Assignment 3 : evaluative report

Part A

Studying INF 206 has provided an understanding of social networking technologies and the concepts, theory and practice of Library 2.0 and participatory library services.  Evidence of this learning can be shown by the posts made previously on this blog such as: Learner Licence Librarian: Delicious, Learner Licence Librarian: Second Life and Learner Licence Librarian: Social networking, libraries and privacy.

These posts provide discussion of two examples of social networking technologies and critically examine the features and functionality of each.  In particular consideration is given to how they could meet the information needs of users. Both posts describe the basic use of the tools and briefly discuss how the tools can be used to meet users’ information needs.  For example Delicious is suggested as a good tool for a library to use to create a subject list for users or for staff to pool their favourite professional development bookmarks for others to utilise.  Indeed Darby describes Delicious as one of the simplest ways of providing lists of resources for users (2009, p. 100).  Allowing staff to share their favourite work related websites in this way helps them to bond and become more cohesive as team (Cunningham, 2010, p. 6).  In discussing Second Life, it is proposed as a suitable forum to conduct virtual reference or information literacy classes in for users unable to attend the physical library.  Indeed the suitability of Second Life for use in this way is backed up by Dede (2009, p. 66), who says that immersion in a digital environment can enhance education by allowing multiple perspectives, situated learning and transfer.  

Sodt & Summey (2009, p. 98-100) in discussing Library 2.0 and participatory library services state that the library environment should not only fulfil information needs and enable learning but that it should also facilitate content creation and community building.  They go on to further say Library 2.0 allows a service to be personalised and tailored by users both in the physical library environment and remotely from it.  From the posts on Delicious and Second Life it is clear they meet these requirements.   

Understanding of the social, cultural, educational, ethical and technical management issues that exist in a socially networked world, and how information policy is developed and implemented to support such issues, is also demonstrated by the Delicious and Second Life posts along with the post,. For example the Delicious post discusses the impact of user tagging and the barriers it can present to location of information such as through the varying racial and cultural meanings and usages of worlds.  These language differences are considered one of the weaknesses and problems of user tagging according to Rolla (2009, p.175).  Technology is also an important consideration for Libraries implementing participatory services.  Tools such as Second Life require specific computing specifications, and as the Second Life post points out there are many considerations which a Library must make before launching services in such an environment (Frank, 2008).  

Perhaps one of the most important considerations of any library wishing to be 2.0 is the concept of privacy and online safety.  The post Social networking, libraries and privacy provides a discussion of some of the considerations surrounding these, particularly privacy which a library should address when utilising social networking tools to provide services.  As the post advises, libraries need to implement suitable policies and communicate it to staff and users alike to ensure that the experience of participating and collaborating remains a positive one for all.  If users do not feel that their privacy is protected or that they are not safe when using library services in a social networking environment then they will be discouraged from participating. Indeed the report Sharing, privacy and trust in our networked world which found that people place a high level of  importance on the ability to protect their identity and personal information online (De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Havens, A., Hawk, J. & Jenkins, L., 2007, p.  3-16).  Services offered via social networking provide a way to bring users, regardless of physicality and real life ties together to communicate and collaborate but this communication and collaboration is based on a fragile trust (Anklam, 2009, p.  419; 423) and if the library cannot ensure users are provided with a safe, trustworthy environment which respects user privacy then users will be loath to use it, and in turn will also damage users’ perception of physical library as a trustworthy source of information.

Part B

Undertaking INF 206 this semester has been an interesting experience.  Prior to beginning the subject I was already a keen user of a variety of web 2.0 and social networking tools on a purely social basis.  There also existed some tools which I viewed as ‘a waste of time’.  Further, I also saw little applicability of many of the tools in terms of use by the information profession to meet the information needs of users.

