in 1999, Abbey Smith noted that “digiti­
zation often raises expectations of ben­
efits, cost reductions, and efficiencies that 
can be illusory, and, if not viewed realis­
tically, have the potential to put at risk 
the collections and services libraries have 
provided for decades.”5 Such expectations 
for electronic resources can indeed have 
a devastating effect on the continued de­
velopment of library collections. Politi­
cians and administrators, who control 
funding and who already have made 
enormous investments in technological 
infrastructure for their institutions, sup­
port the idea of a virtual library based on 
a desire to believe that electronic infor­
mation is free or cheaper than paper for­
mats. Such beliefs would result in reduced 
funding for libraries. After all, if a virtual 
library were possible, there would be no 
need to store books, serials, and docu­
ments, and certainly no need to pay li­
brarians or staff. 

Unfortunately, electronic resources are 
often expensive. In many cases, books, 
serials, newspapers, and microfilm con­
tinue to be the best and most economical 
format to distribute and archive many 
types of information. Nevertheless, some 
librarians and administrators now place 



Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? 241 

the highest priority on the acquisition of 
electronic formats. Because most librar­
ies have limited resources, expenditures 
for more traditional publications such as 
monographs and serials are cut in order 
to acquire electronic resources. This re­
sults in fewer resources available for sub­
jects such as area studies, foreign lan­
guages, the humanities, and other fields 
that currently do not have the extensive 
coverage in electronic resources that the 
sciences do. Focusing solely on acquiring 
electronic resources improves access to 
some information but limits access to 
other, equally important, publications 
that are not digitized. 

Even when specialized electronic re­
sources are available, they are often ex­
tremely expensive, particularly when one 
looks at the cost-per-user ratio. For ex­
ample, in the field of Russian studies, a 
growing number of vendors offer elec­
tronic databases. These databases prima­
rily offer full-text access to newspapers 
and journals from the region and range 
in price from about $2,000 to $23,000 an­
nually.6 The sales pitch of many vendors 
includes the statement that their Russian 
database costs substantially less than 
other databases such as Lexis-Nexis’ Aca­
demic Universe. What they fail to acknowl­
edge is the fact that at U.S. universities, 
the user population for a Russian-lan­
guage database is going to be substan­
tially smaller than the user population for 
a general product such as Academic Uni­
verse. To illustrate this point, there are 
approximately 26,155 students and fac­
ulty members at the University of Kan­
sas (KU). About three hundred have the 
language skills and the need to access 
specialized Russian or Slavic studies re­
sources. Database A, a general informa­
tion database that could be used by ev­
eryone at KU, costs $80,000 per year. This 
cost can be broken down to $3.06 per user 
per year based on the potential audience 
for the resource. Database B, a specialized 
Russian database, costs $23,000 per year. 
If this cost is divided among the three 
hundred potential users of this resource, 
it is $76.67 per user per year. Although 

the vendor is correct in arguing that its 
database is cheaper in total dollars than 
other databases, the cost per user can be 
extremely high, making it difficult for 
universities, even those with strong in­
ternational studies programs, to justify 
the acquisition of specialized databases. 
Ironically, the very nature of research is 
such that most resources will have only a 
few targeted, specialist users and the 
problem of high cost-per-user electronic 
products will continue to grow, particu­
larly if the institution plans to support 
serious in-depth research by its students 
and faculty. 

There appears to be a growing unifor­
mity developing among libraries regard­
ing electronic resources offered. One need 
only look at the electronic resources that 
most ARL libraries offer to see that these 
institutions generally purchase similar 
electronic materials. This indicates that 
these products constitute “core” library 
materials. Unfortunately, it also means 
that as more and more collection devel­
opment money is used for the purchase 
of electronic resources, the distinctive 
character of individual research libraries 
will be lost as each institution offers its 
patrons access to the same materials. Care 
must be taken to ensure that the unique 
character of a research library is main­
tained. We must work to continue to de­
velop library collections that support the 
total teaching and research mission of the 
university. 

The emphasis placed on electronic 
technology over more traditional re­
sources is not limited to higher education. 
In a recent poll, U.S. teachers ranked com­
puter skills and media technology “as 
more ‘essential’ than the study of Euro­
pean history, biology, chemistry and 
physics…and than reading modern 
American writers such as Steinbeck and 
Hemingway or classics such as Plato and 
Shakespeare.”7 Unfortunately, schools are 
dropping traditional courses, such as art 
and music programs, to fund technology, 
even though there are no valid studies 
that prove such technology enhances a 
child’s ability to learn.8 The long-term 



242 College & Research Libraries May 2001 

implications of such priorities are pro­
vocative. 

The Impact of Electronic Resources 
on Research 
Access to electronic resources has already 
influenced and changed the way that stu­
dents and scholars conduct research and 
use libraries. As mentioned above, elec­
tronic databases and indexes allow a pa­
tron to search a vast amount of informa­
tion quickly. For example, a researcher can 
conduct an extensive literature search 
using multivolume resources, such as the 
MLA Bibliography, in a matter of minutes. 
After being introduced to electronic re­
sources, most patrons embrace the tech­
nology and expect to conduct all of their 
research online using electronic indexes 
and full-text databases. They often are 

Librarians and teachers must educate 
students and other users to evaluate 
information obtained on the Web by 
the same standards used to evaluate 
other research materials. 

disappointed to learn that not all schol­
arly materials are available electronically. 
As noted earlier, in the field of Slavic stud­
ies, a small, but growing, number of elec­
tronic resources are available. However, 
the preponderance of research must be 
conducted using traditional paper and 
film formats. This comes as a surprise to 
many, particularly younger students in 
the field who have used electronic re­
sources for other course work and re­
search. On several occasions, students 
have requested assistance in changing the 
focus of their research to a topic that could 
be searched using only electronic sources. 
This trend toward using electronic re­
sources exclusively should be cause for 
concern about the direction of scholarship 
if it now focuses exclusively on data avail­
able online. A wealth of research mate­
rial is not now—and may never be— 
available in electronic formats. Such 
growing dependence on electronic re­
sources makes one wonder if future un­
dergraduate students will have any train­

ing or experience in conducting research 
with more traditional formats. 

When students or scholars become 
fully dependent on searching online re­
sources, what will happen when they 
have to conduct research in an archive or 
a library that is not online, or that is not 
covered in electronic formats? It is easy 
to counter with the argument that some­
day everything will be online. However, 
using the Slavic example, it is doubtful 
that there will ever be money available to 
finance the electronic conversion of all 
information. Simply converting the card 
catalogs of the Russian State Library in 
Moscow and the Russian National Li­
brary in St. Petersburg to an electronic 
format would be a major undertaking, 
given that the two libraries’ combined 
holdings number more than 72 million 
items. The cost of converting all of these 
cataloged publications to a full-text digi­
tal format in a country experiencing se­
vere economic exigencies is unthinkable 
for at least a generation or two. 

An additional problem of electronic 
resources is the difficulty of identifying 
relevant, valid information. The Web, one 
of the most popular electronic resources, 
provides good examples of the challenge 
presented in identifying and accessing 
legitimate information. Scholars from 
around the globe use the Web to conduct 
and disseminate research. But, as we 
know, the Web is not limited to academic 
use. Individuals, social groups, politi­
cians, eccentrics, and businesses, to name 
a few, also use the Web. The sheer num­
ber of sites on the Web makes it difficult 
to identify relevant information. Further, 
because of its open nature, anyone with 
the appropriate equipment can “publish” 
on the Web, even if what they are posting 
is inaccurate or willfully misleading. Al­
though the Web is an excellent tool that 
can provide a wealth of information, be­
cause of its size and open nature, it has 
limitations for scholarly research. 

Many people praise the Web for being 
very democratic. Anyone with a com­
puter and Internet access can use it, con­
struct home pages, and distribute elec­



Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? 243 

tronic documents. Although this egalitari­
anism is a noble idea, it can create a 
minefield for students and scholars con­
ducting research. In general, documents 
on the Web do not undergo editorial re­
view. As a result, not all documents or 
information acquired on the Web are ac­
curate. Much of what is available on the 
Web is, in essence, vanity publishing. 
Ironically, scholars who would never con­
sider using self-published materials, as 
they have not undergone editorial review, 
often do not think twice about using in­
formation acquired on the Web. Librar­
ians and teachers must educate students 
and other users to evaluate information 
obtained on the Web by the same stan­
dards used to evaluate other research ma­
terials. 

