logo
E-books Access: Libraries cutting back on staff, services after Trump's order to dismantle small agency, ETHRWorld

E-books Access: Libraries cutting back on staff, services after Trump's order to dismantle small agency, ETHRWorld

Time of India18-05-2025

Advt
Advt
Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals Subscribe to our newsletter to get latest insights & analysis.
Download ETHRWorld App Get Realtime updates
Save your favourite articles
Scan to download App
Libraries across the United States are cutting back on e-books, audiobooks and loan programmes after the Trump administration suspended millions of dollars in federal grants as it tries to dissolve the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Federal judges have issued temporary orders to block the Trump administration from taking any further steps toward gutting the agency.But the unexpected slashing of grants has delivered a significant blow to many libraries, which are reshuffling budgets and looking at different ways to raise money.Maine has laid off a fifth of its staff and temporarily closed its state library after not receiving the remainder of its annual funding. Libraries in Mississippi have indefinitely stopped offering a popular e-book service, and the South Dakota state library has suspended its interlibrary loan program.E-book and audiobook programmes are especially vulnerable to budget cuts, even though those offerings have exploded in popularity since the COVID-19 pandemic."I think everyone should know the cost of providing digital sources is too expensive for most libraries," said Cindy Hohl, president of the American Library Association . "It's a continuous and growing need."Library officials caught off guard by Trump's cutsPresident Donald Trump issued an executive order March 14 to dismantle the IMLS before firing nearly all of its employees.One month later, the Maine State Library announced it was issuing layoff notices for workers funded through an IMLS grant programme."It came as quite a surprise to all of us," said Spencer Davis, a library generalist at the Maine State Library who is one of eight employees who were laid off May 8 because of the suspended funding.In April, California, Washington and Connecticut were the only three states to receive letters stating the remainder of their funding for the year was cancelled, Hohl said. For others, the money hasn't been distributed yet. The three states all filed formal objections with the IMLS.Rebecca Wendt, California state library director, said she was never told why California's funding was terminated while the other remaining states did not receive the same notice."We are mystified," Wendt said.The agency did not respond to an email seeking comment.Popular digital offerings on the chopping blockMost libraries are funded by city and county governments, but receive a smaller portion of their budget from their state libraries, which receive federal dollars every year to help pay for summer reading programs, interlibrary loan services and digital books. Libraries in rural areas rely on federal grants more than those in cities.Many states use the funding to pay for e-books and audiobooks, which are increasingly popular, and costly, offerings. In 2023, more than 660 million people globally borrowed e-books, audiobooks and digital magazines, up from 19 per cent in 2022, according to OverDrive, the main distributor of digital content for libraries and schools.In Mississippi, the state library helped fund its statewide e-book programme.For a few days, Erin Busbea was the bearer of bad news for readers at her Mississippi library: Hoopla, a popular app to check out e-books and audiobooks had been suspended indefinitely in Lowndes and DeSoto counties due to the funding freeze."People have been calling and asking, Why can't I access my books on Hoopla?'" said Busbea, library director of the Columbus-Lowndes Public Library System in Columbus, a majority-Black city northeast of Jackson.The library system also had to pause parts of its interlibrary loan system allowing readers to borrow books from other states when they aren't available locally."For most libraries that were using federal dollars, they had to curtail those activities," said Hulen Bivins, the Mississippi Library Commission executive director.States are fighting the funding freezeThe funding freeze came after the agency's roughly 70 staff members were placed on administrative leave in March.Attorneys general in 21 states and the American Library Association have filed lawsuits against the Trump administration for seeking to dismantle the agency.The institute's annual budget is below USD 300 million and distributes less than half of that to state libraries across the country. In California, the state library was notified that about 20 per cent, or USD 3 million, of its USD 15 million grant had been terminated."The small library systems are not able to pay for the e-books themselves," said Wendt, the California state librarian.In South Dakota, the state's interlibrary loan programme is on hold, according to Nancy Van Der Weide, a spokesperson for the South Dakota Department of Education.The institute, founded in 1996 by a Republican-controlled Congress, also supports a national library training programme named after former first lady Laura Bush that seeks to recruit and train librarians from diverse or underrepresented backgrounds. A spokesperson for Bush did not return a request seeking comment."Library funding is never robust. It's always a point of discussion. It's always something you need to advocate for," said Liz Doucett, library director at Curtis Memorial Library in Brunswick, Maine. "It's adding to just general anxiety."