However, completion of INF 206 has meant that I have re-evaluated my opinions.  I have expanded the use of web 2.0 tools in my personal life and where I once considered social networking and web 2.0 as holding little to aid the information profession; I can now see applicability and sense in the profession incorporating these tools and the concepts of web 2.0 into everyday practise where relevant.  According to the report Sharing, privacy and trust in our networked world (De Rosa, et.al., 2007, p. 1.1) internet access is “standard equipment” for the majority of users, surveyed for the report, and use of search engines, email and blogs all experienced exponential growth in the period survey from 2005 to 2007.  The exception however to this trend was use of library websites which unfortunately showed a decrease in usage.  What this means, is that libraries exist in a world which has embraced an online existence and it is past time that libraries moved to meet their users in the online world where such users already spend vast amounts of time and are comfortable (Cunningham, 2010, p. 5).  No longer can the information profession expect users to come to us, our future is dependent upon us taking what we can offer to the users and presenting it in a way, and in forums, with which users have become accustomed.  Burrus (2010, p. 53) in his article discussing social networking and Business 2.0 states that by “repurposing” social networking technology as business tools, companies can increase collaboration, problem solving and improve communication, all of which is vital to “adopting continuous value innovation focused on the customer”.  Library 2.0 and business 2.0 reply upon the same concepts and technology, hence Burrus’ statement can equally be applied to libraries.  Users of social networking tools are now used to participating and collaborating with other social networkers, hence it makes sense for the information profession to adopt such practises so it too may engage with existing and potential users.

Whilst INF 206 may not have introduced me to any new tools, it has made me think about the tools I am familiar with in a different light.  The subject has also allowed me to re-evaluate how I thought of some of the tools, recasting them as worthwhile technology in the right situation.  In terms of being an information professional, INF 206 has forced me to re-think my understanding of how social networking tools can be utilised to achieve a participatory library service and recognise that they can be an asset to a library if implemented and used correctly.  It has highlighted the need for the tools and for collaboration and participation whilst also empathising that it is still important to take this path in a considered and planned way.  It has also demonstrated the need for policies and guidelines to be created and adhered for the good of the library and users alike whilst emphasising that they must also constantly evolve and change just like the technologies they are governing the use of.  They should also be created in collaboration with users so as to reinforce the sense of relationship between the library and its users.

 I can now better join in the conversations of my peers as to the advantages and disadvantages of the various web 2.0 technologies and the way in which they can be utilised to meet our users’ needs and engage in a collaborative relationship with them.  There exists still in the profession many who consider that social networking technologies and concepts of Library 2.0 have no place in the information world.  INF 206 has left me in a better position to argue the case for the uptake of these tools and in creating a library service which is both collaborative and participatory in nature.

References

Anklam, P. (2009). Ten years of net work. The Learning Organisation, 16(6), 415-
426. Doi: 10.1108/09696470910993909

Burrus, D. (2010). Social networks in the workplace: the risk and opportunity of
Business 2.0. Strategy & Leadership, 38(4), 50-53.
Doi: 10.1108/10878571011059674

Cunningham, J. (2010). New workers, new workplace? Getting the balance right. Strategic Direction, 26(1), 5-6. Doi: 10.1108/02580541011009725

Darby, A., & Gilmour, R. (2009). Adding Delicious data to your library website [Electronic resource]. Information Technology and Libraries, 28(2), 100-103. Retrieved on Sept. 11, 2010 from http://www.ebsco.com

Frank, I. (2008). Librarians in virtual worlds : why get a second life? [Electronic resource]. First Monday, 13(8).  Retrieved on Sept. 10, 2010 from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2222/2010

Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning [Electronic resource]. Science, 323, 66-69. DOI: 10.1126/science.1167311

Rolla, P. J. (2009) User tags versus subject headings: can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? [Electronic resource].  Library Resources & Technical Services, 53(3), 174-184. Retrieved on Sept. 1, 2010 from: http://www.ebsco.com

De Rosa, C., Cantrell, J., Havens, A., Hawk, J., & Jenkins, L. (2007). Sharing privacy and trust in our networked world: A report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC.  Retrieved July 14, 2010 from http://www.oclc.org/reports/pdfs/sharing.pdf

Sodt, J. M., & Summey, T. P. (2009). Beyond the library’s walls: using library 2.0 tools to reach out to all users. Journal of Library Administration, 49, 97-109. Doi: 10.1080/01930820802312854

I wrote this!...

I wrote this blog post for the National Library and thought I brag a little here lol

Acquisitions trip to a Canberra newsagency

BTW the title wasn't mine, the first sentence of the post is meant to be the title and is much more interesting that the one it was given

You want answers?! I want the truth! You can’t handle the truth!

Firstly apologies for quoting the courtroom exchange between Tom Cruise’s and Jack Nicholson’s characters from A Few Good Men but it seemed a good title for this post.

