The New York Times -- and my favorite library professor Joe Janes -- tries valliantly to convince people that librarians still serve a purpose. This article interests me for a few reasons. Librarians still beat out Google in terms of being able to provide definitive, properly sourced, information. I also like Janes's description of librarians as being people who have a "plan B" when Google fails them. However I wonder if most of our patrons value this level of detail? If you need the name of the party Perot started do you really need to look through more than one page of Google results, as the Times somewhat snobbily implies most people don't? How many times do our patrons really just want to know what most people think the answer is, which is Google's strength, and not the One True Answer, which is ours. [thanks all]