Another problem associated with us­
ing the Web for research is the mobility 
of information. After a student or scholar 
has determined that a site provides valid 
information, he or she has no way to 
know how long the site will be available. 
On the other hand, when a scholar cites 
an archival document, the item remains 
available unless the archive closes or the 
document is destroyed. Other research­
ers assume that they could go to the 
archive to examine the document and 
evaluate the first scholar ’s interpretation. 
Unlike archival resources, information on 
the Web can migrate. Many good Web 
sites are shut down or move to a new lo­
cation (URL). After a Web site closes, the 
information posted on that site may no 
longer be available. If a scholar cites in­
formation from a Web site, it may be im­
possible for others to review and evalu­
ate his or her research. 

The search process on the Web also 
brings up several points that need to be 
considered. These issues apply to the 
search process of other electronic formats, 
as well. Full-text or keyword searching 
provides quick access to vast quantities 
of information. However, the information 
retrieved is only as good as the source’s 
indexing and the key words used in the 
search. On the Web, using the same search 
terms will lead you to varying results de­

pending on the search engine used (for 
example, Go To or Alta Vista) or the time 
of day the search is conducted. A single 
search often reveals hundreds or thou­
sands of hits, most of which are inappro­
priate for the topic under consideration. 
The scholar must know how to use the 
appropriate key words and a combination 
of search engines to find relevant infor­
mation. In an article in the New York Times, 
Steven R. Knowlton wrote that “the 
Internet makes readily available so much 
information, much of it unreliable, that 
students think research is far easier than 
it really is. As a result, educators say, stu­
dents are producing superficial research 
papers, full of data—some of it suspect— 
and little thought.”9 This illustrates that 
a major challenge for researchers using 
electronic resources is to develop a search 
strategy that will identify relevant infor­
mation. 

When conducting a search, the user 
must be accurate when entering the in­
quiry into the database. Computers will 
search for a term exactly as it is entered, 
and typographical errors could result in 
no hits. Surprisingly, spelling errors of­
ten result in hits. An article on search strat­
egies for the Web reports that searching 
the incorrectly spelled term “mathmetics” 
retrieved more than two thousand hits be­
cause the creators of the documents re­
trieved also misspelled the word.10 This 
alone makes one question the validity of 
much of the Web as a serious research 
tool. 

One also must consider the ramifica­
tions of using information that is possi­
bly taken out of context. Searching the 
Web or a full-text database, one can down­
load a passage or two that cover a sub­
ject. However, the passage alone may be 
an incomplete work. Such a search may 
not provide the researcher with all of the 
background material needed on the topic. 

Publishers could use hybrid formats to 
improve access while still meeting the 
needs of users. Textbooks, for example, 
may best serve students in a paper for­
mat. However, publishers could provide 
a Web version, or include with the book a 



244 College & Research Libraries May 2001 

CD-ROM version, of the text in lieu of an 
index. Students could use the electronic 
version to quickly access information but 
could study the paper version. Publish­
ers would benefit from not incurring the 
cost of creating an index. 

Cost 
People are often surprised to learn that 
most electronic scholarly publications are 
not free; in fact, they frequently cost more 
to acquire than the paper version. Charles 
B. Lowry, dean of libraries at the Univer­
sity of Maryland College Park, and 
Denise A. Troll, assistant university librar­
ian for Library Information Technology 
at Carnegie Mellon University, wrote that: 

Too often, work on digital libraries, 
not to mention much theoretical dis­
cussion, proceeds without a thor­
ough grounding in the realities of 
cost. There are certain assumptions 
which precede this state of affairs, 
among them the notion that digital 
libraries somehow will be cheaper 
than print libraries, perhaps even 
free. One suspects that this arises 
from the misplaced hope that digi­
tal libraries will liberate us from the 
difficult cost dynamics of print li­
braries. There is also a presumption 
that electronic access will mean 
added value to library patrons, but 
it begs the question if the access is 
at a cost patrons are unwilling to 
pay.11 

