Cultural capital and public libraries in the era of algorithmic collection management

Purpose – The purpose of this article is to understand how librarians perceive the advent of algorithm-based collection management (ACM), which helps them recognise patrons' loaning patterns, and what threats or possibilities ACM is seen to bring to public libraries, with their mission to provide “cultural capital” freely to all citizens. Design/methodology/approach – This empirical study, based on a comparative case from Finland, included 10 interviews with librarians at two Finnish libraries, one using ACM and one not. The interviews were analysed via qualitative content analysis and organised thematically. Findings – The librarians' discourses on ACM fell into two main categories: optimism and hesitation. The optimism discourse relies on the idea of a functional, tech-positive library that builds cultural capital by offering patrons materials that fit their existing tastes, while the hesitation discourse laments that ACM narrows down collections and takes gatekeeping from librarians, believing that public libraries should strengthen and level cultural capital by exposing patrons to a wide variety of culture. The librarians, not yet working under ACM, combined elements from both the optimism and hesitation discourses. Practical implications – This research offers valuable information about how ACM challenges the traditional understanding of public libraries' mission of levelling citizens' cultural capital and identifies common challenges and pitfalls in a scenario of technological change and budget cuts in the public sector. Originality/value – There have been very few or no comparative academic studies on algorithmic collection management in public libraries.