Citation for the article:
Epperson, Annie and Jennifer L. Leffler, "Social Software Programs: Student Preferences of Librarian Use." New Library World 110.7/8 (2009): 466-372.
Read via Emerald.
I don't think that this article reveals anything terribly new. A lot of what is presented in this article is stuff that I have discussed on this blog and that others better than me have mentioned as well. We are talking about the idea that while academic librarians rush to embrace every nook and cranny of online social software most students either do not care about what the librarians do in that regard or do not like librarians doing it. I have pondered the topic in and out on this blog in places like here, here, and over here just to give some examples. What the Epperson and Leffler article does is validate some of the things I have been saying or restating things that have been said. The conclusion has been presented in other venues: students just do not want or have interest in using social software programs for library help (371). This is something that I find to be in sharp contrast with much of what the celebrity librarian blogger literature advocates. I am not saying that there are not success stories here and there of librarians who can make social software work for library service. I am saying that the hype is not justified given the low return on investment and overall audience interest. I say that on the basis of my own experiences as well as on what I have taken the time to read out there.
The literature review opens with the all too common statement: "the library literature suggests that librarians should be available to students via Instant Messaging, create accounts in Facebook and MySpace, and build avatars to populate Second Life" (366). I think librarians should do some exploring, but it should not be at the expense of other services in their libraries. They should not be doing it without thought because it is the cool and hip thing to do. The article's study sought to see if college students actually used the programs mentioned; the answer is they do, except for Second Life. And then to see is the students would like to interact with librarians in those programs; the answer was pretty much no, or the students were mostly indifferent. Part of this is because the programs mentioned are social programs, and the students want to keep them social. The article authors speculate why Second Life may not have widespread appeal to students; not a single respondent to their study mentioned using the virtual reality world. They speculate that it could be due to their small dataset, a cultural reflection, so on (370). I will suggest that it may be that they simply do not care about it or find it that appealing. Contrary to what some celebrity bloggers proclaim, Second Life is not ubiquitous and widely available. It is a heavy download. It requires a very good computer that can handle the program, and it can be time intensive. Libraries and librarians may be writing their theses on Second Life, and universities may be rushing to build virtual campuses and libraries, but most students pretty much could not care less. And while Second Life may be touting their horn that they are ahead of the pack (from PC World), in reality the numbers they are showing are questionable at best. This is one reason why I tend to take anything my brethren in the profession say about Second Life with a grain of salt. Overall, what the article authors find from looking at the literature is that college students use social software more than the general population, and that said students are not likely to use it for library services (367). The first part of that statement I can easily confirm from experience. At any given time here in our computer lab, students are visiting Facebook or MySpace. This is not surprising. Students' tuition and fees does include access to relatively well maintained computers with unfiltered Internet access, so checking on your Facebook or other social site is just natural. And yet we librarians persevere. I personally think there is some value in us learning how to use social networking, and I think to an extent, if you use it well, it can add a human element in our steps to reaching patrons. But it is not the panacea that the literature makes it out to be. As the authors write, "what works for some libraries will not work for others" (368). Again, it is something I have said before after learning it along the way.
The article's results come from a survey where the authors received 65 responses, with 60 viable responses. This does seem like a small sample, which the authors do admit is small, giving the usual statement about not being able to generalize results (370). As mentioned, the study found that no one uses Second Life. Well, no one in the sample, that is. The study concluded that the majority of respondents "would not care if a librarian participated in social software programs" (369). However, there is a little bit of positive news for librarians: "more participants would seek library help in IM as compared to Facebook and MySpace users" (370). However, as the authors state, one has to keep in mind that IM is more of a tool than an actual social networking site (as in the sense of online community), so the comparison may or not be fair.
The authors conclude by reminding librarians who want to create a presence on these sites to think about their goals for participation; this is if they are doing it in connection to their work like I do with some of my online activity. "Goals should be identified so that the success of the endeavor can be measured" (371). We probably should consider discussing specific measures for success as well, and we probably need to be flexible in those measures as well. Setting up a Facebook page for the library does not mean that all of a sudden every kid on campus will become a fan. Fan count may not be the best measure for success in this case. Maybe this is where the discussions need to be going next. Look at what we are learning and then reflect.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Wednesday, September 02, 2009
Article Note: On demands in librarianship and their impact
Citation for the article:
Knibbe-Haanstra, Marcella. "Reference Desk Dilemmas: The Impact of New Demands on Librarianship." Reference and User Services Quarterly 48.1 (Fall 2008): 20-25.
Read WilsonWeb.
