You are presented with multiple paper abstracts, alongside the associated literature review and chapter titles. Given the provided information, you are going to do a literature review. Please generate a coherent literature review that synthesizes the content, draws connections between different works, highlights major findings, and identifies any gaps in the existing research.

Literature Review Title: Information and digital literacies; a review of concepts 
Chapter Title:  Information literacy and bibliographic instruction 
1. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB001):  In this interview, PTO (U.S Patents and Trademark Office) Commissionner Bruce Lehman discussed his plans for reoganizing and reenginnering the Patent and Trademark office, the inattention of America's CEI to their own intellectual property, and the benefits of 20-year terms 
2. Abstract of Cited Paper (BIB002):  The patterns and formats of information provision by newspapers and television news programmes are examines, with a case study of two incidents from the Gulf War. A content analysis is carried out, with a novel scheme of groups and categories to interpret and display information transfer patterns. The results are set in the context of a survey of the nature of news, and the influence of the media by which it is presented. A clear distinction between television and newspaper information content and format is found, and explained in terms of an underlying information structure. Consequences for public access to information are briefly considered.

Literature Review:
The concept of information literacy as being closely linked with formal learning has been taken up with enthusiasm by librarians, particularly in the academic sector, who have seen it as fitting in well with their 'traditional' role: 'Striving for an information-literate population is a basic goal of librarianship .. the work on information literacy builds on many rich traditions in librarianship, including adult literacy and library instruction.'  Most librarians have taken a closely focused view of it as a form of, or perhaps a successor to, traditional 'user education', 'library skills' or, perhaps most directly, 'bibliographic instruction' [though, as noted above, this view has been criticised as too narrow]. As Depuis (1997) puts it, 'many [bibliographic instruction] programs are now working with or evolving into information literacy programs'; confirmation of Breivik's 1989 plea that 'we must move beyond programs of library instruction to information literacy'. The relation between these two concepts has been discussed by several authors, including Snavely and Cooper (1997), , BIB001 , Coons (1992), Miller (1992) , White (1992), BIB002 , and Arp (1990) . However, their conclusions are by no means unanimous. The lack of general agreement that information literacy in some way supersedes, or updates, bibliographic instruction is indicated by the fact that the former Bibliographic Instruction Section of the US Association of College and Research Libraries, in its search over more than ten years for a more appropriate, inclusive and modern name, eliminated Information Literacy as a suitable new name early in its considerations, indicating its lack of general acceptance (Snavely and Cooper 1997) Arp (1990) notes that neither term had been well-defined, so that some confusion was inevitable. White (1992) notes that some, at least, of the stated goals of information literacy programmes are far from new, and were an accepted part of bibliographic instruction.  , arguing that the two terms are distinct, suggested that the nature of the distinction could be clarified: 'bibliographic instruction is more often a situationspecific response, whereas information literacy contributes towards life-long learning by educating individuals to effectively utilize and evaluate information'. suggests that the two should not be seen as alternatives, nor as competitors, but rather that information literacy is broader concept, and that 'bibliographic instruction is part of an evolution towards information literacy '. Curran (1991) suggests that information literacy is s more holistic concept than bibliographic instruction, and implies an expanded set of roles for information professionals involved in it.  makes the pragmatic points that whereas bibliographic instruction is firmly tied to the academic library, information literacy is a concept which may be appealing in other library environments. BIB002 argues that bibliographic instruction has, in fact gone through three generations of rather different definition: in the 1970s, viewed essentially as library orientation; in the 1980s, with a concentration on teaching library patrons to use research sources; and in the 1990s, with an emphasis on the shift from print to electronic and multimedia sources. She believes, however, that bibliographic instruction is 'still dominated by its association with short-range, library-centered, print-bound instruction', and that information literacy provides a new paradigm to include effective use of computer an multimedia technologies. Wilson (1989) gives a typical example of the ideas of information literacy emerging from this kind of librarybased instruction: 'A definition of information literacy emerged as we planned the content and sequence of the course. We wanted the students to understand, first of all, the journey of ideas from a scholar's brain to the various print and electronic indexes where these ideas become accessible to the scholarly community as a whole. Second, we wanted them to recognise the roles of the actors along the way: scholars, publishers, vendors, libraries, computing centres, utilities, users. Throughout the course we explored the role of the academic library as one of the actors in this journey'. The usage of the phrase in the context of library education, its appropriateness, and possible alternatives are discussed in detail by BIB003 . They conclude that, despite remaining substantial disagreement about the term, which largely relate to the 'broader and more extraneous elements that have been added to the definition, it is possible to discern a measure of agreement that it can be used to describe new trends in library instruction. Specifically, these include: • independent learning, with students able to undertake all steps of the ALA definition • ability to apply these principles throughout a lifetime • instruction in a wider variety of information resources (print as well as electronic) • shift from strictly content-based instruction on particular resources to a process-based and useer-focused approach • faculty collaboration • association with new instructional techniques, such as active learning and critical thinking This results in a newer form of library instruction, which these authors seem to regard as a successor to traditional bibliographic instruction. They then address the question of whether the old term, the new term , or some alternative is best to describe this, analysing the question in some detail. Among the 36 alternative terms which they consider are • abstractionism • information competence • information sophistication • information inquiry • know how to know how • reading and research • virtuous instruction • knowledge R us They also considered 'library literacy' but rejected it, apparently because of a perceived limitation in scope. Ultimately, their conclusion was that information literacy was an appropriate term to use provided that it was used 'carefully and with clarity', and with appreciation of the unique role of the library. The term should not be used to refer to simple instruction in use of any resource, nor to acquisition of computer skills or computer literacy, nor to the general processes of gathering and evaluating information, which occur in many environments. It should be restricted to programmes enabling students and other users to 'appreciate and find their way through the many voices contributing to knowledge .. the large body of recorded knowledge which libraries (traditional and electronic) can offer, and which complement, and not replace, learning occurring elsewhere.