Task 15-Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 and the Future of Libraries

My, what a huge subject. I just made some notes and I will comment on a few thoughts I had upon reading "Library 2.o and 'Library 2.o'," written by Walt Crawford in Cites & Insights.

http://citesandinsights.info/civ6i2.pdf

I found some of the comments by Michael Stephens interesting. I agreed with Crawford that taking advantage of the "hive mind" that the "2.o thing" seems to promote might lead to more group-think than recognition of individuality, which is one of the potential implications here. I do like the "folksonomy" concept, though. It seems to me that a lot can be learned from group-think when it comes to the naming and categorization of new ideas and terms.

I believe that the "permaconnected" referred to in the Talus section of the article still constitute a minority of the general populace (although an affluent one). The contingency of Library 2.0 promoters (especially as it pertains to making wide use of Web 2.0 applications) does not have the mandate to serve disadvantaged and under-served segments of the community that public libraries have. Many people don't have the money for new computer systems with the latest capabilities in their homes. I realize this can be used as an argument in favor of libraries providing access to Web 2.o to those who might not get to experience its capabilities any other way, but let's not kid ourselves that all of these capabilities are expected by, or even familiar to, everyone.

Don't get me wrong. I do enjoy the many new applications, and the interactivity of Web 2.0. And I think new technologies, and new ideas about the way libraries do business should be analyzed. If a technology or an idea is found to be desirable and feasible it should be implemented, applauded, and emulated. It is a good idea to do this not only to serve the library community better, but to maintain an awareness of the information service provision field in general. This will assure that we are able to address the question of the relevancy of libraries whenever it is posed. When I first got my job working in OCPL Library, some of my friends said things to me like: "Aren't a lot of libraries closing because we don't need them anymore because we have the Internet?" The perception that libraries may be replaced by the Internet (though perhaps not well thought out by those who have this perception) does exist--and we should not ignore this.

Just a note on Blog maintenance. I attended a webcast by David King - Digital Branch & Services Manager Topeka & Shawnee County Public Library, Topeka, Kansas and Thad Hartman - Technical Services Supervisor Topeka & Shawnee County Public Library, Topeka, Kansas the other day. During the webcast, it was mentioned that comments on Library Blogs need to be answered within a reasonable amount of time from when the comment is made. If comments are not responded to, the conversational nature desired from the Blog is lost. I know this impacts library personnel's time, and it is something that should be considered when implementing a Library Blog.