Library Science is what librarians learn. It's a real thing for a real job. Like most credentials and like most jobs, some people try to over-fit experience and knowledge in one field to another.
You see the same with CompSci/tech people treating data like there's no bias in its collection.
As I learned from the people on that project with lib sci degrees, the employment prospects are predominantly low-paying, but these ones found a new boondoggle to employ them as "ontologists" where they could get 6 figure salaries to sit around and build models all day in a piece of software called TopBraid Composer. (GUI program built in Eclipse, where users would create diagrams that would then be translated to an XML offshoot called OWL, a W3C standard that's never been successfully used in any meaningful project I've seen) I witnessed these people sit around and create business models and knowledge graphs of arcane Air Force business processes for 3 years (there were literally 9 of them doing this) before the project was cancelled due to its technical impossibility. The ontologies they created were never used once, and when I actually tried to provide them (in PDF form) to a separate project where Air Force personnel were trying to map out business processes, the personnel stated to me (in writing, with a Colonel CC'd) "These are so inaccurate that they are frequently misleading, and cannot be trusted." The Colonel later pulled me into his office and stated (rather comically):
"You mean to tell me I've been paying people to draw cartoons for 3 years? We're not goddamned Disney here."
You see the same with CompSci/tech people treating data like there's no bias in its collection.