Finding authentic information in a socially networked world can be quite a challenge.  It’s easy to plug a few words to your browsing of choice and see what comes up, but how do you know the results you are given are the right results?  If you searched for a topic now on Google, most likely at the top, or near to it, of your results list would be a Wikipedia hit according to Garfinkel in his article ‘Wikipedia and the meaning of truth’ (2008, 111(6) Technology Review, 84-86).  Wikipedia however relies upon articles submitted by anyone, allows anyone to edit it’s articles and uses as it’s only measure of truth that the fact or opinion in the article occurrs in another article in English which is available freely online.  This has caused concern for many in regards to just how authoritative Wikipedia actually is.  Surprisingly though, studies have found that the sheer number of people willing to act as volunteer editors tends to mean articles are mostly correct with errors, either innocent or malicious, usually quickly corrected.

However there are many other pages on the internet purporting to be expert in one subject or another and it means that users must beware when accessing them lest they find themselves relying on information which is wrong.  For information professionals this is even more important as usually we are acting as information mediators.  Users who seek our help in finding information rely on what we give them to be 100% accurate.  If we provide anything less, then not only have we let that user down in not supplying their need but we also damaged or destroyed the users trust in the library as the place to seek quality information.

Therefore information professionals need to be savvy when utilising online resources.  We need to ensure the information we find is from trustworthy and reputable sources.  Sources and information alike should also be vetted and verified before we consider providing it to a user.  This is also a lesson we should be teaching the users of our library, they need to be made aware of the need to critically evaluate what they find online, be it information or the profiles of others on social networking sites.  We need to educate users to validate and verify information and the sources from which it comes and to recognise the signs on websites or user profiles which suggest the source may be trustworthy or not.

Who do you think you are? Thoughts re online identity

With the rise in the popularity of social networking sites (SNS), the issue of online identity is one which bears some considered thought.  How an individual or organisation portrays themselves online has implications.  Should a profile be a brutally honest portrayal of you or should some things be kept personal?

For an organisation the answer to this question is fairly simple, its online profile should provide an honest and accurate picture.  Goodwill, or trust, in the business world is essential if the business wants to grow and be successful.  Word of mouth is a powerful force for any organisation and if users discover an organisation’s online profile doesn’t match the reality then that news will spread like wildfire across the vastness of the online world and potential users may be turned off of dealing with the entity.  

In addition organisations need to consider who is viewing their online profile.  Are there levels of information which need to quarantined or should it all be freely available to whoever wishes to view it.  Organisation should certainly consider if they need to institute levels of access.  For example setting security levels so that staff only information is truly only available to staff.  As for other information which an organisation may want to only be accessed by some users then that too needs the appropriate security applied so that only the relevant users can access the information.

The situation is similar in some ways for individuals.  People with obviously fake profiles can be viewed critically by others who wonder what they have to hide.  Conversely, individuals may wish to not overly identify themselves due to the permanency and mine-ability of online information.  On most SNS users can select a variety of privacy controls to restrict who sees what on their profile.  However these controls do not stop the owner of the SNS from storing this information to use when and how they want.  Take Facebook for example, it recently trumpeted 500 million users, that’s a lot of information about a lot of people that can be used how Facebook wants if they think they will get away with it.

Of course it could be argued that with that many people on Facebook that surely there is some safety in the sheer volume of information collected.  Not only does your data get lost in the multitude but the multitude help to play guardian against mis-use by Facebook.   In addition there are many profiles, mine included, which aren’t used by just one person.  This means any data collected ultimately is not going to be a fully accurate portrayal of the person it is meant to represent which means the data always has a question of quality attached to it. 

At the end of the day I think it comes down to an individual or organisation taking responsibility.  Individuals and organisation alike need to be aware the potential consequences of any information they publish, not only in terms of how they appear to others but also as to how that information could be used by third parties.  Life is full of choices and how much we participate in the online world is up to us, so we should make the effort to be fully informed and then make considered decisions about what we will or won’t post online.

Social networking, libraries and privacy

Whilst it is important that libraries provide access to and utilise social networking tools, this access and use also brings with it important considerations regarding privacy, disclosure of information and online safety.  Libraries need to devise and implement policies which set out how it will deal with any information it collects from or about it users and staff need to be conversant with policies.  In addition, where a library provides the means for users to access the internet or utilises social networking tools to contact the library, then careful consideration must also be given as to how this is done.

