Print

Print


I think that's part of the nub of it -- attitude.
And in some cases Attitude, as in, with a capital A.
People have *yet* (& in many cases this also
includes folks who should presumably know better)
to get a full grip on the fact that "it's *not* all
on the web & it's not all free."  This shouldn't
really surprise us, I guess, since in many cases it's
even still the attitude of our own management.
(I'm lucky -- where I am, the people are more realistic
about the fact that stuff costs.  Not all my users
by any means, mind you, but most of them. <g>)

People still often think there *is* a free lunch ("I
pay my taxes!"), & finding out there is not now &
never has been often gets them bent out of shape at
the messenger.  The concepts of private enterprise
& services rendered for value received apparently
doesn't occur to them. <eg>

I'd be *very* interested to know: who was the lady's
criticism about the AMA journals aimed at?  You, NLM,
AMA, just generalized, or ??  "Inquiring minds...." }:)

Re NLM, I don't really see it as their fault, but then
again I do have the advantage of knowledge of the
system that Josephine Public doesn't.  I'd lay dollars
to doughnuts that the lady sees "National Library," in
her mind that automatically equates to "free."  If that's
the case, then it all gets back to my comment above:
Attitude with a capital A. }:)

Bill Nichols
Eglin AFB, FL
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Kennedy, Joy [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

I've noticed a disturbing trend lately.  Coming from an affluent,
computer-literate suburb I'm getting more and more calls from the general

non-affiliated users.  They are usually somewhat angry or critical since
they thought they could simply click and order the article sent to their
homes free.  I give them other options, mention their local public

journals she mentioned just happened to be AMA journals.  I explained now
they were no longer providing them free and thus the information that was
available by clicking and printing from PubMed before was no longer
available.  This explanation brought more criticism.

I wonder if NLM is hurting rather than helping by creating an expectation in
the public mind that, like PubMed, all medical information is freely