A coworker sent this to me - I've been enjoying these on failblog, but I hadn't seen this one yet:
Here are a few others:
More about these at KnowYourMeme.com. Thanks Sharon.
This comic made me laugh:
Thanks Chris.
You may have already seen this, as it was published a few days ago (which on the interwebs is like being over 30), but it is so true that I had to share. And add XKCD to your feed reader.
A patron calls in asking for information on a wedding announcement. When I asked for the names of the couple, he said:
Patron: Archie and Betty... no, no, Archie and Veronica. [pause] I don't know their last names.
Me: ...um, do you mean the comic book?
Patron: Yes.
I hadn't heard this, but apparently Archie has finally chosen between Betty and Veronica. The news leaked in May (covered by CNN and MSNBC) that the big proposal would take place in Issue 600, on sale Sept 1, 2009. NPR also aired a story recently, and more information is available at ArchieComics.com.
Not a difficult reference question, but I do find it interesting what I learn from patrons.
I had family visiting me for the July 4th weekend, and something they did that I never do was buy a Sunday paper.
I read the local weekly papers, but never buy a big Sunday paper. The travesty of this is that I don't get to read the Sunday comics - so of course that was the first section I grabbed when I saw the paper sitting on the breakfast table.
I only bring this up because a comic strip I've never seen before was very relevant to library work. Check it out, because it's funny, and true.
A friend of mine sent me this comic strip - it's nice when people outside of libraries notice library-related things.
Anyway, this comic also struck me as funny, due to the double-standards inherent in libraries. We pride ourselves on promoting and providing equal access to all information and resources, and yet there are certain topics that could make any librarian think twice. Should the Quran be one of these topics? No more than the Bible.
But I've also noticed this double-standard when it comes to internet use. We defend peoples' rights to look at white supremacist or political websites, which could easily make someone else in the library uncomfortable. But when it comes to people looking at porn in the library, librarians often actively try to curtail it. Why? Because it makes some people uncomfortable.
I know that in public libraries, kids are always a concern, and do need to be protected to some degree. But why would accidentally seeing porn on someone else's computer screen be any more harmful than a flag-waving racist?
Not that I have a solution, of course - I just dislike inconsistency.