This short article looks at stress factors in reference librarianship. The title uses the label "new demands," but a lot of the article presents these demands as stress factors. The article starts with a pretty generic overview of how librarianship has changed. It's the usual statement of dichotomy: how we see ourselves and how the public sees us. We know that librarianship is dynamic, and it continually changes and evolves. The public either sees the elderly matron with a bun or sees the naughty librarian stereotypes. Apparently, for the public, there are only female librarians. Then the literature review continues with the image of library work as minimally stressful. Les Kranz, who Knibbe-Haanstra cites, apparently never observed a real library in action. The reality is different. Knibbe-Haanstra writes that "the modern librarian is expected to be up-to-date on the latest technological developments, information sources, and service management" (20). I've written a couple of time on issues of keeping up and service (for example here, over here, and way over here), so a lot of the article's opening is not really new to me. The issue with Knibbe-Haanstra's statement is that as technology and information developments arise, expectations arise as well. Add a very demanding public, often known for its lack of gratitude, and you get a formula for stress and burnout in our profession. This is the gist of the article. The rest is just a discussion of the stress issues.
As I usually do when making notes, here are some article highlights with my comments:
Citing Placzek, Knibbe-Haanstra writes that:
"It could be argued that the main cause of stress for reference librarians is the ever-increasing number of responsibilities alongside a declining period of time for personal and professional development" (23).
Knibbe-Haanstra, Marcella. "Reference Desk Dilemmas: The Impact of New Demands on Librarianship." Reference and User Services Quarterly 48.1 (Fall 2008): 20-25.
Read WilsonWeb.
This short article looks at stress factors in reference librarianship. The title uses the label "new demands," but a lot of the article presents these demands as stress factors. The article starts with a pretty generic overview of how librarianship has changed. It's the usual statement of dichotomy: how we see ourselves and how the public sees us. We know that librarianship is dynamic, and it continually changes and evolves. The public either sees the elderly matron with a bun or sees the naughty librarian stereotypes. Apparently, for the public, there are only female librarians. Then the literature review continues with the image of library work as minimally stressful. Les Kranz, who Knibbe-Haanstra cites, apparently never observed a real library in action. The reality is different. Knibbe-Haanstra writes that "the modern librarian is expected to be up-to-date on the latest technological developments, information sources, and service management" (20). I've written a couple of time on issues of keeping up and service (for example here, over here, and way over here), so a lot of the article's opening is not really new to me. The issue with Knibbe-Haanstra's statement is that as technology and information developments arise, expectations arise as well. Add a very demanding public, often known for its lack of gratitude, and you get a formula for stress and burnout in our profession. This is the gist of the article. The rest is just a discussion of the stress issues.
As I usually do when making notes, here are some article highlights with my comments:
"Clients in these professions do not often communicate gratitude to professionals who are trying to help them and will sometimes communicate quite the opposite attitude, creating a hostile and unappreciative environment" (22).
- There is a reason why blogs such as The Society for Librarians Who Say Mofo are thriving. A good number of librarians like to put down that blog, say that they are unprofessional, and overall portray themselves as if they are above venting about rude patrons or just deny such exist. The sad reality is that a lot of library patrons lack basic manners and social behavior skills. Librarians, and front line library staff, bear the brunt of this. Of course, talking about this is a taboo subject. After all, a lot of the celebrity librarian bloggers and upbeat wide-eyed librarians would have you believe that patrons can do no wrong. The truth is that our profession often excuses patron bad behavior for the sake of the "nice helpful librarian" image, but this only continues to encourage hostile work environments. Thus, with no place to vent, places like the mofo blog attract those seeking to vent and maybe find someone who will listen and understand. The fact blogs like that exist makes a serious comment on our profession and how it often mistreats its own.
- Personally, I could tell plenty of stories about ungrateful and hostile students and their parents from my school teaching days. But those would be told after the newer ones I can tell from my current librarian days. Overall, some days are better than others.
- Poor leadership.
- Lack of staff autonomy.
- Incongruent vision of job objectives.
- Growing workloads and duties.
- Lack of support from administrators and the community.
"For the most part, this includes the construction and maintenance of a library's website, blogs, and wikis, as well as advanced knowledge in online communication such as e-mail, chat reference, and even virtual worlds such as Second Life" (22).
- I don't maintain websites (yet), and I am familiar with Second Life, though not a user of it. Otherwise, I've done or currently do everything else on the list. And I enjoy that part of the job quite a bit. Things would be a tad easier without some of the stress factors I listed previously above. By now, these skills and activities are just part of my professional life.
Citing Placzek, Knibbe-Haanstra writes that:
". . .the learning curve expectations are very high and many reference librarians are often required to teach patrons how to use a resource not long after being first introduced to it" (22).
- The issue is that often there is not enough time to reflect on what we learn let alone absorb it prior to teaching it to someone else.
"Although the Internet offers a wealth of training information online, Ennis points out that the opportunity to improve technological skills is hardly useful if a librarian has no time to complete them" (qtd. in 22; emphasis added).