Indeed, academic librarians and pa­
trons must carefully weigh the benefit 
versus the cost of electronic resources. Are 
we willing to pay for the added value of 
access (both in searching capabilities and 
convenience through remote access) if it 
comes at the cost of the breadth and scope 
of the research collection? Focusing all 
collection development funds on elec­
tronic resources will privilege some dis­
ciplines in a library’s collections at the 
expense of others that do not extensively 
use digitization as a scholarly communi­
cation format. 

Currently, a number of options are 
available to libraries for access to elec­
tronic resources. One is to own and store 
the information on local computers and/ 
or by using CD-ROM products on stand­
alone workstations or on a LAN (local 
area network). The alternative is to pro­
vide access to information that is owned 
and maintained by vendors or publish­
ers through Telnet, Web-based, or direct-
dial access. 

One study shows that on-site storage 
of digital information at libraries is more 
expensive than storing traditional publi­
cations such as books and serials. “Based 
on a ten-year replacement cycle, digital 
storage and access will cost academic li­
braries sixteen times as much as print to 
store locally.”12 The ten-year cycle in­
cludes the replacement of computer 
equipment and the migration of the in­
formation to newer formats so that it con­
tinues to be accessible. Given how quickly 
computer equipment is evolving, ten 
years is a long time between upgrading 
hardware and refreshing the digital in­
formation. 

Publishers and vendors offer remote 
access to electronic resources as an alter­
native to actual ownership of digital in­
formation. Remote access offers many 
advantages. First and foremost, a library 
will not have to maintain the equipment 
and incur all associated costs to store, re­
fresh, and migrate the information. It 
need only supply relatively inexpensive 
workstations to access the resource. In 
addition, if a vendor maintains the infor­
mation, it can be updated on a continual 
basis. 

But there are a number of issues that 
librarians must consider when they pay 
for remote access to information. First is 
the user’s ability to access the remote site. 
For example, over the past few years, the 
KU libraries have switched to Web inter­
faces to access many databases. Librarians 
and patrons are discovering that connect 
and response times can be slow. Librar­
ians need to question paying $80,000, or 
more, to a vendor when access to the da­
tabase is difficult or impossible. Library 



 

Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? 245 

patrons expect a quick response time to 
electronic inquiries and will not be satis­
fied if they must wait several minutes 
simply to connect to a Web page. A pub­
lished study on accessing scholarly elec­
tronic journals reports the following: 

A full 55 percent of the e-journals 
in the sample could not be accessed 
on the first try by one or more of 
the methods listed in the directories 
[for example, Web, Telnet, gopher, 
etc.]. More than half of the access 
failures were due to the problems 
of the e-journals themselves, such as 
servers being down or server loca­
tion changes. Moreover, about one-
fifth of the e-journals had incom­
plete archives and almost a quarter 
had probably ceased publication.13 

Incomplete electronic archives lead to 
a second, and major, issue concerning re­
mote access—the purchase of “cyber va­
por.” When a library subscribes to a pa­
per or microform index, journal, or news­
paper, the institution keeps the acquired 
issues of the publication. This ensures that 
the item will be available to future schol­
ars, even if the library no longer sub­
scribes to the title or the title ceases pub­
lication. The trend to provide access to, 
rather than acquire ownership of, publi­
cations means that there will only be ac­
cess as long as the library is willing to pay. 
If a library subscribes to an electronic da­
tabase for a number of years and then has 
to cancel its subscription because of finan­
cial problems, it is left with nothing tan­
gible for its investment. This could lead 
to a situation where a library administra­
tor might feel compelled to continue to 
subscribe to an electronic publication so 
that the library does not lose its invest­
ment. This issue is complicated by the 
very real possibility that electronic publi­
cations will see “captive audience” price 
increases similar to those in costs of sci­
entific journals over the past decade. In 
fact, this is already happening. The KU 
libraries were notified that a subscription 
to a certain database would increase from 

about $24,000 in 1997 to $250,000 in 1998. 
(It should be noted that the vendor did 
offer an alternative subscription plan for 
$80,000 per year, but the database would 
not include all of the information in the 
more expensive version.) Few libraries 
can absorb such price increases. 

