What we talk about when we talk about blogs.

January 31, 2008 at 6:41 pm (Library 2.0, blogging, news, web resources)

With apologies to Raymond Carver, I’m pleased to report that the Wednesday blog meeting went very well! We have vision, enthusiasm, and talent, obviously, but we’ve also taken some key steps toward fleshing out our guidelines, procedures, and purpose, too. We’ll meet again in two weeks, to see what progress we’ve made. In the meantime, keep those links and suggestions coming.

Don W., linkfinder extraordinaire, brought my attention to GovGab, the U.S. Government blog, which is exciting on multiple levels. For one thing, what a great way to put a personal face and presence to what many perceive to be a cold, faceless entity (sorry government – we really do love you). For another, the Meet the Bloggers section is creative and inspiring. And as for content? Well, today’s feature story was killer. Kudos to the GovGab team, and long may they blog.

On the library professional side of the blogging argument, a recent post from Meredith Farkas contains, among the many discussion-worthy points, a few relevant to the topic at hand. She states, for example, that:

Not everyone has a population that wants to have a dialog with the library. Unless you see a real need that could be filled by a blog, your library does not need a blog.

That first sentence gives me chills. If the community doesn’t want to have a dialog with the library, why does the library exist? As a passive content provider? I’ve already used Dorothy Parker’s horticulture epithet this week, so repeating myself would be unseemly; however, I would argue that a carefully planned blog might be just the thing to spark community interest. Maybe the community doesn’t want to have a dialog with the library because it perceives library staffers as dinosaurs who wouldn’t know a blog if it bit them? Just a thought.

Farkas advises, later on:

Mistakes will always be made. If a library doesn’t have any failures, then they’re probably not doing enough to change. But the focus should always be on the users we have, not the users we read about in Educause or Wired or the ones at the libraries that are successfully implementing all sorts of social tools.

That’s wonderful, on two counts. For one thing, fear of making mistakes can be tough to shake, so we need as many reminders as possible. For another, it’s inspired me to get cracking on my tasks for the blog project, so we can find out whether Pittsburghers want a library blog, or whether this will be the excellent risk-taking mistake we all discuss in our next job interviews.

I kid, of course. Thanks to Meredith Farkas for the usual fine writing, and our own Irene Y. for passing me the link.

3 Comments

Some late-night ref-desk thoughts about library blogging.

January 29, 2008 at 8:19 pm (Learning 2.0, Library 2.0, blogging, collection development)

Tomorrow’s the first meeting of what I hope will become the CLP blogging brain trust.  I have an extremely casual agenda, namely:

  • Discuss content guidlines
  • Discuss blogging software
  • Identify the next steps forward

I like “guidelines” better than “policies,” becauase blogging, even on the professional level, is meant to be more informal and accessible.  If we’ve learned one thing from The Cluetrain Manifesto, it’s that people are tired of being marketed to. They want, generally, to be communicated with, and who better to do that the librarians who work most closely with the public?  We’ll always need official communiques, but blogging really is a grass-roots, value-added service that would lose something if we tried to codify it too much.

At any rate, I’m really excited about this; a number of good writers and sensible planners have RSVPd, so hopefully they’ll see things I won’t.  And while I’m all on fire to write the manifesto, “Where We Blog, and What We Blog For,” perhaps a simple bulleted list of possible topics, along with some common-sense reminders, might fit the bill nicely.

 Of course, at this hour of the evening, talking about 2.0 is like dancing about horticulture.  So I’ll be revising my notes and thoughts in the morning, and turning instead to the latest Ingram Advance.  Getting these is like Christmas, once a month, but it does involve shutting one’s browser and focusing on print.

Leave a Comment

Rhetoric, literally!

January 25, 2008 at 6:32 pm (web resources)

The American Rhetoric Website contains all sorts of nifty gems, including mp3 and full-text HTML files of the top 100 speeches of the 20th century. A section on the rhetoric of 9/11 could prove useful for student projects, and the selection of movie speeches is both fun and educational (Atticus Finch, anyone?).

I’m not crazy about the banner ads, but, hopefully, this site will get enough attention and funding to quietly disappear them in the near future. Librarians who field pop culture and/or student questions might want to bookmark this resource for future use.

2 Comments

The care and feeding of databases. Also, among the missing.

January 24, 2008 at 6:41 pm (databases, traditional library services)

When many non-library users think “librarian,” their first thought is still “reference librarian,” or, “behind the desk, possibly with bun.”  However, a great deal of library work a) doesn’t involve desk service, and b) is downright invisible.

