The first journal I will attempt to analyze is “Library Journal.” The intended audience seems to be librarians and for my sake, I will add Library Students. It published a few different things. It publishes articles, commentary, reviews of an array of things and it published, different media happenings, and of course, it reports news in the library world, particularly public libraries. This journal is not strictly peer-reviewed, but includes many peer-reviewed articles.
The next journal I looked at was “American Archivist.” This is a peer-reviewed academic journal. The intended audience is people in the archiving field. As back issues are available to public, I would imagine it has a large following outside the field as well. Likely content, would be developments in archival science. It includes reviews, case studies, and essays.
Both journals provide different things. The “American Archivist” provides peer-reviewed articles. This is important. People know that they are getting solid information on pretty much everything they are reading. For someone who only has time to read one journal, this could pretty much be the journal of choice for an archivist. It does offer similar things to “Library Journal,” but it is going to be specific to archiving. It is not necessarily better because it is peer-reviewed. “Library Journal” offers a wider variety of things to read. Based off their website, maybe a bit too much. It can be chaotic at times. However, the journal is a bit more organized. Given that it is not specific to archiving, it has that advantage. Some of it does come from peer-reviewed sources, so it is not to say it does not have authority, because it does. I do not think one is inherently better. They function as two separate entities and it is important that we have both.