Given recent developments in the li­
brary environment, publishing trends, 
and patron needs, the move toward pro­
viding access to information, rather than 
actual ownership of material, is a reality 
for most research libraries. However, li­
brarians must carefully consider the im­
plications of purchasing only access to 
information. Libraries will have to de­
pend on a vendor or publisher not only 
to provide access, but also to archive the 
information. If the vendor goes out of 
business or decides that it is not finan­
cially viable to continue to maintain a 
publication, the library will lose its vir­
tual holdings to it. Some vendors, such 
as East View Publications of Minneapo­
lis, Minnesota, have come up with a 
workable solution. East View offers nu­
merous Russian newspapers in electronic 
format. Rather than waiting six weeks to 
receive the paper via airmail, a person in 
the United States can read news reports 
the day they are published. Unfortu­
nately, the subscriber will have access to 
this information electronically only as 
long as the vendor maintains the data in 
the computer. For archival purposes, East 
View offers microfilm copies of the pa­
per at a discounted rate to electronic sub­
scribers. This enables a library to provide 
immediate access to the current newspa­
per but also ensures that their future pa­
trons will have access to the same publi­
cation, albeit in a slightly different format. 
However, this solution will not work for 
all electronic publications. 

Librarians must take the initiative in 
encouraging vendors and publishers to 
guarantee that appropriate electronic 
products will be available to future gen­
erations of students and scholars in or­
der to secure their investment. This could 
be done through the use of an indepen­
dent third party, such as OCLC or RLG, 

http:publication.13


246 College & Research Libraries May 2001 

that would store and disseminate a re­
source if the vendor goes out of business 
or decides that it is no longer economi­
cally feasible to offer the product commer­
cially.14 If this scenario were to occur, the 
database or electronic files would be 
transferred to the third-party site. Librar­
ies that subscribe to the product would 
be assured of continued future access to 
the resource. However, such backup sys­
tems are only in a nascent state of devel­
opment and the costs are still unknown. 

Preservation 
Librarians need to consider whether digi­
tization is an appropriate format for stor­
age and preservation. Given the rapid 
development of computer hardware and 
software upgrades, will current materi­
als will be accessible in ten years? For 
example, with regard to CD-ROMS, we 
find that: 

not that the compact disks them­
selves are short lived, but the hard­
ware needed to read them is ever 
evolving. Support for today’s tech­
nology may not be available tomor­
row. What use is a disc that can last 
500 years, even 100 or 50 years, if 
there is no machine which provides 
access to the information on the 
disc?15 

By way of illustration, the U.S. govern­
ment compiled the 1960 census on punch 
cards. The only machine that can still read 
the data from this census is now in the 
Smithsonian. A more recent example is 
seen in some early personal computers 
that are no longer produced. Often files 
created on such equipment can only be 
accessed on this equipment; current 
equipment is not compatible. Along with 
hardware is the issue of updated and re­
vised software. Early versions of many 
popular word-processing programs are 
no longer compatible with current ver­
sions; if one does not have the earlier pro­
gram available, the information originally 
created with the program will be very 
difficult or impossible to access. Any in­

formation that is stored electronically has 
to be constantly refreshed and migrated 
to maintain its integrity. This is an ongo­
ing expense that can be costly. Each time 
this action takes place, there is the chance 
that data will be corrupted or lost.16 

Currently, there are many challenges 
that need to be solved before on-going 
digital storage of information becomes 
cost effective for libraries. 

