PHM3

The best argument for book banning...

2008-09-28T09:43:00.000-07:00

... would be based on science.

Hard data definitively demonstrating a causal link between exposure to a book/ideas/images, which for at least some individuals directly leads to changes in behavior which we as a society would find intolerable/criminal.

(i.e. a causal link was found between exposure to certain ideas, thoughts etc. which for at least some individuals directly lead them to steal, kill, etc).

Now, before I get into this thought a couple of disclaimers:
1. WARNING: This may get your blood boiling.
2. Consider this a devil's advocate argument. I certainly don't necessarily subscribe to any of the following, but I think it's important to discuss it - if nothing else to at least prepare for any challenges that will likely come in this vein (if they haven't already).
3. Book-length treatises (somewhat ironically) could and indeed have been written on this subject, so this hastily-written, undocumented post doesn't pretend to be comprehensive in nature.

OK, back to the argument:
I don't think we are anywhere near conclusive scientific proof to support book banning, filtering etc. (and perhaps a definitive link will never be found) however, if I were out to ban or restrict exposure to material, this is the argument I would use (and it would be backed up by documentation of course):

Reading I've done recently indicates everything we think, do, see, etc creates changes in our brain. Exposure creates or reinforces neural pathways which wire our brain to act in a certain way. This is why repeated practice of a new task makes it easier for us to perform that task.

Yes, you say, but just observing something isn't the same as doing it. Watching someone kill another person in a movie isn't the same as actually killing them.

Well, believe it or not, there seems to be evidence that watching someone committ an act and actually personally committing that act causes the human brain to fire and wire in the same way.

Of course this doesn't mean that repeated observation of any act/image/thought will lead anyone directly to personally perform the observed action, but one might argue it does predispose our brains to fire in the same way in the future when presented similar stimulus, and as a result make us more likely to take that action in the future.

Killing is of course an extreme example, but what about something like cheating? Or something "beneficial" - exposure to charitable acts of giving? Science seems to indicate observing those kinds of acts wires our brains and predisposes the brain to fire in that way in the future, thus making in-kind action more likely.

Thus, the argument would conclude:
Science, as best we can tell, is telling us exposure to information/actions/ideas primes our brains (and of course our children's brains!) to fire and wire in a way that predisposes us to act in that way in the future.

As a result, we must carefully select what we expose ourselves and our children to, and filter/remove this "damaging" material which predisposes us to criminal behavior. (Let's say for the sake of argument, the concern is about exposure to ideas/information which might predispose our brains to criminal behavior.)

End argument. I'll hold off on my thoughts on counter-arguments for now, but what are your thoughts? How would you respond to challenges of your material brought in this vein?

Would we invent wikipedia if it didn't exist?

2008-06-01T18:25:00.000-07:00

Ever hear someone say something like this at a conference:
"Well, if they would have consulted librarians when they were designing the Internet/wikipedia, then [insert positive benefit here]...."?

OK, let's cross that with: "If the Internet/wikipedia didn't exist, it would have been necessary to invent them."

Let's take that hybrid and do a thought experiment. If the Internet/wikipedia didn't exist and librarians somehow were the only ones who had the power to bring either into existence (assume we had the necessary resources) - would we have done it? Or would it have looked too risky and messy? - Even for all the amazing advances in knowledge and information dissemination each would bring?

What lesson does this thought experiment leave us with as we stare down an uncertain future where we might find ourselves deciding whether or not to try some new, perhaps messy, less than perfect project?

Why we need to be in the experience business....

2008-04-13T10:29:00.000-07:00

Hi all,
Check this out:
www.fancast.com

It's Comcast's new on-demand website. Not only can you watch nearly any episode of many contemporary TV series (The Office, 30 Rock, Amsterdam, The Simpsons as well as classic TV series, Arrested Development, A Team, MacGyver, Firefly, Buffy etc) but you can also watch a limited number of streaming, full-length feature films, all apparently absolutely free with no need for registration. Movies now available include Sideways, Ice Age, and one of my favorites, The Big Lebowski).

This train seems to be a comin'...

What will we be offering if a "perfect storm" of digitization comes together in the next 5-10 years (or sooner!) and patrons no longer have to come to us through any medium to checkout DVD's, music and perhaps books? (Which is probably actually a good thing for many patrons...)

