How Do You Solve a Problem like the Whole User? The Construction of Worthy and Problematic Users in Online Discussions of the Public Library

Abstract

How do you solve a problem like the whole user? The construction of worthy and problematic users in online discussions of the public library In this article I use a discursive approach and the concept of the 'category entitlement' to analyse the ways that contributors to a public Internet discussion of the value of the public library make cases for different user characteristics and behaviour as 'worthy' or 'problematic', and use these characteristics to discuss and debate the kinds of individuals and the kinds of behaviour that properly belong to each category. Contributors to the discussion represented users in three categories: a fluid 'everyone', which included people represented as being disadvantaged and in legitimate need of the library's resources, expertise, and support; the user information , whose worthy variant takes advantage of the library's offerings to achieve success in economic, cultural, and civic domains and whose problematic variant fails to do so; and the visceral user who may meet bodily needs or engage in pleasurable non-purposive activities and who is deemed worthy or problematic based on their behaviour in the library space. Despite public libraries' growing emphasis on serving the whole user, these public comments prioritise users who exercise their mind to develop into worthy members of a community and who meet behavioural expectations consistent with quiet intellectual activity.

Deconstructing information literacy discourse: Peeling back the layers in higher education

“…It further recognises information literacy in terms of progress (Seale, 2016), an approach to learning that aligns with classic narratives of betterment that have been traced within library discourse (e.g. McKenzie, 2019; Ross, 2009). From this perspective, patrons who take advantage of what the library, and more specifically what information literacy instruction has to offer, will be able to improve both themselves and their lot in life.…”

“…Discourse analysis methods have also been used within the broader field of LIS to unpack representations of library users (e.g. Hedemark et al, 2005; McKenzie, 2019) as well as close readings of institutional documents, including library mission statements (e.g. Aldrich, 2007; Crawford Barniskis, 2016), strategic plans (e.g.…”

“…Although information literacy research has been slow to acknowledge the issues that cultural stereotyping and the devaluing of student ways of knowing poses within the classroom, recent steps to address these issues have certain underexplored parallels with Library and Information Science research that critically reflects on both the construction and assumptions of user-centred research. Of particular relevance to the current study is work that has illustrated how a focus on individual, internal cognition has led to the construction of ‘ignorant’ (Frohmann, 1992) ‘needy’ (Olsson, 2005) and ‘worthy’ (McKenzie, 2019) users. Tuominen’s (1997) work tracing the impact of these assumptions within Kuhlthau’s information-seeking process further draws attention to the mechanisms of power and the questions of control that underscore the positioning of specific social groups.…”

Relegating expertise: The outward and inward positioning of librarians in information literacy education

“…Frequently used to examine the roles of users themselves (e.g. McKenzie, 2019), discourse analysis has also drawn attention to the hidden structures that underscore professional practice within specific texts (e.g. Tuominen, 1997).…”