The long-term digital preservation 
problem calls for a long-lived solu­
tion that does not require continual 
heroic effort or repeated invention 
of new approaches every time for­
mats, software or hardware para­
digms, document types, or record 
keeping practices change. The ap­
proach must be extensible, since we 
cannot predict future changes, and 
it must not require labor-intensive 
translation or examination of indi­
vidual documents. It must handle 
current and future documents of 
unknown type in a uniform way, 
while being capable of evolving as 
necessary. Furthermore, it should 
allow flexible choices and tradeoffs 
among priorities such as access, fi­
delity, and ease of document man­
agement.17 

Consortia of libraries and scholarly 
institutions can work together to use elec­
tronic resources effectively. JSTOR (Jour­
nal Storage) is one cooperative project that 
has promise. It is a nonprofit organiza­
tion dedicated to making full use of digi­
tal technologies by providing access to 
and preservation of back files of impor­
tant journals.18 Studies done by JSTOR 
participants show that this form of coop­
erative access and preservation is actually 
cheaper than storing numerous copies of 
the original journal in separate libraries.19 

Savings are achieved through coopera­
tion. Libraries and scholarly institutions 
that participate in JSTOR share in the cost 
of storing and refreshing the information, 
rather than attempting to do so individu­
ally. 

http:libraries.19
http:journals.18
http:agement.17
http:cially.14


Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? 247 

The Paperless Society 
It has been argued that we are moving 
toward a “paperless society,” meaning 
that all information will be stored and 
accessed electronically. Andrew S. Grove, 
CEO of Intel, believes that all information 
can and will be stored electronically. He 
has written that digital information lasts 
forever and is “information without 
boundaries, fitting in with the trend to­
ward a single, global community: it is in­
stant, consistent with the rhythm of 
times—fast, fast, and faster.” Further, he 
has written that the publishing industry 
has been built on “elaborate and expen­
sive printing presses.”20 This last state­
ment fails to take into account the cost of 
editorial review of publications and as­
sumes that paper publication costs are 
based solely on physical production costs. 

Recent publishing and reading 
trends in the United States, at least, 
indicate that we are not headed 
toward a paperless society anytime 
soon. 

Editorial review is an expense that will 
occur regardless of format. Even elec­
tronic publications will need editorial re­
view. So far, there has been no indication 
that electronic formats will be cheaper to 
acquire than hard-copy publications.21 

Although printing equipment is an ex­
pense for paper publications, electronic 
formats have additional computer access 
and storage costs. Moreover, it should be 
stressed that Grove is talking about in­
formation rather than knowledge. In most 
cases, information probably can be best 
stored electronically. However, most stu­
dents, scholars, and library users, in gen­
eral, are not simply looking for informa­
tion. The goal of a library is to provide 
access to knowledge. In their 1995 book, 
Future Libraries: Dreams, Madness & Real­
ity, Walt Crawford and Michael Gorman 
wrote “that libraries are not wholly or 
even primarily about information. They 
are about the preservation, dissemination, 
and use of recorded knowledge in what­

ever form it may come so that humankind 
may become more knowledgeable; 
through knowledge reach understanding; 
and, as an ultimate goal, achieve wis­
dom.”22 

In contrast to Grove’s narrow view of 
electronic resources, Umberto Eco recently 
noted that, rather than moving us toward 
a paperless society, electronic texts have 
actually resulted in the increased produc­
tion of printed material because we print 
off documents from our computers. Rather 
than dealing with published books and 
journals, we will have to cope with “tons 
and tons of unbound sheets of paper.”23 

Eco believes that new technologies will 
render only some types of publications 
obsolete, such as multivolume encyclope­
dias. Most printed books that are durable, 
portable, and economical will continue to 
prosper.

 Recent publishing and reading trends 
in the United States, at least, indicate that 
we are not headed toward a paperless 
society anytime soon. Public library book 
circulation increased by 15 percent be­
tween 1990 and 1991. A year later, book 
sales increase by almost 16 percent.24 One 
only has to look at the phenomenal 
growth of the book “superstore” to see 
that print is not dead or dying. These 
stores are often open fourteen hours a day 
and are usually crowded. The prediction 
of a paperless society is premature. 