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump travel ban: Why did he spare Pakistan?
Trump travel ban: Why did he spare Pakistan?

Time of India

time29 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Trump travel ban: Why did he spare Pakistan?

US President Donald Trump has imposed a travel ban on nationals from 12 countries, citing national security risks, but Pakistan which openly hosts and celebrates US-designated terror groups is missing from the list. White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson posted on X: "President Trump is fulfilling his promise to protect Americans from dangerous foreign actors that want to come to our country and cause us harm." In March, the Trump administration was considering issuing sweeping travel restrictions for the citizens of dozens of countries including Pakistan, as per an internal memo seen by Reuters. During his first term, Trump had taken a very hard stance against Pakistan for its sponsorship of terror. What moved Trump's hand in a short period of time? Also Read: US imposes entry ban on 12 nations, adds restrictions on 7 others Play Video Pause Skip Backward Skip Forward Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration 0:00 Loaded : 0% 0:00 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 1x Playback Rate Chapters Chapters Descriptions descriptions off , selected Captions captions settings , opens captions settings dialog captions off , selected Audio Track Picture-in-Picture Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo From Trump 1.0 to Trump 2.0: The change of heart During his first term as the US president, Donald Trump's first tweet of 2018 was on Pakistan: "The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!" he posted on X, then called Twitter, on January 1, 2018. In August that year, the US military cancelled $300 million in aid to Pakistan, accusing it of not doing enough to root out militants from its border region with Afghanistan. Another $500 million were stripped by Congress from Pakistan earlier to bring the total withheld to $800 million. In November 2018, Trump accused Pakistan of helping to hide Osama bin Laden, stating, "But living in Pakistan right next to the military academy, everybody in Pakistan knew he was there" . Consequently, the US suspended a significant portion of its military aid to Pakistan. Live Events In April 2019, the Trump administration imposed visa sanctions on Pakistan under Section 243(d) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This US law mandates that if a country refuses or unreasonably delays accepting the return of its nationals who have been ordered deported from the United States, the US government may impose sanctions, including visa restrictions on certain categories of that country's citizens. Also Read: Terror hub Pakistan not included: Brahma Chellaney hints at US' Deep State's anti-India stance The sanctions were targeted visa restrictions, initially applied to certain Pakistani officials and government representatives. The State Department, in coordination with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), began denying or delaying visa issuance to these individuals. The move was designed to be escalatory, signaling that broader visa restrictions could follow if Pakistan did not take corrective action. This was a rare use of Section 243(d). Prior to Pakistan, only a handful of countries had faced such penalties (including Guinea, Cambodia, and Eritrea). However despite tensions, Trump also sought to reset relations with Pakistan. In July 2019, then Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan visited the US, where Trump called for strengthening trade ties and offered to mediate the Kashmir dispute, a proposal India rejected. What explains Trump's new love for Pakistan? In March this year, Pakistan was part of the sweeping travel restrictions planned by the Trump administration for the citizens of dozens of countries. However, a US official had told Reuters at that time that there could be changes on the list and that it was yet to be approved by the administration. One change that has happened is Pakistan has been dropped from the list. The action is not inconsistent with Trump's recent statements on Pakistan. In a recent interview with Fox News, Trump spoke glowingly about Pakistan: "They are brilliant people and make incredible products." Trump has offered unqualified praise for Pakistan several times after Operation Sindoor. He claimed he intervened during the India-Pakistan conflict and convinced both the countries to reach what Trump claimed to be ceasefire. India has contested this interpretation. It has said it just halted military action and didn't agree to any ceasefire with Pakistan. It has also said the halt in India's Operation Sindoor came at Pakistan's request and not due to Trump's intervention. Trump suggested he used trade as a negotiating tool to force India into a ceasefire. The ministry of external affairs said the issue of trade did not come up during any talks with the US and "it was the force of Indian arms that compelled Pakistan to seek ceasefire". Clearly, Trump chose to support Pakistan in the aftermath of Operation Sindoor. Former Pentagon official Michael Rubin, writing in the Washington Examiner, said that by bragging about how he could leverage trade to stop fighting, Trump drew moral equivalence between terror-sponsoring Pakistan and terror-victim India. Why is Trump ignoring Pakistan's terror project against India and stepping in to save it? Many would think Trump, who sees himself as the greatest deal maker, has been bought by Pakistan which is 'investing' in the Trump family to reap geopolitical dividends, as several recent reports suggest. Trump's change of heart on Pakistan after Operation Sindoor -- ignoring its terror activities, praising it, and offering to mediate on Kashmir -- could be connected to a recent deal between Pakistan's Crypto Council and World Liberty Financial (WLF), a cryptocurrency venture in which Trump's family has 60% stake. WLF sent its heavy guns, including Zachary Witkoff, son of Trump's golf buddy Steve, to Islamabad where they were feted by Pakistan PM Shehbaz Sharif, and more crucially, army chief General Asim Munir, who just days later 'cleared' the mass killing in Pahalgam of tourists who were segregated on the basis of their faith, TOI had reported. WLF's stakeholders include Trump's two sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr, who, along with their brother-in law Jared Kushner, have been scouring different parts of the world for lucrative business deals and have attracted allegations of leveraging their links to the White House. There are other deals that would have mellowed Trump towards Pakistan. TOI reported that Gentry Beach, a hunting buddy and college friend of Donald Trump Jr, the US President's son, visited Pakistan in January and came back to brief Trump Sr and his close aides at Mar-a-Lago about the 'amazing place called Pakistan' and a potential to cut deals worth billions of dollars in explorations of rare earth minerals, oil & gas, and real estate. Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif hosted him twice, first in Islamabad in January in the presence of his senior cabinet colleagues, including the ministers for finance and foreign affairs, and again in Dubai on February 11, on the sidelines of the summit of world govts. Beach was an exceptionally unknown face among hosts of foreign dignitaries and heads of state Sharif met. While in Pakistan, Beach noted the Islamic country had rare earth reserves of more than $50 trillion Pakistan has often tried to please the US by handing over terrorists that it had been using to achieve its own goals actually. Early in March, the US arrested in Afghanistan an ISIS-K operative involved in the 2021 Abbey Gate bombing that killed 13 Marines. Trump was quick to thank Pakistan for its help in nabbing the high-value fugitive from the Pak-Afghan border. "I want to thank the government of Pakistan for helping arrest this monster," he told the US Congress. TOI reported that what was brushed under the carpet was an open secret in intelligence circles -- the operative, Sharifullah, had been in Pakistan spy agency ISI's custody for over a year. ISI ran multiple operations using his network and ultimately handed him over to the CIA at the right time - when the regime changed in Washington. (With TOI inputs)