At the very least, it looks Fancast and Joost point to the video portion brewing on the immediate horizon, and Google certainly has designs on making the world's text available online...

Rebranding the Library Card

2008-03-14T14:05:00.000-07:00

Is anyone calling their library card anything but a "library card"?

"Discovery card"? (Not sure how the folks at Discover Financial Services would feel about that one...)
"Learning pass"?
"Growth card"?
"Exploration passport"?
Other ideas?

Seems it's high time we take control of what we name the old library card to put what we offer in the best light.

"The words we use are powerful, they make reality."
(Readers of an earlier post will not this is not a Sting or Police lyric! It turns out it's, of all things, Wang Chung!)

Zipcar, Goloco and Social Learning

2008-02-10T09:02:00.000-08:00

So I watched an interesting talk on many fronts the other day by Robin Chase, founder of Zipcar (the American automobile sharing service) and now Goloco. http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/212

Goloco is a "a service that helps people and communities create their own personal public transportation network" - seemingly enabled via a social software application (like Facebook etc - and there does appear to be a Goloco Facebook application).

Goloco pitches itself as "a better way to travel. Driving together reduces CO2 and raises your spirits at the same time."
Of course the environmental benefits of ride-sharing are obvious, but it was the fun part that got my attention.

With the enthusiasm of a new economy start-up entrepreneur (although one who seems to be a bit nervous) Ms. Chase paints a picture of a future where the social experience of getting there is half the fun. Through services like Goloco, traveling would once again be a richer, social, more enjoyable experience (think of the depth of experience and satisfaction of say, pioneering settlers (minus the hardships of course), as opposed to the lonely, devoid of meaning drudgery "commuting" can be today). Well, personally I'm not betting too much money on the Goloco vision emerging in the near term, but the talk did get me thinking about the experience of learning.

Learning can take place in both social and solitary contexts, and although the balance is no longer as absolute as it once was, libraries for the most part seem still predominantly to facilitate solitary learning (sure information commons/collaborative spaces are popping up, but most libraries are still centered around the usually solitary book).

This post is getting a little long, so let me cut the the chase: Is anyone using social networks to actively pair users with similar interests in an attempt to create social learning contexts (with the permission of each individual user of course)? In effect to perhaps actively create richer learning experiences in the same way Goloco is trying to create a richer traveling experience?

I know a lot of libraries have a somewhat passive presence in social networks, but is anyone (ONLY with the permission of all involved!) actively pairing previously unknown patrons with similar interests in an attempt to enrich their users learning experiences and thereby smashing through the privacy boogeyman that still somehow exists when our patrons give permission to share information?

The technology seems to be there, but is anyone regularly using it in this way? What have the results been?

AutoRenewal

2008-01-27T15:33:00.001-08:00

Apologies, it's been a while since the last post, hope this will make up for it:

What mindless, rote activity is performed hundreds or perhaps thousands of times every day through most individual libraries across the globe that should easily be automated requiring no human intervention by either the patron or staff members? (OK, the post-title gave it away....) Renewing checked out items.

Manual renewal requires a patron to:
1. Remember to make the effort to renew
2. Make time to go online to renew
OR
Make time to phone to renew (and a phone call may or may not require additional staff assistance)
OR
Make time to take a trip into the library where additional staff assistance may or may not be required

Multiplying the individual effort above by the number of patrons renewing items daily (not to mention situations where multiple items are being renewed) adds up quickly.

Automating this process would free up a good deal of extra time which could be more productively used by patrons and likely staff members.

Additionally, an AutoRenewal setup is more patron friendly. Traditionally if a patron forgets to make the effort to renew that means the item is likely overdue and perhaps fines accrue. In an AutoRenewal setup, if a patron forgets to manually renew before the due date or return the item, depending on your circulation policies, AutoRenewal could swoop in and save the day for the patron by extending the due date.

Sure this is all fine and good you say, but why not just extend the initial loan period or go to a recall system rather then setting up a process to the same effect?
My response is that if your circulation policies are anything like the ones at my library, the effect isn't quite the same.

At the Arlington Heights Memorial Library if an item has an outstanding reserve request on it, items on loan cannot be renewed. In an AutoRenewal setup if an item cannot be renewed because of outstanding reserve requests, the borrower receives an email the day the item is due indicating the item is due today as it could not be renewed. Consequently, as opposed to an initial longer loan period, the item isn't kept out of the hands of other desirous patrons as long.

