purple motes

Video circulation from Massachusetts public libraries doubled from 1998 to 2006. Over the same period, print item circulation fell slightly. Audio and video items together now account for 32% of total item circulation from Massachusetts public libraries.[1] Audiovisual circulation in libraries in other states might account for somewhat less, perhaps a quarter of total circulation.

YouTube, which was launched in November, 2005, now generates about 10% of broadband subscribers' Internet traffic in North America (Ellacoya findings).

Video attracts much more attention than print. Historically, persons have spent on average relatively little leisure time reading. Most of the growth in leisure time from 1925 to the present has been absorbed in watching television. Now persons have on-demand access to large, diverse collections of videos, similar to what they have had for books.

Book digitization and internet publishing makes texts more readily accessible. But changes in access to video will have much larger effects than changes in access to print.

Reference:

[1] Data from Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners, Public Library Data, Summary Report 2006, p. 29. This is also the source for the above graph.

3 Comments

In 1914, books accounted for 74% of items circulated from the Cincinnati Public Library. Prints accounted for 13% of circulation, lantern slides, 6%, and music rolls, 3%.[1] The Cincinnati Public Library at this time was one of the largest and most lavish public libraries in the U.S. These statistics indicate the scope of services that a leading public library provided.

Data for U.S. public libraries in 1955 show less format concentration in holdings and greater concentration in circulation. Books comprised an estimated 67% of libraries' items and 94% of libraries' circulation. Photos, pictures, and prints, which made up 20% of items, accounted for only 2.2% of circulation. While sound recordings and films accounted for small shares of items and circulation, these formats had relatively rapid turnover in lending (see Table). A film was lent on average 13.3 times per year. A film could be viewed much more quickly (perhaps a half hour for films of this time) than a book could be read, and loan periods for films were probably much shorter than those for books. The ratio of circulation per item suggests considerable interest in viewing films in public libraries' collections.

Notes:

[1] Data from Papers and Proceedings of the Berkeley Conference of the American Library Association, uly 1915, published in the ALA Bulletin, v. 9. The number of (book) volumes at the end of 1914 was 463,521. The source does not give item counts for the other formats. Total circulation for all formats was 2,164,310. A large number of piano rolls are available digitally here and here.

[2] Data from U.S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare, Biennial Survey of Education in the United States 1954-56, Chapter 5, Statistic of Public Libraries: 1955-56, Tables 9-13. The number of library systems reporting non-book items was only 26% of the number of systems reporting book volumes. I've scaled all reported figures by number of systems reporting. If systems reporting non-book items had larger than average non-book holdings, the non-book figures are over-estimates. Because nearly the same number of systems reported items and circulation, scaling matters little to the circ./item figures. For further analysis, see the underlying data for this table.

Offer Comments

Sarah Ann Long, a former president of the American Library Association and currently director of NSLS, a library consortium in the northern suburban region of Illinois, recently noted public library users' interest in audiovisual materials:

In 2001, the NSLS conducted an informal survey of member public libraries and found that in a few libraries, loans of AV materials were about 40 percent of all loans. The same survey was just repeated and the numbers have grown. Many libraries now report that AV borrowing is in the 40 percent range. The Gail Borden Public Library in Elgin said that almost 57 percent of their loans were for AV materials and the Glencoe Public Library reported that AV accounted for 63 percent of all items borrowed.

Some libraries are adopting innovative collection management approaches to audiovisuals, such as having the library subscribe to Netflix.

National censuses of U.S. public libraries provide more comprehensive information on audiovisual materials in U.S. public libraries. Audiovisual materials as a percent of the number of book volumes in libraries’ collections have increased from about 3.5% in 1987 to 9.5% in 2004. The share of videos grew much faster than that of audios, with videos rising from 0.6% of book volumes in 1987 to 4.6% in 2004. Estimates based on cross-section variations in libraries' collections indicate that videos account for about 20% of libraries circulation in 2004, and audio and visual materials together (audiovisuals), about 35%. Thus the reported figures from northern Illinois appear to be representative of the situation in the U.S. as a whole. The popularity of audio and video materials compared to books is consistent with a variety of other evidence from the communications industry.

Public libraries' provision of audiovisual materials has received relatively little scholarly attention. The Library Media Project, which sought to foster the development of public libraries' video collections, recently expired. Nonetheless, public libraries have provided and are likely to continue to provide many services besides lending books.

Update: Some state library websites (search them here) provide data on audiovisuals circulation. The data I've found are in the table below. These data suggest that audiovisual circulation for libraries across the U.S. might be closer to 25% of total circulation in 2006.

5 Comments