Here, for example, are some of the tasks associated with database committee service:

  • setting up trials
  • running test searches and writing evaluations
  • deciding on what to purchase (and, conversely, what, if anything, to cancel)
  • collecting statistics
  • designing and distributing promtional materials
  • organizing training sessions as needed/desired
  • coordinating new database hookups with IT
  • troubleshooting access issues
  • facilitating meetings

How’s that for service diversity?  If these functions are performed correctly, they should remain invisible to patrons, in the name of seamless service.  However, they’re definitely something you want to keep track of (perhaps in a cunning pie chart?) for when yearly evaluations roll around.

On a less technical note,  I spent the bulk of my non-database time today in the stacks, hunting for items on the missing list.  This grand tour of the Ns and Ps bulked up my reading list considerably as I rediscovered the joy of serendipitous browsing.  Did you know you can get Urdu poetry in translation at CLP Main?  Or that you could learn to create Celtic designs with the books in our collection?  At the abstract level, one assumes a library contains the information one wants to have; it’s an entirely different experience to see it happen right beneath your fingertips.

Do you remember the first time you realized a library had something you wanted?  Or something you didn’t know you wanted until you saw it / heard about it?  Was it the visible or the invisible that brought you to the library?

3 Comments

Trendspotting, or, If/Then for ‘08?

January 22, 2008 at 7:53 pm (Library 2.0, philosophizing, traditional library services, web resources)

The trend-spotting folks at What’s Next have released their list of 2008 trends. Speculation is one of my favorite sports, so I thought I’d offer some random thoughts on possible library responses to these trends. These are impromptu responses to possibilites, and I hope people with run with them and offer their own thoughts.

1. Rhythm and Balance. A call for more traditional library services, such as print books, phone service, programming? These have always been in high demand in Pittsburgh, but perhaps they will experience an ‘08 renaissance? Good f2f customer service could become more valuable if patrons begin to experience tech anxiety, and put a higher premium on interpersonal interactions.

2. Karma Capitalism. Higher demand for materials, information, and programming on green living, sustainable business practices, slow food, religion, philosophy, interpersonal relationships?

3. Making things. A good time to bring back the “How to” program series? Increased demand for books on DIY materials of all stripes, from construction to handicrafts?

4. Something for nothing. Increase in circ and visits as people re-discover the concept of “Free to the People”?

5. Industrial provenance. Wow. Good one. How will libraries/librarians respond to these requests for information, if they materialize? Is Google the best search tool for this information? Is there a metasite for this sort of thing? Will someone build one?

6. Robotics. More and better gadgets to help us do our jobs? I’m a tad skeptical that, even with voice and visual recognition, a robot could shelve books better than one of our pages. I would not, however, say no to something hand-held and portable that would give me catalog access in the stacks (extra love if it’s compatible with III and has barcode recognition).

7. Data visualization. Librarians’ skills in these areas will achieve greater recognition and increased value (hey, I can dream). As the amount of information continues to increase, the need for trained professionals could increase proportionately, especially as Google cleans up on the easier searches, leaving us the stumpers.

8. Reality mining. Patrons could become less concerned about privacy, and more willing to give up personal information, while librarians, as gatekeepers of said privacy, would have the opposite reaction. People’s current willingness to lend their cards, and grant written permission for family members to pick up books, etc., is a sign this is already in progress.

9. Eco-exhaustion. People could become even less impressed with marketing, hype and buzzwords, making alternatives to traditional marketing (blogs, Facebook apps, etc.) more attractive alternatives for libraries seeking to promote their services.

10. Fantasy and escape. Higher circ in the fiction collection, especially sci-fi, fantasy and horror. Higher circ in non-fiction current events materials?

Remember: speculation is not a spectator sport. What do you think? If these things happen, how could libraries respond?

1 Comment

Speak easy?

January 18, 2008 at 4:18 pm (Learning 2.0, Library 2.0, databases, news, philosophizing, traditional library services, web resources)

The database committee has been exploring alternatives to Rosetta Stone, as the electronic product will no longer be offered to libraries after current subscriptions expire (more on this as I learn more). Auralog is currently the big dog in the language learning database field, and a helpful colleague who went to ALA midwinter was able to secure a trial (thanks, Holly!). However, I wonder: is an online database the best way to learn a language?

As with most other things these days, language learning is undergoing a 2.0 phase, with plenty of startups looking to jump on the social networking bandwagon. A recent TechCrunch post summarizes key players in the field, and includes links so that you can test-drive them yourself.

Of the pack, I would be most likely to sign up for LiveMocha, which appears to balance the learning and social networking aspects of the platform most neatly. Runner-up points go to Xlingo, with its ambitious Advanced Search scope that just might inspire folks to sign up to teach less popular languages (I’d take a crack at Pashto if it were offered, wouldn’t you?). And you have to wonder if libraries might, someday, purchase products like Mango Languages’ Mango on the Go.