Something as simple as a library blog throws up a whole series of issues which have to be considered.  If the blog allows comments then there exists the possibility of inappropriate or offensive posts.  The library must formulate a policy on how best to deal with this situation and this should be clearly communicated with users also.  Thought also has to be given as to whether users will be able to comment anonymously to protect their privacy.

In relation to safety, does the library install upon the public access computers software to filter content which potentially will filter out websites that are harmless?  Should a library filter content, other than that which is illegal, at all?  Is it the library’s duty to protect children from websites containing pornography even if it means denying adults access to the content?  Does library staff conduct physical monitoring of computer use?  Should the library take a pro-active stance and provide safe surfing classes and teach users about the need to protect their information online or leave it up to users to work out for themselves?

However the library decides to deal with the many issues thrown up by access to the internet and use of social networking sites, it should document carefully all policies and provide reasons why such policies have been adopted where applicable.  Ideally policies should also be created using the input of the users who will be effected by such policies.  The policies should then not only be freely available for all to access but should be a regular part of the conversation with users and staff alike.  Such policies should also never remain static.  Just as the internet and social networking constantly change and evolve, so to should any library policies concerning them.

Digital citizens behaviour & information policy

The video Did you know 4.0 outlines many shifts or trends which have an impact on how individuals behave as digital citizens.  Among trends/shifts identified in the video as at September 2009 are the following:

• Print newspapers have experienced a decline in readership whilst online it has increased.

• Revenue from online ads has increased, whilst print ad revenue has decreased.

• More video gets uploaded to Youtube in two months than gets shown over several years over multiple tv channels.

• Traditional media outlets such as tv gets a fraction of unique visits that social networking sites such as MySpace/Youtube/Facebook get per month – 10 million v 250 million – yet the social networking sites have only existed for the last 6 years.

• 95% of music downloads in a year were done for free.

• Wikipedia, which started in 2001, has more than 13 million articles in 200+ languages.

In terms of the need for, and development of, information policy in organisations, these trends/shifts demonstrate that digital citizens are behaving differently to what has previously been the norm.  Where once they sourced their information from traditional, non-online places, they are now increasingly abandoning those sources and seeking the same information online instead.

For organisations this means developing/updating information policies to allow individuals to access the information they want in the way they want to do it.  Organisations cannot afford to continue on as they have done, they must adapt to the new way of doing things if they wish to keep their traditional users and to gain new ones. Organisations must adopt use of social networking, and other online tools, to establish a relationship with users in a way users are now comfortable with and prefer to more traditional methods.

Indeed it won’t be long before this online behaviour is considered the norm thus organisation need to jump on the bandwagon sooner rather than later or else risk losing their relevance and credibility with little hope of regaining it in a market providing a multitude of other sources.

Who'd have thought...

Well a couple of years ago now I started the program 23 Things as an initiative in my previous workplace.  Circumstances at the time and bit of 'who cares' attitude meant I never finished all 23 things.  I did some and the posts are here on this blog as testament to my thoughts at the time but I don't think I want to look back at them in case they are cringeworthy. 

But how times change... 

A few months ago I would have told you 'my name is Jo and I'm a Facebook addict' and I could say I had a Delicious account but rarely looked at it (mind you this hasn't changed lol).  I would have also said I wouldn't touch Second Life nor Twitter with a ten foot barge pole as I didn't see the point of either tool.  

Flickr also sounded alright but again I wasn't interested in creating my own profile there.  

Now however, due to a subject currently being studied at uni I find myself with my own Second Life avatar and even a 'friend' who isn't part of my uni course.  I have a Flickr account to which I have added photos and selected a handful of favs from the multitude of photos added by others (more will come when I have the time...damn real life getting in the way of my virtual life lol).  I even intend to use Flickr when uni is over.  I like to take landscape photos and whilst I have previously posted them to Facebook, only my FB friends can see them.  I am proud of some of these photos and thought why not share them with the world so that maybe someone else might enjoy them too.  

Just between you and me I'm also considering keeping Second Life going.  I don't think I'll visit very often but it might be fun now and again.  The jury is still out on Twitter, I have made a few posts, have followed a few people and even have a couple of random followers of my own (though I'm glad they aren't paying for the privilege as they certainly aren't getting their money's worth) but at the end of the day it doesn't excite me.  It feels a bit like talking to myself and as for understanding the posts of others, sometimes I think I have a lot to learn about twitterspeak.  However I do see how libraries could utilise it so don't consider it with the contempt I used to.

