Sports Calendar

Jeanneney says that Google is not what it seems. Its search results are biased by commercial and cultural pressures. He has a point. Try this: go to Google Book Search and enter Gustave Flaubert. The first results are full of English translations of Madame Bovary.

The books of the English-speaking world are given overwhelming priority. Equally, Google’s main search engine produces paid-for sites. Google is a profit machine. Nothing wrong with that, as long as we don’t delude ourselves into thinking it is an entirely neutral source of information.

But there are even deeper issues revolving around the distinction between information and knowledge. “A search engine,” says John Sutherland, professor of English at UCL, “is not an index.”

An index is the work of a mind with knowledge, search engine results are the product of an algorithm with information. Parents will already have seen the power of the algorithm. Google has supplanted the textbook as the source of homework research.

Furthermore, with the advance of library digitisation, students will increasingly get through their degrees on screen rather than in libraries. Indeed, Bill Gates expects in the very near future that Microsoft will be able to give all undergraduates a $400 hand-held device that will contain all the text books they need for their course. We are, it seems, about to lose physical contact with books, the primary experience and foundation of civilisation for the last 500 years.

Lynne Brindley, chief executive of the British Library, refuses to see this in apocalyptic terms. With 100,000 of her books being scanned by Microsoft this year, she regards the ultimate digitisation of the library’s entire 150m-item collection (journals included) as “a wonderful outcome, though I suspect I’ll be long dead by then”.

Brindley disagrees with Jeanneney about having to fight off American hegemony. She points out that search engines are still in their infancy. Google has competitors that are bound to eat into its monopoly. Furthermore, improved technologies will make search results more like indexes, working more precisely as knowledge providers than simple information dispensers. The British Library has no choice, she believes, but to go with this technological flow. The alternative is to become little more than “a book museum”.

Back at the NYPL, David Worlock of Electronic Publishing Services said, “Ultimately it’s not up to Google or the publishers to decide how books will be read.

It’s the readers who will have the final say.”

No, it is the teachers who will have the final say. They will determine whether people will read for information, knowledge or, ultimately, wisdom. If they fail and their pupils read only for information, then we are in deep trouble. For the net doesn’t educate and the mind must be primed to deal with its informational deluge. On that priming depends the future of civilisation. How we handle the digitising of the libraries will determine who we are to become.

Additional reporting: Dominic Rushe

www.bryanappleyard.com