So, wonderfully creative innovations. But, I repeat: is this the best way to learn? For those who are not technologically savvy, or prefer f2f interactions, libraries will, hopefully, continue to offer good old-fashioned CDs and programming opportunities.

What do you think? What resources and materials would help you best learn a new language?

4 Comments

Multi-tasking, redux. Also, a new project.

January 15, 2008 at 7:30 pm (Library 2.0, blogging, collection development, databases, professional development)

Between organizing new database hookups, experimenting with collection development methods, gathering statistics for various reports, and following up on reference questions, it’s been yet another busy week in the life of a library alchemist.  Most of these projects must be completed by Friday, so there’s been little time for blogging.

However, my latest fondest hope is that I will spend less time on personal blogging, and more time as part of a team of library bloggers.  Don W. and I will be working together to try to assemble a group of CLP staff to contribute to a book blog on a regular basis (at least three times weekly).  This is something about which we both feel very strongly, from a literary perspective as well as a technology perspective, and I think the diversity of both writing styles and reading interests among the CLP staff gives the project a good chance for success.   If this sounds like a project with which you’d like to be involved, please drop me a line or leave a comment below.

4 Comments

In which we pause to honor a peer.

January 10, 2008 at 4:47 pm (personal, philosophizing, professional development)

Between reference questions, I’ve been trying to decide (as all library bloggers must, amidst the veritable deluge of information) what was worth writing about today.  The Annoyed Librarian’s recent post, Careers and Stuff, stood out from the field of techno-reportage and 2.0 philosophizing.  As is her wont, AL cuts right to the satirical heart of a professional issue:  what is library success?

It’s a great post, but it’s prompted a very serious answer on my part.  I would argue that library success is measured by the degree of illumination and support one has offered one’s patrons and colleagues, and the depth of the heartache one leaves behind when one has retired from the field.

In memoriam, M.C. Duhig:  librarian, colleague, friend.

Leave a Comment

Balancing the plate.

January 8, 2008 at 7:39 pm (Library 2.0, ethics, intellectual freedom, news, philosophizing, professional development, social justice, traditional library services, web resources)

Because my entries have skewed so tech-heavy as of late, it’s always a pleasure to shift gears, even if the shift is not always comfortable. This recent blog post from veteran library activist Rory Litwin is a firm, and not-so-gentle, reminder that there are other dynamics in play besides Library 2.0, and that we shouldn’t forget them.

This is kind of a strange admission for an organization’s “2.0 librarian” (however merely nominal that title is at this point), but I really struggle to balance all the different responsibilities I currently bear.  As I surf through the blogosphere, I don’t see any other 2.0 folk having the same struggles, or, at least, not admitting them.   Perhaps this is because they are all 2.0, all the time, while I am wearing about as many hats as Bartholomew Cubbins.

That’s not a complaint; I wouldn’t trade the variety of tasks I currently perform for anything in the world (except, perhaps, the chance to work here).  I do have a few questions, though:

 1)  If you are your organization’s “2.0 librarian,” is that all you do?  Or are you responsible for desk time, committee service, etc.?

2)  How do you personally balance your organization’s competing needs?

It’s important to focus on the positive, but that doesn’t necessarily mean sweeping the negative under the rug.  What elements of contemporary library service do you find challenging, and how do you cope?

1 Comment

Wikia Search debuts. Pundits natter. The alchemist speculates.

January 7, 2008 at 6:07 pm (ethics, news, searching, web resources, wikis)

Wikia Search, the latest brainchild of Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, debuted to less than enthusiastic press, a summary of which you can read here.

That’s pretty negative, and it strikes me as overkill. I’ve tinkered with the service today myself, and while it’s not perfect, it’s structured to invite criticism and suggestions, much like many new web applications. Isn’t that the whole point of Web 2.0? Constant beta? Feedback? Experimentation? I suppose the “high expectations” argument is valid, to a point – success tends to breed them. I wonder, however, if a newbie’s effort would have received the same reviews?

At any rate, what I find a little more disturbing about this new project is that it seems to suffer from some of the same issues Wikipedia does – namely, use of uncited source material. Compare, for example, the Literawiki summary of Stendhal’s The Red and the Black with the reference page cited at the end of the entry. Providing a link does NOT mean a wiki author has a pass to use word-for-word text from a print source without proper attribution.

Once an English teacher, always a nit-pick. But if the new Wikia social network self-monitors half as well as regular Wikipedia users, I’ll be satisfied.

Leave a Comment

« Older entries