Trump pulls the wrong trigger to ban citizens of 12 countries from coming to US
Trump pulls the wrong trigger to ban citizens of 12 countries from coming to US

First Post

time33 minutes ago

  • First Post

Trump pulls the wrong trigger to ban citizens of 12 countries from coming to US

Trump has announced a sweeping travel ban on citizens from twelve countries. Although he cited the recent Colorado attack as the reason, the attacker's home country, Egypt, is notably absent from the list. read more In another move that has drawn global attention, US President Donald Trump has unveiled a sweeping travel ban targeting citizens from twelve countries, by banning their entry to the United States. The ban, which completely bars entry for individuals from nations including Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, and Yemen, is part of what Trump claims is a broader effort to prevent terrorism and protect American lives. In addition to these full bans, partial visa restrictions have been imposed on citizens from seven more countries, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Turkmenistan, limiting their access to specific types of visas. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This comes as Trump justifies his move by referring to the recent attack in Colorado, allegedly carried out by a foreign national who, he claimed, bypassed proper vetting procedures. However, critics were quick to highlight a key flaw: the attacker's home country—Egypt—is not among the listed nations. These partial restrictions will limit the ability of citizens from affected countries to obtain certain types of visas, while allowing for limited exceptions in specific circumstances. Why: Trump justified the new ban by raising concerns over foreign nationals entering the US without being 'properly vetted.' In his statement, he cited the recent deadly attack in Colorado as an example of the danger posed by individuals who manage to circumvent the immigration system. The suspect in the Colorado attack, he argued, was a foreign national who had entered the US without undergoing adequate security checks. As a result, he claimed, stronger vetting protocols are necessary to safeguard American citizens and prevent future attacks. The wrong trigger: However, a glaring issue with the travel ban has come to light: the suspect in the Colorado attack, identified as an Egyptian national, is not included in the new restrictions. This omission has led many to question whether the Trump administration has targeted the wrong countries in its attempt to bolster national security. Egypt, despite being the attacker's country of origin, is notably absent from both the complete and partial bans—prompting criticism that the administration's rationale behind the travel ban is fundamentally flawed. The reason: So why has Egypt been spared from the ban? The answer lies in the longstanding defence alliance between the United States and Egypt. The US has consistently regarded Egypt as a key partner in the Middle East, referring to the relationship as a 'pillar of regional stability.' This military and diplomatic partnership has created a delicate balancing act between security concerns and geopolitical interests. Despite the Egyptian link to the attack, the Trump administration appears to have prioritised maintaining its strategic alliance with Egypt—even if that means compromising on the stated goal of enhancing national security. This partnership, which includes joint military operations and intelligence sharing, seems to have shielded Egypt from inclusion in the travel restrictions. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Public backlash: The decision to exclude Egypt from the ban has sparked backlash from critics, who argue that the move is politically driven—placing international alliances above the safety of American citizens. Many have pointed out the inconsistency in the logic of the ban, which disproportionately targets countries with limited US diplomatic ties while sparing those of greater strategic importance. Conclusion: While the administration maintains that the travel ban is a necessary measure to prevent terrorist attacks, the omission of Egypt raises significant doubts about the true motivations behind the policy. With the Colorado attack cited as the justification, critics are questioning whether political and military considerations have been prioritised over a coherent and effective security strategy. As tensions rise, many argue that President Trump may have pulled the wrong trigger—targeting the wrong countries and potentially undermining the very goal the ban was meant to achieve.