Conclusion 
This article has attempted to point out 
some of the potential limitations, costs, 
and problems of using electronic formats 
to access knowledge and information. Its 
goal was to take a thoughtful look at the 
impact that technology will have on li­
braries and education. Because digitiza­
tion and electronic access is relatively 
new, it is often seen to be “better” than 
traditional formats such as newspapers 
or books. The access and storage options 
offered by electronic technology and digi­
tization are exceptional in range and 
quantity. For many resources such as in­
dexes, bibliographies and statistical 
works, digitization is the best format 

http:percent.24
http:publications.21


248 College & Research Libraries May 2001 

available. However, the challenges and 
expense of digitizing all available publi­
cations are great, making the outlook for 
the total electronic conversion overly op­
timistic, given today’s technology. 

The belief of many people that elec­
tronic formats are superior to other for­
mats is too simplistic. This belief is often 
reinforced because institutions, having 
invested enormous sums in creating a 
campuswide technology infrastructure, 
want to see this infrastructure maximally 
used in order to justify their investment. 
If this outlook prevails, it could have a 
devastating effect on the development 
and maintenance of library collections by 
diverting funds from the continuing de­
velopment of unique collections. Al­
though electronic formats offer many ad­
vantages, investing huge sums in these 
resources will possibly reduce the 
library’s ability to serve its patrons as ac­
quisition budgets are used to purchase 
electronic resources at the cost of acquir­
ing books and serials. Many disciplines 
in the academy, particularly the humani­
ties, continue to conduct scholarly com­
munication through traditional formats, 
such as monographs. One should not con­
sider electronic resources superior to 

other formats simply because they use 
current technology. Library resources 
need to be evaluated and acquired based 
not on format but, instead, on content and 
patron and disciplinary need. 

As electronic resources for the publica­
tion of information become more preva­
lent, perhaps the all-or-nothing attitude in 
support of or against them will subside. 
We now have many communication 
choices, including mail, fax, telephone, and 
e-mail; and we choose the right format to 
meet our communication needs on a daily 
basis. No one form is better then the other. 
In much the same way, publishers, librar­
ians, scholars, and the reading public will 
use the appropriate format to access infor­
mation with no one type superior to the 
other. Currently, electronic formats are best 
suited for resources such as indexes, full-
text databases, and other publications that 
benefit from enhanced searching capabili­
ties and the ability to update information 
on a regular basis. Other publications, such 
as novels, magazines, and newspapers, 
will probably continue to be published in 
inexpensive paper formats. One would be 
hard pressed to find a better format for a 
fifty-cent newspaper, which is inexpensive 
and easy to access. 

Notes 

1. An earlier edition of this paper was presented at the 1997 Globnet conference held in 
Warsaw, Poland, in November 1997 (available online at http://slim.emporia.edu/globenet/ 
globenet.htm). An abbreviated earlier version of this article was published as “The Effects of the 
Digital Revolution on Libraries and Research,” NewsNet: The Newsletter of the American Associa­
tion for the Advancement of Slavic Studies, 38 (May 1998): 1–3. 

2. Joseph Branin, Frances Groen, and Suzanne Thorin, “The Changing Nature of Collection 
Management in Research Libraries,” Library Resources & Technical Services 44 (Jan. 2000): 26. A 
version is also available online at http://www.arl.org/collect/changing.html. 

3. For an excellent examination of the issues related to copyright, fair use, and ownership of 
intellectual property in the digital age, see: National Research Council, Committee on Intellec­
tual Property Rights in the Emerging Information Infrastructure, The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual 
Property in the Information Age (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Pr., 1999); also available 
online at http://bob.nap.edu/html/digital_dilemma/. A good overview of this extensive re­
port can be found in Ann Okerson, ed., “The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property in the Infor­
mation Age,” Against the Grain 12 (June 2000): 45–54. 

4. Buildings, Books and Bytes: Libraries and Communities in the Digital Age (Washington, D.C.: 
Benton Foundation, 1996), 4. 

5. Abby Smith, Why digitize? (Washington, D.C.: Council on Library and Information Re­
sources, 1999), iv. 

6. For a good evaluation of the databases that are currently available, see: Michael Neubert, 
“Online News from Russia via the Internet,” Slavic & East European Information Resources 1, no. 1 
(2000): 45–67. 

http://bob.nap.edu/html/digital_dilemma
http://www.arl.org/collect/changing.html
http://slim.emporia.edu/globenet


Electronic Resources: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing? 249 

7. Todd Oppenheimer, “The Computer Delusion,” Atlantic Monthly (July 1997): 46. 
8. Ibid., 47. In fact, people are questioning the value of having young children use comput­

ers. See, for example: Kathy Kelly, “False Promise: Parking Your Child in Front of the Computer 
May Seem Like a Good Idea, But Think Again,” U.S. News Online (Sept. 25, 2000); available 
online at http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/000925/nycu/computers.htm. 

