My town votes 50/50 Republican/Democrat, yet our newly rebuilt library is filled with lib/women oriented non-fiction and contemporary women’s pulp fiction. They no longer even have paper sets of encyclopedias. It’s not possible to learn much about science or technology there anymore - they weeded much of that out during the remodeling.
> They no longer even have paper sets of encyclopedias.
Why would they? With Wikipedia being freely and always available and up to date, and most/all for-profit encyclopedias being online now, who goes to the library to use a paper encyclopedia? Have you used a paper encyclopedia recently? I haven’t for decades, but I still visit the library. Google tells me World Book is the only encyclopedia left doing print runs, and it’s more geared toward students, so maybe only purchased by schools. I wouldn’t hold up paper encyclopedias as evidence of what the library has or doesn’t have.
Women reading mostly romance and the occasional “young adult” fantasy book is practically the only market left for authors, if they want to sell fiction.
Science and tech is obsolete like the format of paper encyclopedias? (It isn't.)
It's worth considering if a short-term focus on stocking fad romantasy comes at the long-term expense of a body of knowledge. Consider the classic value of college degrees - they're (largely) not optimized for fad pop knowledge or even vocational skills, instead optimizing for a rounded body of knowledge considered to be broadly 'educated'.
