<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brooklyn Public Libraries partnering with Netflix?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://waxingphilosophic.com/2007/03/26/brooklyn-public-libraries-partnering-with-netflix/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://waxingphilosophic.com/2007/03/26/brooklyn-public-libraries-partnering-with-netflix/</link>
	<description>Culture, technology, psychology and other musings</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 09:00:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ms. Anderson</title>
		<link>http://waxingphilosophic.com/2007/03/26/brooklyn-public-libraries-partnering-with-netflix/comment-page-1/#comment-33</link>
		<dc:creator>Ms. Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 06:17:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://waxingphilosophic.com/?p=94#comment-33</guid>
		<description>On the surface this seems like a decent idea to me, especially as a Netflix subscriber who pays a monthly fee... who wouldn&#039;t like to save $12.99/mo? But in order for Netflix to buy into this (which the article notes, Netflix hasn&#039;t even heard of this deal), the Brooklyn Library will have to pay a significant fee in order to provide all willing Brooklynites with Library/Netflix subscriptions. As a taxpayer, I&#039;m not sure if this is the best use of my federal and local dollars. I can see why it could be useful/community building for a library to be in the business of renting out dvds and cds in house, it&#039;s good to get foot traffic in local libraries. But this Netflix proposal seems to eliminate that piece from the picture. Sure there&#039;s benefits to making obscure/artsy/historical films available to the masses (which Netflix sort of does on a limited basis), but that doesn&#039;t seem like that&#039;s just what this is about. I hear there&#039;s an illiteracy problem in this country. Maybe funds could be better used for that tackling that rather than making sure every Brooklynite can have on demand access to Weekend at Bernie&#039;s. Maybe I&#039;m cynical, or maybe I&#039;m just prioritizing limited resources.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the surface this seems like a decent idea to me, especially as a Netflix subscriber who pays a monthly fee&#8230; who wouldn&#8217;t like to save $12.99/mo? But in order for Netflix to buy into this (which the article notes, Netflix hasn&#8217;t even heard of this deal), the Brooklyn Library will have to pay a significant fee in order to provide all willing Brooklynites with Library/Netflix subscriptions. As a taxpayer, I&#8217;m not sure if this is the best use of my federal and local dollars. I can see why it could be useful/community building for a library to be in the business of renting out dvds and cds in house, it&#8217;s good to get foot traffic in local libraries. But this Netflix proposal seems to eliminate that piece from the picture. Sure there&#8217;s benefits to making obscure/artsy/historical films available to the masses (which Netflix sort of does on a limited basis), but that doesn&#8217;t seem like that&#8217;s just what this is about. I hear there&#8217;s an illiteracy problem in this country. Maybe funds could be better used for that tackling that rather than making sure every Brooklynite can have on demand access to Weekend at Bernie&#8217;s. Maybe I&#8217;m cynical, or maybe I&#8217;m just prioritizing limited resources.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
