In November 1996, a survey form was sent to the 1170 subscribers of the Abbey Newsletter, asking a) which changes, if any, they would make in the form and delivery of the Newsletter, and b) which subjects they would like to see covered more (or less) thoroughly. Replies came from 141 readers out of about 1050. Ten or 15 of these were sent in from other countries, including Spain, Singapore and South Africa. A few replies came too late to be included in the graphs below, but their written comments are recorded.
This is Part I, a tabulation of "other ways of delivering the news and information" and subject priorities for coverage. Part II, appearing in the next issue, will include some of the more general written comments sent in.
Fig 1. Readers' preferences for five suggested publishing practices. (1=high priority, 3=low priority.)
Write-in options suggested by readers:
1. Side punch holes for binding
2. Larger typeface
3. More position listings
4. Send "Useful Web List" every year along with "Useful Addresses"
5. Publish book review and bibliography twice a year as special issues or separate insert
Figure 2 (below) shows the readers' preferences for more or less coverage of 15 topics. Interest is high for the conventional functions of the preservation and conservation departments (supplies and materials, pests and mold, environment, archival paper conservation and book conservation). Digital preservation ranked not far below them, but digital texts and libraries, which relates more to publishing and access than to preservation) is at the bottom. There actually were four topics less popular than digitizing (administration, papermaking, sound recordings, and science and technology), but they were omitted from the graph to save space.
Readers suggested 13 more topics of their own:
Fig 2. Topics on which readers wanted more coverage (stippled bars) or less (white bars).
Timestamp: Sunday, 03-Mar-2013 21:39:01 PST
Retrieved: Monday, 21-Jan-2019 14:30:19 GMT