Delicious, well that will stay too as you never know when you might need it.  In fact only yesterday at work on our Yammer network (like twitter but designed for companies use inhouse only) someone posted about searching for resources using tags such as web2.0 as there is a wealth of bookmarks which could come in handy for my upcoming assignments.

And finally Facebook, well I'm still an addict and I don't think the situation is going to change anytime soon...

Hi, nice to meet you, I"m Librarian 2.0...

Successful web 2.0 information professionals, or Librarian 2.0 as it has become known, can be defined by particular skills, attributes and knowledge.  Whilst no one definitive list exists of what Librarian 2.0 actually is, they can be described as follows.

Librarian 2.0:

• embraces change and works actively towards making change happen in the library;

• is enthusiastic - about trying new things; about finding new ways to interact with users and forging a more personal two-way relationship between them and the library;

• is willing to constantly learn;

• can recognise that change needs to be purposeful rather than because it’s cool or hip to do so;

• endeavours to be conversant with the many available technologies which can be utilised so as to utilise them effectively and to help others use them;

• understands that libraries can’t do everything so must be selective to ensure the best possible service/experience is provided to users within the various constraints experienced by libraries;

• wants to engage users in a two-way ‘conversation’ and to collaborate rather than the old way of talking at them;

• creates opportunities for this two-way conversation and collaboration through providing ways for users to add their own content in the form of comments, tags etc where appropriate to the library’s online presence;

• is willing to experiment to find the tools which best fit the library and the services it wants to provide to users, as well as those which users want even if it means mashing tools together to achieve a particular aim;

• has a positive, can-do attitude;

• doesn't let hype get in the way of making good decisions.

 Of course this is just how I see library 2.0, others may see the role very differently, and that's fine.  Part of the beauty of librarian 2.0 is our ability to adapt and be inclusive of others, we become what our users and library need us to be.  Being a librarian is about helping others to find the information they need/want and web 2.0 is just a set of tools which help us to meet this aim in new and exciting ways.  Gone are the days where librarians sat behind a counter stamping books and shushing users.  Now we want to engage with them and enlist their help to help us be the best we can.  

To steal the slogan from the recent Australian federal election librarian 2.0 is about 'moving forward' to a brave new world, where rather than shush users we encourage them to talk to us.

Effective library website design

When desigining a website for you library it is important to get it right as your online presence is the virtual representation of the phyical library.  If the library website creates a poor impression on users, they will also think poorly of the 'real' library.  Some criteria to consider when designing a library website includes:

• Content needs to be interesting – uninteresting pages are unlikely to get return visits

• Content needs to be current – out-of date content creates a bad impression and will discourage users recommending your website to others or returning to it themselves.

• Don’t use web 2.0 tools just because you can or want to look ‘hip’, use them for a definite purpose

• Ensure your website’s layout is uncluttered and easy to navigate.

• Use visual cues such as icons to break up text and to create interest – icons, pictures etc can encourage users to delve deeper.

• Make sure the identity your website presents is consistent and reflects its intended audience – don’t confuse your users as to the library’s identity or who it is trying to reach. 

• Collaboration and interaction - don’t make the website a one way conversation. 

• Promotion – the home page is the perfect place to ‘sell’ the library.

• Feedback/comments – don’t just provide a form, show the library is interested in what its users have to say by posting feedback/ comments for all to see (ensuring user privacy of course) and include library responses where applicable.  This demonstrates to users that their opinions are important to the library and helps create a relationship between the library and users.

Applying the above criteria to an actual website, in this case the CSU library the following can be said:

Content, whilst current, is dull.  Tutorial videos such as how to use the catalogue could easily be made fun and interesting as demonstrated by the Library Minute series of videos on the ASU Library Channel.

Use of web 2.0 tools is purposeful.

The website is extremely text and url heavy.  Some pages would benefit from moving information elsewhere on the site or by breaking it up using pictures, icons etc.  This would also give the pages a more ‘friendly’ appearance as currently the look, whilst consistent across the website, it is very formal.  The library would benefit from a look which was a compromise between serious academic institution and one which suggests a fun and positive learning place.  Also a more relaxed approach to format could be appropriate for pages targeting students. The more formal format could be saved for areas such as those for academic staff.

The library website makes good use of the centre of its homepage to promote itself.