In the case of a recall system (and I have to admit I am not as familiar with the various shades of this animal) it's my impression the patron would have to be more aware they might need to return their item at any time, perhaps after a guaranteed initial period. With regular, guaranteed loan intervals, it would seem the borrower is more likely to be on top of the situation at or around the various due dates.

Recall systems incorporating an unlimited loan period are another situation all together. If your library isn't interested in loaning items out for an indefinite amount of time, there is no reason why an AutoRenewal setup could not limit the number of times an item can be renewed to 1 or 2 or however many maximum renewals are desired.

So why does it appear ILS's just don't offer AutoRenewal? Not sure. At AHML we are experimenting with a home-grown script (written by script virtuoso Harvey Hahn) which works on top of our Innovative ILS to affect AutoRenewal - complete with a maximum of 2 renewals, the ability to manually renew before the due date if desired and notifying emails when an item can not be renewed. Those that have been "experimented on" love it, and we hope to roll it out to our entire patron population in the near future.

AutoRenewal may not be for every library given it's individual collection, patrons and circulation policies, but I think it could benefit a great number of libraries - but most importantly patrons.

Is anyone aware of libraries offering some sort of AutoRenewal? Some cursory research uncovered an online intra-academic library service in Israel that seems to do the same thing, but no other comparable AutoRenewal services were uncovered.

A School of Doing

2008-01-11T12:52:00.000-08:00

Is anyone aware of a library school where students actually run, staff and are responsible for a working library?

In theory an unserved or under-served area could be paired and served by a school of aspiring librarians who learn by doing (often the best way to learn).

This model seems to work well for the culinary arts, automotive, cosmetology, advertising etc, professions - Is there any reason it couldn't work in Library Science? (or Information Science - where perhaps "real world" project work could be offered at a discount to outside organizations? )

After being introduced to the principles of librarianship, and guided along the way by complementary class work (and perhaps the class of students ahead of them who get practice training), wouldn't having students run, staff and be responsible for a working library (along with all of the user interaction that entails) go a long ways towards satisfying those who feel current curriculums don't do enough to prepare students for "real-world" work?

Logistics of course would need to be worked out - perhaps the community served, the educational institution and if needed, a corporate sponsor could contribute to funding such a school of doing (and all at a discount from what would be needed if each were the sole funder of a traditional library), but creating this kind of environment would seem like a great way to further the profession's mission (providing access to information), while at the same time providing students with a "real world" education that would improve upon already invaluable educational experiences like practicums.

Above a one-time practicum or exercise, a school of doing would provide students with a more holistic picture of the contemporary library environment while immersing them in interaction with a vital element of our profession that is increasingly getting the attention it deserves - users.

What are your thoughts? Are you aware of any such schools? Any overriding reason why this wouldn't be a good idea or couldn't be done? Could existing schools transition to this model?

BigThink

2008-01-08T14:45:00.000-08:00

One more site of thought-provoking videos - with a 2.0 twist:
www.bigthink.com

Bigthink has been billed as a "Youtube for ideas".

Posting Video from Library Conferences?

2008-01-02T15:02:00.000-08:00

Follow-up from the previous "TED and Charlie" post:
Is anyone posting videos of the programs being done at library and related conferences?
A cursory search revealed only a handful of videos at www.webjunction.org

This seems like a no-brainer and as such perhaps it's already being done -but if it isn't, shouldn't we be doing this? As librarians we are all about sharing information (dare I say it's our reason for being!) and capturing and posting this valuable content should be relatively easy.

Does anyone have any insight into any organizations/conferences that might be doing this or will be doing it in the near future? A lot of librarians would love to be able to have access to the great programs being given, but the cost of attending a conference is prohibitive.

Any thoughts on why this shouldn't be done? I guess one might argue that posting programs could cannibalize conference revenue and attendance, but it seems to me the net benefit from distributing this information would be greater.

TED and Charlie: Ideas worth watching and spreading

2007-12-28T11:06:00.000-08:00

One of my absolute favorite sites:
www.ted.com

Concise, freely accessible videos of thought-provoking talks given at TED conferences by the world's foremost thinkers and do-ers on anything and everything.

Presenters include: Steven Pinker, Malcom Gladwell, Jane Goodall, Steven Johnson, Bill Gates, Erin McKean (of the Oxford American Dictionary), Sergey Brin and Larry Page, Seth Godin, Lawrence Lessig, E.O. Wilson, Chris Anderson (of "long tail" fame), Richard Branson, Jimmy Wales, Steven Levitt, Will Wright, Nicholas Negroponte and on and on...

Talk themes include:
Technology
Entertainment
Design
Business
Science
Culture
Arts
Global Issues

It seems most videos are somewhere between 3 to 20 minutes long and new videos are added every week. The length and content have made them a favorite distraction of mine while folding clothes.

For a more in-depth treatment of similar and other topics, check out the website for the Charlie Rose show on PBS - www.charlierose.com. As far as I can tell, you can freely watch the entirety of every single segment Charlie Rose has ever done over the show's 13+ year run from the site! You name the thinker/doer/politician/entertainer of consequence and they have likely been on the Charlie Rose show.

Videos from the Googleplex at Google Video also offers some excellent, extended thought-provoking talks.

And some quick questions for discussion:
What is a library's role in highlighting these types of resources for users?
They are freely available to anyone with an Internet connection, but given that presumably most are unaware of their existence, would highlighting them as an institution fit with a 21st century definition of our traditional mission of "providing" resources to our users? (Since if we don't "provide" them by highlighting, the resources in a sense, will likely not exist for our users.)

And generally as "print people" (stereotype alert!), do we have to make a special effort to realize the value these non-print resources may have for our user population?

Enjoy viewing, and best wishes to all for a happy and healthy New Year!

Brainstorming Other Opposables

2007-12-23T18:29:00.000-08:00

What other breakthrough solutions might be out there for libraries by staying in the opposable mindset?

Here's a quick brainstorm of another issue libraries might be facing and how the opposable mindset might help (and there are likely libraries out there doing this, but hopefully the exercise will be generative):

Issue: How late should the library be open? We don't have enough funding to keep it open as late as we would like.
Opposable mindset: The entire library does not have to operate like an ON/OFF switch - with all functions of the library being either operational or closed (in fact we already do not think this way with regard to our online presence).

Perhaps thinking of of library services on a transversable spectrum with all services being operational on one end and all services being shut down on the other would facilitate an opposable solution.

Are there other opposable solutions you can suggest to issues libraries are currently facing?
Could you share any opposable solutions you've come up with to address issues you are facing?

The Opposable Mind

2007-12-16T09:04:00.000-08:00

Just started reading Roger Martin's The Opposable Mind. Seems like a quick, insightful read about one brand of successful strategic thinking. Here's an attempt at a succinct summation of the premise:

"Human beings ... are distinguished from nearly every other creature by a physical feature known as the opposable thumb. Thanks to the tension we can create by opposing the thumb and the fingers, we can do marvelous things that no other creature can do - write, thread a needle, carve a diamond... All those actions would be impossible without the crucial tension between the thumb and fingers" (6).

Similarly, the creative tension generated by holding opposing or multiple viewpoints in mind, despite all the messiness it can entail, can create the conditions for breakthrough solutions.

OK, that's slightly abstract, but let me map that back into the library context and onto a conversation I had with my colleague Brian Shepard the other day at lunch at Jimmy John's.

We were talking about overdue fines. We know overdue fines are patrons/users #1 irritant related to using libraries, yet many libraries (especially public libraries, including my own) still charge them. Here's the evolution of the discussion:

We could get rid of fines, and go to some kind of system where users would not be allowed to take out additional items if they had an item overdue. That would please a lot of people, but there are still many others who don't mind paying a small fraction of dollar if it allows them to keep their items a few days longer and checkout a few additional items. Which system to go with - what to do?

Opposable mind breakthrough: Why don't we allow patrons to choose which system they want to partake in?

Most ILS systems should allow any library to create different patron categories that treat different sets of patrons in different ways. We could let some people do away with fines in favor of some other system, and we could let others choose to pay fines (or perhaps rebranded "extended use charges") to keep the items a little bit longer. And we could let them switch back and forth as often as they would like.

Admittedly there are potentially many other relevant factors that would inform an individual library's decisions related to whether or not they charged fines (revenue streams, overdue points, recall systems, no overdues at all!, details about what the alternative system would entail, etc), but hopefully the above example helps illuminate the concept of opposable thinking - a system characterized by "integrative" "and" thinking as opposed to "or" thinking, especially aided these days by all the opportunities technology can afford.

Incidently, does anyone offer their users the opportunity to choose whether or not they pay fines?

Happy Holidays!

And we'd have a Gemeinschaft edge....

2007-12-08T12:43:00.000-08:00

Lots of thoughts bouncing around at the moment, but here's a quick one:

A Jimmy John's sandwich shop just opened up in Arlington Heights and my colleague Brian Shepard and I went down there for lunch this past week. I've always been fascinated by corporate atmosphere and mojo, so when we walked into this buzzing place a little after noon, I was immediately struck by the fact that all 7 or 8 people behind the counter looked up from busily making sandwiches for a second to yell "Heeey!".

Not only did that do that every time someone walked in, but whenever someone walked out, the whole crew would yell some mixture of enthusiastic salutations that most customers reacted positively to by either raising a hand or at least nodding back.

Coming and going the whole crew felt like they meant it - they were happy to see you come in and they were wishing you the best going out. Very 3rd Placey.

Which made me wonder - wouldn't this be fun to try in a library? For the right setting, I think it could work.

Only wanting contact

2007-12-02T10:32:00.000-08:00

A cursory search of some available resources didn't turn up the reference I was looking for, but I remember coming across several references to an older study that found that patrons who had received service from a reference librarian who managed to touch their hand during the interaction (while handing them a slip of paper perhaps) consistently rated the service they received as better than those in a control group who received the same service, but did not have their hand touched during the interaction.

When I've come across it, the results have been mentioned generically to highlight just how powerfully important touch is (usually in self-helpy type literature). I can't say I've ever seen mention of this in library literature.

So my question though is (if the results are not apocryphal), should/can we be explicitly incorporating what was learned from this study into the service we are providing at the library (after all the study was supposedly performed with reference librarians!).

More clearly, should we be making subtle, imperceptable efforts to make hand-to-hand contact (of course no grabbing etc) with those we are serving in the course of the reference interview where appropriate?

Can this be formulated as an organizational procedure - to touch hands where appropriate? Is that somehow too "dangerous" to make a directive? Or is this somehow only something those in the know could only do under the radar?

Crowdsource, "but verify"?

2007-11-29T18:32:00.001-08:00

My colleague, Bill Pardue at the Arlington Heights Memorial Library, along with Caleb Tucker-Raymond of Multnomah County Public Library have organized the ongoing Slam the Boards event on the 10th of every month.

On that day, Librarians swarm general answer boards like Yahoo Answers, Amazon's Askville and WikiPedia Reference Desk to provide quality, authoritative answers to the world's questions.

The success of Slam the Boards got me to thinking, could the general answer boards be a two-way street - is there also value in utilizing those boards to crowdsource the toughest Reference questions, but then verify the responses before passing an answer back along to patrons?

Now certainly there are listservs and outlets that can be used for the same function, but it seems to me the general answer boards have the widest possible audience (and thanks to Slam the Boards, that audience now includes trained Librarians), and thus the deepest, most diverse pool to draw an answer from - perhaps giving us our best chance to find someone with specialized or maybe even first-hand knowledge.

Or we could find ourselves wading through piles of raving drivel with lots of !!!!!!!!! ..... :-)
But I don't suppose we would know until we tried.

Any thoughts from the house on this one?

"Customer-centered"

2007-11-18T17:43:00.000-08:00

I've been mulling over "customer-centeredness" lately, as it seems to be #2 these days behind "2.0" on the buzzword list for libraries. Specifically, I found myself thinking, what does it really mean to be "customer-centered"? If this is to be more than an empty phrase what does a "customer-centered" library do?

So with those things in mind I suggest for your comment, "You might be customer-centered if:"
1. You spend more time, on balance as an organization working with and thinking about customers as you do information or institutional adminsitration.

2. Your customers do not have to interrupt you reading through information or working at a computer to get assistance inside the library. Customer interaction is primary and respectfully sought after - inside and outside the library.

