Comments on: Is Library 2.0 and/or Web 2.0 really serving our patrons?

By: Chrystie

Chrystie — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 20:53:27 +0000

I saw a recent definition of web 2.0 that may be useful here. It’s when we stop using the web to publish our own stuff, and start using the web to ask people to participate in our space *with* us. If we’re giving our patrons a voice or a place in our spaces, to what end? It always must come back to the library’s mission. And these days, there are many of them – there just isn’t a “one size fits all” solution.

There’s the story of the Carver Bay Public Library that created a local gaming program that included access to online gaming (as a reward for various activities). The library’s mission was, very simply, to keep local kids in high school through graduation. The director found a way to use gaming access to drive to his mission; kids got access to gaming for doing homework or extra-curricular activities at school or in the community. Say what you will about this approach, the gaming program was offered because it directly supported the library’s mission, clear and simple. I think we need to do more of this sort of validating of all our services, not just those that have to do with the participatory web.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 19:54:30 +0000

I think there are loads of good examples of Web2.0 – Library2.0, for me, is still a growing idea – and I’ll be honest in saying I’m not sure we’ll ever really be able to assess whether it’s ever really ‘here’ anyway as it’s too amorphous a concept.

All great web2.0/library.20 stuff needs the considered approach you describe and it just is too easy to set up a blog and pat yourself on the back…

By: Anon

Anon — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:53:46 +0000

For a great example of Library 2.0 working to make use of user-generated content in more meaningful ways, check out John Blyberg’s blog (http://www.blyberg.net/) about the soon-to-be-launched SOPAC 2.0 at the Darien Library.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:06:08 +0000

One of my colleagues and I taught some session on 2.0 this summer and what we tried to stress to them was that even if they didn’t use the tools, it at least gave them a chance to know that they were there and may help them rethink their traditional services.

By: Bobbi Newman

Bobbi Newman — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:40:45 +0000

P.C. – well said, 2.0 doesn’t just mean blogs or facebook or myspace, it means using the new social tools to provide connection, service and communication with our patrons.

By: P.C. Sweeney

P.C. Sweeney — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 00:05:58 +0000

I think we need to consider what it means to be “library 2.0.” This doesn’t mean our library has a myspace page or a blog. What web 2.0 means is integrating and arranging user created content into the open web in a more meaningful way. To apply this to libraries it would mean we allow our patrons to integrate and arrange their own content into our library in a more meaningful way. For example, allowing patrons to comment on books or write reviews in the libraries catalogue, to allow user created tags, to allow users to arrange the material in a virtual “bookshelf” in a way that is more meaningful to them.

By: sarah washburn

sarah washburn — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:48:11 +0000

Hi Bobbi,

Embarrassed! Our blog is always open for comments, but for some reason the post about you was not. I’ve changed that, and soon, I’ll stop blushing out of embarrassment and annoyance, because I’m a big believer that a blog isn’t a blog if comments are not allowed.