9. Steven R. Knowlton, “How Students Get Lost in Cyberspace,” New York Times Education 
Life 2 (Nov. 1997): 18. 

10. Julia K. Nims and Linda Rich, “How Successfully Do Users Search the Web?” College & 
Research Library News 59 (Mar. 1998): 158. 

11. Charles B. Lowry and Denise A. Troll, “Carnegie Mellon University and University Mi­
crofilms International ‘Virtual Library Project,’” Serials Librarian 28, nos. 1/2 (1996): 160–61. 

12. Ibid., 165. 
13. Stephen P. Harter and Hak Joon Kim, “Accessing Electronic Journals and Other E-publi­

cations: An Empirical Study,” College & Research Libraries 57 (Sept. 1996): 454. 
14. OCLC is developing Electronic Collections Online (ECO) as a way to archive digital pub­

lications. Through negotiated agreements with publishers, libraries that subscribe to ECO will 
continue to have access to electronic publications covered during the paid subscription period, 
even if the library discontinues its subscription to the title. Information on ECO is available 
online at http://www.oclc.org/oclc/eco/archive.htm. 

15. Marcia Watt and Lisa Biblo, “CD-ROM Longevity: A Select Bibliography,” Conservation 
Administration News (Jan. 1995): 11–13. 

16. For a concise explanation of the problem, see: Howard Besser, “Digital Longevity,” in 
Handbook for Digital Projects: A Management Tool for Preservation and Access, ed. Maxine K. Stitts 
(Andover, Mass.: Northeast Document Conservation Center, 2000), 155–65; available online at 
http://www.nedcc.org/digital/dighome.htm. 

17. Jeff Rothenberg, Avoiding Technological Quicksand: Finding a Viable Technical Foundation for 
Digital Preservation: A Report to the Council on Library and Information Resources (Washington, D.C.: 
Council on Library and Information Resources, 1999). The publication is also available online at 
http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/rothenberg/introduction.html. The quote in the text is taken 
from the executive summary of the Web version located at http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/ 
rothenberg/preface.html#executive. 

18. Kevin M. Guthrie and Wendy P. Lougee, “The JSTOR Solution: Accessing and Preserving 
the Past,” Library Journal (Feb. 1997): 42–44. 

19. William Bowen, “JSTOR and the Economics of Scholarly Communication,” in The Eco­
nomics of Information in the Networked Environment, ed. Meredith A. Butler and Bruce R. Kingma 
(Washington, D.C.: ARL, 1995), 28–30. 

20. Andrew S. Grove, “What Can Be Done, Will Be Done,” Forbes 158 (Dec. 2, 1996): 193. 
21. In addition, the potential for profit, at least for popular magazines, is not as high as some 

would believe. “Magazines are going to be losing money on the Web for years to come, says 
McKinsey and Co. Director Joanna Barsh following a 2 ½-month study done in cooperation with 
the Magazine Publishers of America.” From David Lieberman, “Study Says Magazines Shouldn’t 
Rush to Web, as Profit Potential Is Low,” USA Today, 23 Oct. 2000, 3b; available online at http:// 
www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cti705.htm. 

22. Walt Crawford and Michael Gorman, Future Libraries: Dreams, Madness & Reality (Chi­
cago: ALA, 1995), 5. 

23. Umberto Eco, “Gutenberg Galaxy Expands,” Nation 264 (Jan. 6, 1997): 35. 
24. Crawford and Gorman, Future Libraries, 16. 

www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/cti705.htm
http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports
http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/rothenberg/introduction.html
http://www.nedcc.org/digital/dighome.htm
http://www.oclc.org/oclc/eco/archive.htm
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/000925/nycu/computers.htm