3. At conferences and internal meetings you spend more time discussing customers and their needs than you do resources, administration, internal procedures, or yes, the library profession.
(In fact, you may even use the words "customers"/"patrons"/"users" more often than you do "library" etc - as an indication of where your focus is. - This might even be worth counting at your next internal meeting or conference session to get an imprecise measure of where the focus is at.)

4. You devote resources to identifying and understanding your customers (their demographics etc), how they are using what you provide, and how your services and information fit into their lives, so you can better tailor your offerings to THEIR needs - as opposed to just counting how often the library and resources get used.

And interestingly here, when you start talking about customer demographics you begin to run into the traditional professional hangup with gathering any and all user information. Certainly, we would never, ever condone gathering information without consent, but in cases where patrons have been fully informed of the benefits and potential dangers of sharing information, it seems we should not be protecting users from themselves by not allowing them to share personal information with us.

In fact, given the contemporary information environment, if we don't give patrons the option to share their info with an eye towards providing better services, it probably seems to an outsider that we just don't want to make the effort.

In many cases high bars indeed, but something to aspire to. Any other "You might be customer-centered if:" thoughts you'd like to share?

Local History Mashups

2007-11-05T17:44:00.000-08:00

Is anyone mashing their local history material with a cartographic application, like say Google Maps or even better Wikimapia, to geolocate local history material? Something like a geolocated memoryarchive.org for local material? While browsing local history photo's (even those with corresponding addresses) I often find myself wondering, "Now where the heck is that?"

Open-sourcing the content and inviting the community to submit their own local history via an application like Wikimapia could be even better. Local history could be captured with a depth and scope that otherwise would be impossible.

Imagine how much more could be captured and saved if the entire community was involved in sharing their own stories and connecting it to place. Stories from Grandpa's shop could be shared and connected to where it once stood. Ditto on stories from Grandma's college days.

You could even share the spot where your uncles faked finding a crash-landed Skylab by dousing a lawnmower engine with gasoline and lighting it on fire - perhaps linking it to the resulting media coverage (Yes, I have to admit I know some uncles who did that....)

Hmmm, how much more of the 99% of history could be saved by visually tying it to place and enlisting the community to share their most meaningful histories.....

Accidental Creative

2007-11-01T18:47:00.000-07:00

I always enjoy podcasts from the Accidental Creative - also available on ITunes. Great quote today from Todd Henry, "Chief Cat Herder" at Accidental Creative (also checkout their Facebook group):

"If you aren't failing, you aren't trying hard enough."

In other words, if you aren't failing, you're not only leaving potential unused, you're missing out on the richest opportunities to learn.

How many of us are denying ourselves the opportunity to fail?

Sting, The Police and "Filter(s)"

2007-10-26T14:30:00.000-07:00

It seems to me if you wanted to make the best case against Internet "filters" you would want to avoid using that term ("filter(s)") in relation to applications that supposedly "filter" objectionable Internet content. Why? The acceptance and use of the term itself implies comprehensive, accurate and beneficial "filtering" is going on.

1. Let's examine "beneficial". Think of filters in every other context, water filters, air filters, etc - they keep out the harmful stuff, leaving only the healthy stuff. Should the term "filter" be then applied to applications that block access to health care information?

Contrast the connotations of "filter" and "censor". Which implies their action will beneficial? What would the climate of the discussion be if we were talking about "electronic censors" as opposed to "filters"?

2. "Comprehensive and Accurate". Through the use of proxies and terms in languages other than English, getting around these applications is not difficult. So the case can be made that calling these applications "filters" - in so far as they imply the filtering is comprehensive and accurate, is misleading and counterproductive.

Gvien the above, it undermines the argument to say, "We oppose (mandated) filters" and then in the next breath say "Filters don't work". From this perspective, accepting and using the term "filter(s)" is like agreeing to let the other side cheat (in so far as they are allowed to inaccurately describe a central factor in the debate to the benefit of their argument, although perhaps not knowingly) - not to mention it is misleading to our users.

If you are going oppose these applications, couldn't you argue it would be more accurate and better inform the discussion to use language that accurately reflects what these things are, something like "faulty electronic censors" (maybe others can suggest better phrases or terms) as opposed to using language that implies these things are something they are not (comprehensive, accurate and beneficial) and then say they say in the next breath they are not those things?

