Late breaking news- the CILIP Gazette is …

In CILIP on June 5, 2009 by Danielle Tagged: , , , , , , ,

Late breaking news- the CILIP Gazette is available online and available to all (no login necessary) via the CILIP website. That’s not all-it is searchable and clippable as well. I’ve tried clipping which also emails it to you or to another interested soul and it was quite nifty. So far there are the two most recent issues online (22 May and 5 June), but stay tuned for more new and archived content.


If I sound slightly breathless it is because I have come out of an editorial meeting astounded at the amount of work that goes into the Gazette and the monthly Update magazine. Every issue of Update is 50 pages of advert-free (except the back cover) unique content produced on a tight budget with a minimum of staff. Gazette is almost a one-woman show led by Debby Raven who produces a fortnightly copy. The Gazette urgently needs input from all Special Interest Groups. Economical training courses need to be shouted about so please send ideas to her.

There are opportunities to review books, write letters (anything informationy is welcome) or articles for Update- please contact Elspeth Hyams and the team to find out more. Critical friends welcome!

Today’s issue of the Gazette features an interview of Andrew Motion and an 8-page preview of Umbrella 2009. It looks like it will be a great conference and unfortunately I will be missing out (training budget cuts, etc).  However, if you are a new professional and want to attend Umbrella for free, please send 300 words explaining how it will benefit you to the Career Development Group before 5pm, 12 June.  They will also pay £100 towards your travel expenses.


8 Responses to “Late breaking news- the CILIP Gazette is …”

  1. Superb. Next stop – Update.

    I have had several long chats with various CILIP folk about the need to make at least sections of Update available in this way. By all means keep some stuff behind a password but the research / feature type articles deserve to be easily shared. They are an advert for the profession / the people involved.

  2. Yes, you are completely right about Update not being hidden. The main tension I think is that this is supposed to be a members’ benefit. And you do say key articles being open access-I agree 100%. If it weren’t an extra burden on the staff, at least letting folks read abstracts of the content and perhaps brief news pieces that are open would be good. Another option could be allowing archive copies to be free after a time like I believe the BMJ do.

    Something else to consider is linking and making the content of Gazette and Update ‘web 2.0-able’ so that it can be easily tweeted and discussed. Direct links to articles, and perhaps start ratings and such should be considered.

  3. It’s fantastic. It’s also one less reason to join CILIP. 🙂

  4. Way to discourage CILIP to be more open with its content.

    The job ads which make up about half of gazette each fortnight were already available.

    If you agree that Gazette has value then you should recognise it as a reason to wish to be a member of the organisation that creates it.

    For my personal use of Gazette I find the paper version a lot handier though I am very glad that CILIP is reaching out in this way.

  5. It was tongue in cheek. I actually quite like the Gazette. It does, I think, have value, just not £177/pa worth of value.

    I think you and Danielle are spot on in that CILIP needs to make more of its content free, but keep some of it as pay for/membership only premium content. If CILIP move in that direction then I’d support them all the way, including possibly by becoming, shock horror, a member (if I can afford it). The new website is a definite improvement.

  6. I think that the £177 is worth it if you view it as a ticket to getting involved and making yourself heard, in addition to the obvious perks such as Update delivered to your door, discounts on conferences and courses, free and changing access to ejournals, etc. Being on a panel or a board is good experience and a great way of bringing your views across.

    It is true that there are different venues where this won’t cost you £177 per year, but if you don’t like the cost, (and I agree-it is steep-I voted against flattening the scale to no avail) and you only voice your opinion here, then it is as good as shouting into a wishing well. Write a letter to Update and Bob McKee’s blog while you are at it. Let us feel your wrath-and folks need to vent a bit more I think. I think someone of your verbal intelligence can make an elegant argument.

  7. I think I must be a bit odd in that I don’t think CILIP costs all that much. We are talking 50p a day. Most people blow more than that on some random nonsense every few hours. You can also reclaim the tax so it is less again.

    I was actually on CILIP council at the time of the setting of the flat rate (rather than during the debate that lead to the vote on it).

    Those people worst affected by the change in rate (ie those who saw the largest rise in membership costs) were out of pocket to the tune of less than £20 if I recall correctly (I think it may even have been less than that). Most people would have seen less of an impact. Some saw a reduction (and were encouraged to give it to the Benevolent Fund).

    In a rather strange meeting various Councillors took it in turns to say that the particular section of the profession they represented were going to be hardest hit. We were talking less than 50p a week difference for the hardest hit.

    One way for the membership cost to maybe come down would be for loads of people to join…

  8. I compared the CILIP fee with a couple of organisations that I was a member of in Canada (remember, $1 CDN= 50p or so). The Canadian Health Libraries Association charges $100 per year for membership and they don’t include the JCHLA as a perk as this is open-access.(I should ask if they have had a drop in membership when it went open access). You are basically paying to support the body, to participate, get discounts on events and such.

    The Canadian Library Association charges a relatively whopping $200 per year (still only £100). They are pushing the institutional membership though, and this starts at $325 (for 2 staff), and goes up to $1000 for 5 staff but with additional perks. Feliciter (their journal) is available with membership, or for subscription at $95 for 6 copies per year. They do not seem to have an equivalent of the Gazette.

    So I am not saying these 2 Canadian groups offer the spectrum of topic groups that CILIP does, but they are cost effective.

    I take your point about the 50p a day thing, but I really do not conceive of CILIP membership as a daily expense. As I am paid monthly, I think about the £14.75 per month, which doesn’t sound too bad to me, but might give someone pause at the lower end of the payscale.

    I completely agree that attracting new members could make CILIP a lot more cost-effective. I must add that Student membership is VERY cheap for the CLA at $25. Get them early and get them young. CILIP charge £32 for student membership-well done.

    Perhaps if Cilip in London is to remain free to members, it could consider charging £5-10 for non-members. But the flipside is that it needs to tell us earlier what the topic of the month will be so this can be broadcast.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: