Posts Tagged ‘web 2.0’

David Lee King

Cindi Trainor

Michael Porter

Meredith Farkas

Roy Tennant, Moderator

 

Description of the analogy of the elephant – People grab onto different parts and form an opinion based

 

Q – What does library 2.0 mean to you?

 

Cindi – It’s not just a set of tools and technologies. It’s a philosophy. It’s about creating services and spaces for users that invite them.

 

Michael – What libraries do to fulfill their roles as community anchors has to change. There are new tools tht make us more vibrant and more relevant than ever before.

 

Meredith – Creation of services as an iterative process. You’re constantly fixing and assessing. It’s about putting our money where our mouth is and being really user focused.

 

David – Wikipedia as a tool – It’s a new way to present information and to let everyone contribute their knowledge. It’s a new philosophy about how to do things.

 

Michael – I’m more interested in what works. I don’t care about Twitter or Gmail or Facebook. Focus on why the tools do or do not meet our needs.

Cindi – It’s useful to think of Library 2.0 as a derivative of Web 2.0. Distinguish new types of companies from dotcom bubble companies. It enables software as a platform. There are applications on the web (not just on the desktop).

 

Meredith – Technologies that allow us to build communities and communicate with one another. People form relationships with others who are only electronic blips.

 

David – Making tech tools easy for non-tech audience to use. 2.0 technologies are made to connect people. If it is succeeding, the technology is out of the way.

 

Michael – 2.0 technologies can be distracting. It’s hard to know what to use as brands change (so pay attention to functionality). It’s very difficult to track the success (or lack thereof) of your institution’s use of these tools. It’s all anecdotal.

 

David – It’s sad that we’re still trying to figure these tools out because some of them are 15 years old. Disagree with Michael on tracking success. You can find blog stats. If users are commenting, then they are reading and engaged. Facebook gives some basic statistics and demographics.

 

Cindi – Just because someone had a page open for 10 minutes, how do you know they were actually reading it and not talking with friends?

 

Meredith – It’s scary that so little assessment is being done. We’re spending time on these services. Why not assess them?

 

Michael – If you use the reporting tools from these various sites, they don’t always sync up on the same timeline. When the way you report is numbers-numbers-numbers, that doesn’t account for social connections and interactions and how people’s lives are impacted.

 

Cindi – Tools like WordPress, Blogger, PBWiki, and Flickr gives libraries the power to reach out to audiences in new ways.

 

David – In a normal library, how do you capture this anecdotal evidence? It’s recorded in these social tools.

 

Q – What are some of the barriers you see to libraries adopting and using these new tools?

 

Meredith – We’re entrusting our knowledge and hard work to third party sites that may or may not be there in the future. Twitter is a good example of a highly popular service that is constantly losing money. People aren’t planning for web 2.0 tools the same way they’re planning for others with regard to backups, etc.

 

Cindi – Any time you want to do something new or create a new service, don’t be afraid of failing. Take a risk management approach. What are the terms of service?

 

David – What are the barriers? Technology. The bigger barriers are our own. If you want to really "get" a technology, you have to immerse yourself in it.

 

Michael – Years ago, there was a debate in public libraries about whether to circulate fiction. In the 1970s the companies that produced VHS and Betamax tapes went to court to prevent libraries from circulating them. Do we circulate digital movies in our libraries? Very few. Go to Netflix. THEY circulate digital movies. These companies are usurping our content distribution. If we don’t figure out a better way to circulate digital content, we’re in deep trouble. Setting up a blog or a Flickr stream are first steps in doing something about it.

 

Meredith – Time is a barrier. People say that they don’t have time to learn or do a new thing. People are asked to do new things, but no responsibilities are being taken away from their jobs. This has to change at the organizational level. People have to be given the time and resources to do this.

 

Michael – Use the tools to get more effort out of what you’re doing.

 

Meredith – We spend a lot of time outside of work learning to do these things. If our administrators don’t give us time and resources to do these things, then they don’t value them.

 

David – Some people are better at managing their time than others. Reference librarians do 20 hours n the reference desk and 20 off. What are they doing with the unscheduled time?

 

Q – What libraries are good examples of using 2.0 technologies and principles?

 

Michael – Lester Public Library in Wisconsin.

 

Q – What is the one thing you want to say to the audience?

 

David – Administrators and managers – let your staff go with it. The worst thing that can happen is that you have a filed project and learn something from it. That’s a positive outcome.

 

Meredith – These technologies are not a magic wand. We shouldn’t use a tool just because someone else is. Think about what is appropriate to your audience.

 

Michael – If you focus on your role and mission in your community, you’ll be fine.

 

Cindi – It’s a matter of having someone in your library who understands the role of these tools in the community.

 

Q – How can library 2.0 tools be supported in brick and mortar libraries?

 

David – We had a tweetup with free food sponsored by a local tv station. The library will be hosting a conference on 2.0 tools for the community.

 

Q – What are ways to help people who are intimidated by computers, let alone 2.0 technologies?

 

David – If you have staff who are still intimidated by computers, why did you hire them, and why do you still have them? Why have you not fired those people if they are not fulfilling their roles?

 

Michael – I’m a big advocate of partnering people. Pair someone with greater technology skills with someone with lesser skills.

 

Meredith – Technology petting zoos. I like the idea of having a place where people can play with technology in a non-threatening environment. Host a training session where people can just play around.

 

Cindi – Subject guide boot camp. People will spend all day together working on subject guides  and reinforcing their skills.

 

Q – It sounds like a lot of library 2.0 is marketing. Would you say that that sums it up or is there something that goes against that?

David – That’s only part of the picture. Marketing is part of it because it’s a broadcast medium. It’s also a collaboration platform for connecting and sharing. It’s more about using pooled knowledge to come up with a better idea.

 

Cindi – It’s also a tool that lets users give feedback to us. It’s not just a wooden suggestion box in the corner.

 

Q – If you’re going to have a technology petting zoo, what tools would you show them?

 

Meredith – It depends on your population, what they need, and what will be appropriate to them.

 

Michael – Kindle, iPhone, Palm Pre, Flip camera, Livescribe Pulse

 

________________

 

David – Set your priorities and focus on them. Don’t focus on what will take the most or least amount of time.

 

Michael – If you’re going to do something like a blog, you have to have the plan, commitment, and follow-through to keep it updated.

 

Q – What some of the privacy pitfalls that we need to be aware of and let our patrons know about?

 

Michael – Every company doing these social tools is a for-profit enterprise. We care about privacy, but these companies don’t. I think there should be a non-profit connected to libraries that develops tools like this.

 

David – The bigger privacy concern is just a lack of understanding about what these tools do, where they go, and who follows them. People THINK they’re being anonymous. Some people don’t quite understand the tools well enough to know who can read them.

 

Q – There are people with legitimate arguments and complaints that Facebook and Twitter are a waste of time. These users may be feeling left behind in face of 2.0 initiatives.

 

David – The largest growing segment of Facebook users is the over-50 group.

 

Michael – We don’t have any trouble doing what we’ve always done.

 

David – My job is digital branch manager. My patrons ARE these users of digital tools.

 

Additional Reading

 

The Great Debate – Has Library 2.0 Fulfilled Its Promise? – at Librarian by Day

 

Has Library 2.0 Fulfilled Its Promise? at LITA Blog

 

Starter Questions for Ultimate Debate 2009 by David Lee King

Advertisements

Google Wave – Jason Griffey

Google describes Wave as e-mail if you invented it now.

Check out more info at http://www.yourbigwig.com/node/154.

Wave seamlessly knows if people are online or offline. The service is synchronous if everyone is online, asynchronous if they are offline.
If someone is added to the wave, the new person can see everything that has happened in the wave, and – if allowed – they can edit everything that has happened. It allows real-time and asynchronous editing of multiple pieces of information by multiple people.

Google is planning to open-source this product. It will be downloadable an installable to local servers.

A wave is an embeddable client. You can get to it from anywhere. For example, you could have a reference wave with all reference librarians a member, and students can be part of it as well. Multiple libraries can participate in shared wave reference.

You can write plug-ins for it. Google demoed a robot plug-in that can parse text and automatically respond. This can happen with no human intervention. For example, a student needs resources for a Sociology 101 paper. The robot could parse "sociology 101" and recommend the sociology subject guide, the top sociology databases, etc.

A robot could parse the name of a book, search the library catalog, and automatically return results to patrons.

Semantic Web – Julia Bauder

The underlying concept is to make the web machine readable. The idea is to eventually make the web work like Wolfram Alpha: you ask a question and the answer gives you an answer.

With this concept, the answer just pops up. This raises the obvious question of information validity.
To make the semantic web work, everything (including people) has a universal identifier. Privacy concerns.

Q – What are companies doing to facilitate this?
A – Not much yet. There are semantic web browsers out there, but you have to know a subject’s universal identifier. You can’t do natural language searches.

 

Facebook Pages – David Lee King

Using Facebook to push programming – Facebook Events
Meetings are listed selectively because this facility hosts thousands of meetings. They’ve tried some discussions through Facebook, but that hasn’t gotten particularly good response. Status updates have been the most successful tool.

The Facebook statistics have revealed some information about their users, and they have used that to market to their high use constituencies.
Content is updated by David, two web people, and the marketing person (but mainly the marketing person).

Q – Do you have photos and videos?
Y – We’re using boxes for YouTube and Flicker.

Q – How are academic libraries increasing use of their page?
A – We’re posting fun things such as news stories about the anniversary of the Sony Walkman. We’re trying not to be too librarian-y.

Upcoming instruction sessions can be advertised. Some libraries are are friending their student workers, and that leads to some additional friends.
One of the big issues is deciding what your Facebook identity is.

Facebook can also be used to give status updates and construction and renovation projects.

 

Cloud Computing – Matt Hamilton, Cindi Trainor

Computing power moves from your local device to the server on the web.
Cloud computing is like Play-Doh. Break off a little or large piece depending on what you need. When you’re finished, it goes back into the big lump for everyone else to use.
There are software and tools aimed specifically at libraries: Liblime, SFX, ILLiad are all available as hosted services. You don’t have to have staff who can manage server hardware and OS.
Other tools – Google Docs, DropBox
Distinction between having servers in the cloud vs. having services in the cloud.
Amazon idea – companies spend a lot of their resources on supporting the infrastructure. What might happen if you could shift the infrastructure support and focus more local resources on development and innovation?
What about the security of your data? When you put your information on someone else’s server, you’re subject to their privacy policies, their backup procedures, their disaster recovery plans, etc.

 

Government Information Mashups – Rebecca Blakely

Think about extracting raw data and combining it with services to make something new.
www.data.gov

Individuals and non-profits are using this information. Check out www.ilive.at

www.recovery.org – Non-profit site used the http://www.recovery.gov data to create something better.

EPA – Toxic Release Inventory

www.opencongress.org – Pulls data from other government sources.

Managing Staff Furloughs – Melissa Shepherd

Used Drupal to manage furlough information. Many user-developed modules already available.

 

Mobile Websites and Applications – Cody Hanson

Beta site is in development for the UMN community.
Site is developed primarily for the iPhone because it has the most forgiving browser.
Mobile site is php-based.

Site is using Metalib to provide mobile-optimized search results/interface for specific databases.

Q – What level of expertise is required?
A – The lead developer has a lot of PHP experience as well as experience with the ILS.

Q – Did you have a lot of demand from the users? Is that what drove the development?
A – No, we just thought it would be cool.

Q – How much development time has been invested?
A – We’ve just had one developer who sent 2-3 days.

Q – What kind of usability testing will you be using?
A – We do a fair amount of usability testing, but our usability lab is setup for desktop testing. Still trying to figure out how we’ll do this in a mobile environment.

Last month brought a lot of hoopla over Facebook’s change to the terms of service agreements with users. (See references below for more reading.) Now it seems that Eastman Kodak Co. also has a change that has generated some user ire. According to a recent AP story, Kodak’s free online photo hosting service is no longer free. It sounds like Kodak is asking users to make a modest minimum purchase in order to keep using the storage services. Users who fail to do that risk having their photos deleted.

These two cases sound like they are at extreme ends of the spectrum. Kodak’s change sounds reasonable to me. They don’t want to just provide free storage for people who never make a purchase, so they’re asking customers to buy a few photos. On the other end, Facebook has essentially told its users that even if they delete their accounts, Facebook has the right to do what it wants to with their content forever. Can you imagine Facebook taking one of your photos and using it in an advertising campaign? Sounds like they have given themselves the right to do just that.

Now as I said, Kodak sounds reasonable, and Facebook sounds unreasonable. The thing that really surprises me though, is what people are getting upset about. From a lot of the reading I’ve done, people are not as upset about the new TOS as they are that the terms have changed at all. They somehow seem to think that they are entitled to non-changing usage agreements. Why? Yeah we pretty much get that when we buy a piece of software, but TOS agreements change OFTEN with SERVICES. Anyone still paying the same cable, electricity, telephone, or water rates they were 10 years ago? I doubt it. Economic condition changes, management conditions change, company goals change, and terms of service agreements change. How does the Internet generate this sense of entitlement that makes people think they should have a free ride forever, and that companies should never be allowed to alter their terms of service? You know most providers include that clause that says they can change TOS at any time. Or did you miss that? Interesting to note that enough people complained, and Facebook reversed the decision.

 

References

Facebook’s New Terms Of Service: "We Can Do Anything We Want With Your Content. Forever."
Facebook Responds to Concerns Over Terms of Service
Facebook Terms of Use
Consumers can be stuck when Web sites change terms
Facebook Reverts Back to Old Terms of Service

This one is over a month old, but I just happened across it: Congressman twitters secret trip to Iraq. Apparently all this social networking stuff is not always a good thing. And this was from the Ranking Member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Whoopsie!

As I listen to people talk in various sessions, it’s clear that many librarians are feeling overwhelmed by the exploding number of Web 2.0 (and other) applications out there. Which ones will “stick”? Which ones will patrons actually use? How steep is the learning curve for staff? Which ones can the library’s budget support? Which ones can the library’s personnel support?

 

Many libraries are still struggling with these questions and just trying to figure out how to get started. While there are a few libraries fortunate enough to have an employee charged with investigating these new technologies, most are not. So where do we start?

 

It strikes me that a good approach is to look for people who already have those skills. Many employees, student employees, or even patrons may already have a good handle on using a certain tool. Find them. Harness their knowledge. Use it to give yourselves a jump start.

 

No one can jump onto and follow every new trend that comes along, but you can find out what your patrons are using. If no one on staff is using it, how about asking the patron for help? Most people really enjoy sharing knowledge, especially when they feel that they are the expert. If we try to tap into patrons’ knowledge, students’ skills, and staff interests, I think we’ll be surprised at the number of services where we already have a built-in knowledgebase.

Thinking about cell phones makes me think about both their possibilities and their limitations. The online experience is an increasingly important consideration for cell phone users. Cell phones are becoming more complex and truly reaching the level of handheld PCs. For many users computing is increasingly an online activity, and they expect a natural and seamless convergence point. The problem of course, is that the applications simply aren’t there. The lack of a Flash player come to mind. If you’re running Windows Mobile, you can enjoy some Flash content. But no Flash for iPhone. No Flash for Palm OS. Can you say “No YouTube”? What about Android? Who knows?

The layout and display will obviously vary on mobile devices due to varying screen sizes. I can accept that image resolution will be different since cell phone resolution falls far below desktop resolution. But the current state of mobile devices and online content is such that in many cases you simply can’t view it. I think of radio as a fitting analogy here. Whether it’s a portable radio, car radio, home stereo component, or an online player, you can get the same radio content. Sure the quality will vary according to the quality of the device that you’re listening on, but in each case you can at least get the content. Not so with far too many web sites and web applications.

As user behavior increasingly moves mobile and online, mobile device manufacturers and software developers have to make sure that users can access and work with their content through any website on which it resides and with any of a host of mobile devices. There is certainly room for specialized applications offering advanced features, but full interactivity with all major websites should be a core goal for all software and device manufacturers. It’s no longer a question of just what users want; it’s a matter of what they need.

PhrazIt

Posted: August 14, 2008 in library, web 2.0
Tags: , , ,

Lots of people read online reviews. Whether it’s for a movie, a restaurant, or a new gadget, the opinions and experiences of others are often help. The problem with some reviews though, is that they’re simply too long. They go on and on and one, and it’s hard to get to the meat of the review. Sometimes we need the subtleties and the details, but sometimes we just want to know if it was good or bad.

Enter PhrazIt. PhrazIt is a interesting website that let users give reviews in 30 characters or less. That’s right – 30 CHARACTERS – not 30 words. User reviews are displayed as a tag cloud. In typical tag cloud, fashion those reviews getting more votes appear in a larger font. Users can add their own 30-character review or vote for an existing review simply by clicking on a phrase they like.

Many libraries are incorporating both patron reviews and tag clouds in their OPAC displays. I think PhrazIt is an interesting hybrid of these two concepts. I can imagine it being used in a library setting. My initial reaction is that it might work well for “browsing” new books online. It could very well have uses beyond that, but the inherently short nature of the reviews of PhrazIt make me instantly think of browsing. The interface is very intuitive, and once you realize exactly what the site does, it make perfect sense. Check it out for yourself and see what you think.