So where do Sting and The Police come in you ask? Well, without getting too philosophical I have a vague recollection of a Police/Sting lyric which implies that you ought to be careful about the language you use because it creates your reality. I've got to run this morning, and I wasn't able to find it quickly in several lyric search engines, but it makes the point nonetheless.

(Please share if you know the lyric I'm grasping for....)

More on InfoCasting

2007-10-22T18:12:00.000-07:00

Thanks to all who shared their thoughts on InfoCasting. Your comments suggested the following analogy:
InfoCasting could be to traditional play-by-play/commentary, what blogging/podcasting is to traditional major media journalism.

Agreed, good InfoCasting would require up-front work, and if we (libraries) were doing it, it would have to be fact-based (non-library InfoCasting would allow for more opinionated commentary), but I do think there is the potential to add value to all sorts of broadcasts - perhaps in unseen ways (think back to before blogging hit it big, who would have thought so many people had so many valuable things to say that weren't already being said through traditional outlets?).

I'm just brainstorming here, and some of this would simply be interesting for its own sake in true "Pop-up Video" fashion, but for American NFL broadcasts (and perhaps you would only do one InfoCast for the Super Bowl) you could cover things like:

Why the Chicago Bears' Devin Hester - officially listed as a wide receiver - is allowed to wear the number 23, even though wide receivers are only allowed to wear numbers 10-19 or 80-89? (Yes he used to be a Defensive Back, but the NFL is usually a stickler for these kinds of things... If anyone knows, please pass it along!)

Picture the "Pop-Up Video" bubble and bubble sound for this one:
That the NFL allows players to wear shirts with full length sleeves and short sleeves, but not three-quarters length sleeves.

And perhaps information about the referees - would you believe Mike Carey owns his own sports apparel company (we could provide a link) and is 57 years old!

An explanation of how "waivers" works.

But InfoCasting for sports is just one option. The key would be to InfoCast events you are knowledgeable and passionate about. As far as I know InfoCasting hasn't ever been done.
Anyone interested in being a pioneer?

PHM3

InfoCasting via Twitter

2007-10-19T07:37:00.000-07:00

Sunday afternoon in the fall in the U.S. means one thing to many people, professional football. And near Chicago, Illinois, that translates to the Chicago Bears.

So while working one Sunday a few weeks back the following went through my head:
Not many people will be here (at the library) between 12 and 3, because the Bears' game is on.
Next thought: Why don't we go to where they are, watching the game?

How could we do that? Perhaps by setting up some kind of contextual, value-added, strictly factual broadcast (an "InfoCast" if you will) to accompany ongoing events (could be any kind of event) we know many people are watching. (Hmm... InfoCasts could be done during popular TV shows, or and this could be dangerous territory, but perhaps, fact-checking from neutral, credible sources during political speeches....)

We would make our presence known, and make it clear that as Reference Librarians we are available 24/7 to answer questions related to the event or anything else. A kind of interactive, 2.0 Biblio-"Pop-up Video".

My initial thought was that this could be done via Twitter, but, and correct me if I am mistaken, those who would be receiving the InfoCast would either need to be continually refreshing to get new messages or if they were subscribed, checking their email for new messages. Not ideal, but I suppose a live vocal broadcast could also be done - although that would seem to require more effort and polish.

Sure, with NFL football games there may be some legal issues that would have to be, forgive me, "tackled" (that's terrible...), but in the abstract, I find the idea of doing an InfoCast intriguing and fun.

What do you think? Is anyone doing this? Other thoughts on InfoCast mediums? Or potential InfoCast events?
PHM3

Magazine Subscriptions - for Patrons/Users

2007-10-16T17:42:00.000-07:00

First, a big thank you to everyone who read and/or responded to the first post. This rookie blogger really appreciates it.

And thank you especially to Jenny Levine for mentioning the first post on her blog theshiftedlibrarian.com (see link at right). If you aren't already subscribed to theshiftedlibrarian be sure to do so, it's one of the best information science/library blogs out there.

A question for you - is anyone aware of any libraries providing subscription services to patrons on individual magazine titles? In other words, the patrons tell us they want to subscribe to a title, and then when a circulating copy is ready, it's automatically on hold for them.

Anyone aware of any ILS systems (maybe open-source systems like Koha or Evergreen) or other software solutions that could support this kind of activity?

