Comments on: Phil Bradley on CILIP in 2020 http://www.aurochs.org/aurlog/2010/05/20/phil-bradley-on-cilip-in-2020/ Cows and stuff Sun, 08 Jan 2012 14:39:55 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Sheila Thomas http://www.aurochs.org/aurlog/2010/05/20/phil-bradley-on-cilip-in-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-9763 Sheila Thomas Fri, 21 May 2010 08:43:46 +0000 http://www.aurochs.org/aurlog/?p=549#comment-9763 Good points about championing library issues in the media, but a word of caution - there are a lot of us in CILIP who could not be a member of a "Library Association". Good points about championing library issues in the media, but a word of caution – there are a lot of us in CILIP who could not be a member of a “Library Association”.

]]> By: Megan http://www.aurochs.org/aurlog/2010/05/20/phil-bradley-on-cilip-in-2020/comment-page-1/#comment-9751 Megan Thu, 20 May 2010 17:03:59 +0000 http://www.aurochs.org/aurlog/?p=549#comment-9751 But what about those of us who aren't librarians, who CILIP supposedly represents, who feel we're sidelined? This is a massive problem, and why there is a lot of ill-feeling towards CILIP in certain areas - you say that "trying to take ownership of the word Information rather than the word Library is dangerous", but CILIP is also there to represent information professionals, so it's far more dangerous (and rather stupid, in my opinion) of them not to. I think CILIP often lips into the habit of forgetting it is a merger of two organisations - one representing librarians and the other representing information scientists. I think Phil is spot on with what he says, as CILIP has got to be more representative of the rest of its membership and be more relevant in a world where librarians' roles are changing out of recognition. I am a trained librarian (with an accredited degree and everything) but I now work for a private company managing and advising on social networking usage. A professional body Phil describes would have massive validity to me, whereas CILIP at the moment is mainly a line that looks good when we put my CV in bids. But what about those of us who aren’t librarians, who CILIP supposedly represents, who feel we’re sidelined? This is a massive problem, and why there is a lot of ill-feeling towards CILIP in certain areas – you say that “trying to take ownership of the word Information rather than the word Library is dangerous”, but CILIP is also there to represent information professionals, so it’s far more dangerous (and rather stupid, in my opinion) of them not to.

I think CILIP often lips into the habit of forgetting it is a merger of two organisations – one representing librarians and the other representing information scientists.

I think Phil is spot on with what he says, as CILIP has got to be more representative of the rest of its membership and be more relevant in a world where librarians’ roles are changing out of recognition.

I am a trained librarian (with an accredited degree and everything) but I now work for a private company managing and advising on social networking usage. A professional body Phil describes would have massive validity to me, whereas CILIP at the moment is mainly a line that looks good when we put my CV in bids.

]]>