I find this whole argument pretty interesting, but maybe I don't see it from the same angle that people who speak passionately about it.
I'm trying to be 'progressive' in my thinking about how we deliver services. Even the term 'deliver service' has a certain connotation that Library 2.0 doesn't anymore. I've spent years delivering a service, and it can be difficult to switch mindsets around your core work for the last million years ( it feels like it, anyway).
Wikipedia talks about one of the issues with Library 2.0 being that librarians are being resistant to allowing input from nonlibrarians, without any moderation or interference, and allowing people to create their own resources and to publish their own stories. I have a little bit of this feeling in me too, to be honest, but the deep seated reason for this is because we don't want to feel redundant in this new and exciting approach to information.
Our new website begins to offer our customers exactly what a library 2.0 is about. We are offering a social digital space for our customers, and allowing them to create content, participate in 'reference queries' and tag materials for easier/different searching.
I'm excited about it, to be honest, and proud that we are moving forward. I think that having a website like this will give us opportunities to feel more comfortable with the idea of user created/owned content, and we'll benefit from this.
Library 2.0 is a 'watch this space' kind of thing for me, i think. I'm not 100% convinced that our customer base or staff are completely ready for what it could mean, but I'm open to see what happens.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Who knows if they or we will ever be ready?
Post a Comment