The website provides little in the way of conversation with users.  Blog posts carry capability for users to comment on posts but otherwise there is no provision for users to add content to the site.  Similarly the library misses an opportunity to create a relationship with users via its feedback/comment capabilities.  Whilst the library may reply personally to a user, it could also use those comments and feedback as a promotional and community building tool

A to Z of Social Networking for Libraries

The article A to Z of Social Networking for Libraries provides a 26 point A-Z list of tips for libraries who use or are contemplating using social networking.  These tips are highlight that not only should the social networking tools selected by the library work for the library and staff but that the library is not just jumping on a bandwagon, rather it is serious about connecting with users via this medium.  Some of the advice given include:

B – Blog, this is a great way for you to offer value and content to your library and it has become the standard for libraries to have one.

F – Facebook, having a presence on Facebook with a fan page or a group is a must. 

M-Mobile, more and more of you library’s social networking needs to be able to accessed via mobile devices. 

P-Podcasting, this is a great way to share interviews and valuable audio tips with your library’s audience.

V-Video, whether on Youtube or elsewhere, use video to enhance and engage with your users via social networking.

The National Library of Australia social networking efforts include: 3 blogs, and various podcasts split into 8 broad genres both of which are available via its website and which can be subscribed to via RSS. (A Delicious button is also provided for sharing links to the blog posts); Twitter, Facebook, Delicious, it’s own Youtube channel, and Flickr accounts.  In addition, for internal use only, Yammer (a private social network for companies) is currently being trialled to allow an informal, work related, conversation to happen amongst staff via twitter-like posts.  The Library is also developing mobile applications for ‘finding a library’ and the NLA catalogue.

Whilst the NLA has a presence in all these places demonstrating a strong embrace of the Library 2.0 ethos, it is vital that all these sites are updated regularly with new content so that users are not left questioning the NLAs actual commitment to social networking.  Content not only needs to be frequently added, it also needs to be interesting and relevant to users.  The use of these social networking tools allow the NLA to reach users that may not be able to physically access the Library and takes some of its vast resources to the spaces where users often now first choose to seek the information they require.

Second Life

Second Life is a 3D virtual world where users create their own avatar which can then move between various lands and interact with other avatars.  It is a tool which has been utilised by organisations such as universities, libraries and professional bodies.  Second Life presents an opportunity to create a space for a group to collaborate and learn in.  It can be made to resemble the institution it is representing or it can be fantasy.  It allows direct interaction by individuals or groups either through physical interaction of the avatars and also allows communication between avatar owners through the use of IM or voice with the aid of a headset/microphone.  

This means that a library can recreate itself in a space where users can feel as if they are accessing the physical library whilst not leaving their own home.  Applying this to libraries, Second Life could be used to conduct virtual library tours, run classes such as for information literacy or social groups such as book clubs.  Libraries could also provide a reference service to users via its Second Life space.

However Second Life does present difficulties.  Firstly users have to be willing to download the Second Life software to be able to use it; however, Second Life needs specific system requirements to function on any pc.  PC’s which don’t meet specification will mean Second Life either won’t function at all or will function poorly.  Thus not only do the Library’s systems need to be able to ‘handle’ Second Life so too does the pc’s of the users which may wish to access the library service through this medium.  

Consideration also must be given to the time and cost involved in providing such a service as it will need staff able to set up a Library space and avatar in Second Life then it will also require staffing to ensure a presence is available in Second Life for users.  An unstaffed virtual library is on par with an unstaffed physical library if users expect to be provided with a service.  A further concern with Second Life is the difficulty of the system and the total anonymity it affords users.  Unlike many web 2.0 tools which tend to be fairly intuitive, Second Life is not so user friendly and may require a library to first educate users on how to use it before it can be utilised in any other way. 

Second Life is quite exciting in the potential it provides for the provision of a tradition real life library service in a virtual setting.  However getting users to take up the application due to its lack of user friendliness and the hardware requirements could make it a difficult goal for libraries to achieve.