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth confident NATO will commit to Trump's defence spending target
Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth confident NATO will commit to Trump's defence spending target

Time of India

time37 minutes ago

  • Time of India

Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth confident NATO will commit to Trump's defence spending target

NATO countries are in talks about raising their defence budgets. US wants members to spend 5% of their GDP on defence. The goal is to strengthen the alliance. Mark Rutte suggests a 3.5% defence spend and 1.5% on security. New targets for troops and weapons are expected. Germany may need more soldiers. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Thursday he was confident that members of the NATO alliance would sign up to Donald Trump's demand for a major boost in defence spending, adding that it had to happen by a summit later in U.S. president has said NATO allies should boost investment in defence to 5% of gross domestic product, up from the current target of 2%."To be an alliance, you got to be more than flags. You got to be formations. You got to be more than conferences," Hegseth said as he arrived at a gathering of NATO defence ministers in Brussels."We're here to continue the work that President Trump started, which is a commitment to 5% defence spending across this alliance, which we think will happen," Hegseth said, adding: "It has to happen by the summit at The Hague later this month."Diplomats have said European allies understand that hiking defence expenditure is the price of ensuring a continued U.S. commitment to the continent's security and that keeping the U.S. on board means allowing Trump to be able to declare a win on his 5% demand during the summit, scheduled for June 24-25."That will be a considerable extra investment," NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters, predicting that in the Hague summit "we will decide on a much higher spending target for all the nations in NATO."In a bid to meet Trump's 5% goal, Rutte has proposed alliance members boost defence spending to 3.5% of GDP and commit a further 1.5% to broader security-related spending, Reuters has of the new investment plan will likely continue to be negotiated until the eve of the NATO TARGETSIn the meantime, Rutte said he expects allies to agree on Thursday on what he called "historic" new capability targets, which define how many troops and weapons and how much ammunition a country needs to provide to NATO, would aim to better balance defence contributions between Europe, Canada, and the United States and "make NATO a stronger, fairer and a more lethal alliance", he said in opening remarks to the will need around 50,000 to 60,000 additional active troops under the new NATO targets, German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said as he arrived at the NATO remain divided over the timeline for new has proposed reaching the 5% defence target by 2032 - a date that some eastern European states consider too distant but which some others see as too early, given current spending and industrial production Defence Minister Hanno Pevkur said that to meet the capability targets, "we need to agree on the 5% in five years. We don't have time for 10 years, we don't have time even for seven years."Sweden would also like to see NATO reaching 5% defence spending in 2030, Defence Minister Pal Jonson told is an ongoing debate over how to define "defence-related" spending, which might include spending on cybersecurity and certain types of infrastructure."The aim is to find a definition that is precise enough to cover only real security-related investments, and at the same time broad enough to allow for national specifics," said one NATO diplomat.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store