If the logistical hurdles could be surmounted (and having enough copies of desired titles to stave off patron frustration could be one of them), offering this kind of service has always struck me as a win-win.

Patrons would love it, especially if it could be paired with some sort of home delivery (I wonder if libraries could mail at the discounted bulk rate for magazines....), and libraries would love it because it cements an ongoing usage relationship with patrons - the kind of thing businesses would kill for.

PHM3, MLIS

The Google Proposition - Challenging our Identity, Furthering Our Mission?

2007-10-13T06:35:00.000-07:00

Imagine this: Google, whose mission is "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", realizes it’s too expensive or just not worth it to fight the fight to scan and make copyrighted books available online. Instead they acquire one or more publishing houses (who perhaps can be had for a reasonable price because their major media parents are disappointed with their contributions to the corporate bottom line) with the intention of providing unlimited simultaneous, free access to texts online while "monetizing" that access via advertising in the same way they have very successfully monetized search results.   Then being as resource rich as they are, Google attracts writers and book producers by offering better compensation in exchange for the right make their to-be-published works immediately and "universally accessible" online. In addition to monetizing book access, Google claims it is doing “good” by making this information "universally accessible and useful" free of charge to readers. 

 To see if this was fiscally possible, I checked Google's August 7, 2007 balance sheet as reported on Yahoo Finance. Google has a "capital surplus" (or cash) of over $12.50 billion and net tangible assets of over $17.50 billion.

Random House has been called “the world's largest English-language general trade book publisher" and perhaps the biggest publisher in the United States. In 1998, they were purchased by German media company Bertelsmann AG for $1.4 billion.  

Since then the asking price for Random House (if it were up for sale) could conceivably have quadrupled, quintupled or sextupled, but even if that were the case, Google theoretically would have enough cash to purchase Random House and with the resources leftover, purchase 2 more Youtube's at $2 billion a piece. (And let's not even get into discussing the fine line of credit they would be able to take out with any lender worth their salt...)

A more likely scenario would see Google purchasing a smaller publishing house. They could then follow the strategy outlined above: pulling best selling writers and book producers away from other publishing houses by offering better compensation in exchange for the right make their works immediately and "universally accessible" online - which could be attractive to writers and book producers. In time, Google, and other copycat competitors, buy up individual "legacy" publishing houses, gaining their backlist titles and negotiating the rights to make them freely and "universally accessible" online.  Eventually, the “immediately and universally accessible” model becomes the dominant publishing model, although perhaps initially only for adult books.

If this happened, how would libraries respond? and should we actually be lobbying Google and others to follow this path?   There would be justifiable concern about Google (and other for-profit organizations) gatekeeping and controlling access to the world's published material (a significant concern!), but not withstanding the current digital divide, it is difficult to argue that the freely, immediately universally accessible model would not do more, faster, to give more people access to information than libraries ever could going forward.

Would we protest, perhaps out of a short-sighted desire to preserve ourselves as an institution as we have traditionally existed?
 OR 
Would we embark on some kind of "transformational change" (as many before me have called it), satisfied our mission of providing freely available information is substantially (if not perfectly acheived - perhaps negotiating electronic and hard copy fail safes to maintain access in case Google and others become "evil") and reorient and redevote ourselves using freed up resources to address other community needs - hosting cultural and/or social centers, focusing on instructing and becoming "People's Universities", navigating the available information etc.... 

Harvey Hahn, my collegue at the Arlington Heights Memorial Library, has suggested the same "freely available" publishing model could be applied to databases as well (those available throught Thomson, ProQuest, Gale etc). He suggests that making that information (journal articles, legal info, health info, dissertations, etc.) freely available, could have a greater beneficial impact.

Could a non-profit publisher thrive and sustain itself by using a freely and immediately available model right now? and should libraries be involved in that? My best guess is that it would be difficult, but so many Internet organizations (Wikipedia, Ebay, Craigslist etc...) seem to be able to sustain so many activities that seem unlikely on the face of them.

Discussing the "Google Proposition" as a real possibility gives us a better chance to proactively affect its potential unfolding. If we don't, we risk being caught flat-footed, perhaps reacting in some knee-jerk, but less influential way - akin to "shouting at the river", objecting to its course as it flows by us.

What do you think?

PHM3, MLIS
 