RSS

An RSS feed can be a valuable tool for a library as it allows users to subscribe to a selected feed. Feeds can be blog post, podcasts, vidcasts etc and can be on innumerable topics. For example iLibrarian is a blog which can be subscribed to by RSS feed which provides “news and resources on Library 2.0 and the information revolution”. Information wants to be free is another blog which is a librarian reflecting on the profession and on the tools used to service library patrons. Usually RSS feeds are subscribed to through a feed aggregator, for example Bloglines (unfortunately this will not longer exist soon) or Google Reader, which allows users to access all posts to the blogs they have subscribed to in one place rather than having to go to each individual website. An aggregator is also a good way to handle RSS feeds as it means new posts have held until the user is ready to view them instead of the user’s email inbox being ‘bombarded’ with new feed posts.

Libraries can utilise the ability to push information to users via RSS to communicate information such as:

• Library news and events

• Subject guide news

• New books

• Information literacy programs

These feeds can be in the form of text, videos or audio thus catering for multiple access needs or wants and also allows information to be spread to remote users in a timely manner.

An example of a library using RSS feed can be found on the National Library of Australia's website.   There you can find 3 blogs: Behind the scenes, Events, and Library labs.  Events is self explanatory, Library labs showcases the NLAs experiements with new technology, whilst Behind the scenes provides readers with a glimpse into what happens in the background at the library.  The Behind the scenes is the most frequently updated blog but all 3 can be subscribed to using RSS.

Delicious

Delicious is a tool designed to allow users to bookmark websites and utilise tagging for easy location later on. These tagged bookmarks then can be kept private for the user’s own benefit or made public for all Delicious users. In addition it means bookmarks are no longer tied to the browser/pc they were created on. A Delicious account can be accessed anytime and anywhere a user can access an internet connection.

Whilst users create a list of their own favourite bookmarks, they can also create networks of people. Networks mean that a user can elect to view a list of the latest bookmarks created by their network, all in one place. Similarly, subscriptions allow a user to follow a tag. This then means a user can see the latest bookmarks shared on Delicious which have all been tagged in the same way. Users can also utilise ‘bundling’ whereby tags which are related can be grouped together in a bundle for ease of viewing.

The main downside of users being able to create their own tags is the lack of control over terminology which has many implications. It can create duplication of bookmarks for a website which has been given multiple different tags. This also makes grouping of like bookmarks difficult if their tagging is not alike. Further what a tag means to one user may mean something else to another user especially across cultural and racial borders as Delicious is a tool open to the whole world. To overcome this issue Delicious also allows a user to create ‘tag descriptions’ so that others can see what was meant by the tag applied to a bookmark.

For information organisations Delicious supplies the opportunity to create a common space for staff to access and save bookmarks relevant to their day-to-day work and also for activities such as professional development. Delicious also provides a way for information organisations to create lists of relevant bookmarks, for example subject related, which users can use to fulfil their information needs without the need for them to have to physically visit the organisation.  By utilising the hashtag feature on Delicious, the organisation can also allow users to contribute their own bookmarks to the established lists thus creating a collaborative environment with its users.

Social networking

Social networking to me is the ability for multiple users to participate in the online world by the creation, and/or alternation, of content utilising web 2.0 tools. It means users no longer just look at information on a screen but instead they interact with it to increase value and to claim a stake in it.

Social networking technologies or sites I have utilised include:

Facebook
Twitter
Second life
Blogger
wikis
Youtube
Delicious
Skype
Windows MSN
RSS
podcasts

In completing INF 206 Social networking for professionals I expect to gain a greater understanding of the social networking tools available and their applicability. In particular, through learning about social networking it will help me to develop an understanding of how these participatory tools and sites can be utilised specifically within the library and information management world to provide new and/or improved services to users in a manner which is relevant, fun and inclusive.

Active again...

Well haven't been near the blog in a long long time and thought that would be the way it stayed as I've never been the diary keeping sort...but here I am again. Uni went back as of yesterday and I'm now doing my final semester (woohoo). This time round I'm only got to do an elective - Social networking & information professionals and 2 professional activities. Uni is to blame for the reactivation of the blog as I need to keep an online journal for my elective subject so for all those not following me here I am again lol. Anyway just to update things a little more. I am no longer with the law firm having been made redundant in May of 2009 after 13 years with them. Luckily for me I found a new job after only 4 months of looking which considering we were in the midst of the GEC was pretty good going I reckon. So where am I now you might ask...well only the biggest library in the country - the National Library of Australia. I am in technical services (my first love) and work in the Australian Serials unit. The pace of working life is very different from the law firm as is the work I'm doing but I can see a long and productive life at the NLA for all is good. So now all I have to do is get into uni mode and consider what I am going to be posting on here for that...