- In many cases, technology just adds to our already bloated workloads, and it increases stress levels.
"It could be argued that the main cause of stress for reference librarians is the ever-increasing number of responsibilities alongside a declining period of time for personal and professional development" (23).
- This is a point I've made before. We need thinking time, something that is very rare in our profession and workplaces. This is specially true if you work in a library's front lines.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Some lessons I have learned about social networking sites, some the hard way
This is the third in a series of posts prompted by Steiner's article (see previous here and here). This time I will go over some lessons I have learned over time when it comes to using social networking sites (SNS). Some I have learned the hard way; others are common sense. I am not trying to be prescriptive. These are just some things I have learned over time.
- You use what works for you. The service solves a problem and/or meets a need. It fits in with what you do already. If it is something new, then it integrates easily into your routines. It's not a chore or just another service to mind.
- You need to discard anything that does not work for you. If you are no using it, if it is not relevant to you, if it just does not work for you, delete or deactivate the account. Personally, I think that unless it is something that has some value if left online, say a project's blog, then it is time to take it down. Back it up if you need to, but then delete. I think leaving debris in the Internet, such as a blog you started for a class assignment, then wrote three posts (likely because someone made you do it), then never used it again, leaves a bad impression. Clean your tracks.
- Don't feel like you have to open yet another account. Just because the "cool kids" are doing it, it does not follow you have to do it. The old adage your mom probably used on you of "if everyone else jumps off a cliff. . ." probably applies here. As I have said before, feel free to experiment but do so judiciously.
- Take it seriously. This is specially applicable to libraries. If you decide to make the jump and set up a blog or a presence on an SNS like Facebook, take it seriously. It is not the thing that the geeky librarian on your staff does on the side when he or she has time (as if he or she has spare time given that he or she is already likely overworked). SNS for libraries are extensions of their services in addition to being an impression you make on your patrons online. Why would you treat it less than seriously? This means commitment not only from the staff working with the SNS, but it also means clear and unequivocal support from the administrators. It also means you give some thought to what you are doing and make sure it fits with your service goals and strategic plans. The worse thing an administrator can do is treat it as just something the librarian working on SNS does on the side, or worse, think he or she is goofing off.
Monday, August 24, 2009
A further look at the utility of social networking sites for libraries
Looking back at the Steiner article, I made some notes on the specific sites mentioned in the article. So, here we go.
Facebook (FB) has become a constant use tool for me. I have been using it personally for a while, and it has forced me to reflect on the idea of boundaries between my professional and my personal profiles online. My three readers know that I have a professional blog (this one) and a personal blog (see here). The basic goal was, and still is, to keep my professional writing and reflections separate from my personal musings and opinions. FB blurs that boundary quite easily. When I started using FB, FB was still a closed system just for college folks with a .edu e-mail address. FB back then was something I started so I would maintain a semi-professional profile and so I could do some outreach and reference work. I say semi-professional because I did include some small personal details in the profile. After all, you still want to come across as a human being. Once FB opened the gates, the borderline blurred a bit more as old friends and family joined the site and could find me. I found that I really had to learn how to tighten the privacy settings. I had to be extremely selective on what third party apps. I installed or even displayed. Some of my friends and family members love those little apps., whether it's some quiz or passing a virtual drink. That is fine for them, but in a setting where not only do students see me, but also colleagues, some administrators, and potential future employers, one has to be careful and somewhat restrictive on some things. Some degree of self-censorship has to be exercised; it's the price of having an online presence. I could go on, but we have other things to cover at this time.
Recently, I created an FB page for my library (I don't have enough fans yet to get the vanity URL, another peeve. Anyhow, just use Google to find it if you wish to see it; MPOW itself is linked on the right hand column of the blog). The purpose is to use it as an outreach tool. We make announcements. We post our events. We put photos of the library and what we do. I also linked the library's blog to the FB page so the blog's posts show up on the FB page newsfeed, a feature I like. We did a soft launch during the spring, and we are formally announcing it when the fall begins. So far, it is working out pretty well.
I was never too keen on MySpace for starters. However, in the interest of experimenting, I set up a MySpace profile (it is linked on the right side column of this blog). After some time, I can say that I am not impressed. MySpace is extremely cluttered and clunky. It's value to me personally is minimal and questionable. With my presence in FB, MySpace seems redundant. Given its poor features, I am seriously thinking about deleting the MySpace profile. One thing that might make use MySpace more is if it was more present in sharing options. As many folks out in the Internet know, many sites and blogs offer a form of "share this link" for social networking sites. FB tends to be pretty prominent, and it allows me to do a bit of microblogging where I share a link and make a brief comment on it. MySpace shines by its absence in this regard, and even in the very few instances where MySpace has a share option on a site, it is clunky to use, assuming it even works. So I rarely bother for MySpace. Bluntly, FB pretty much ate MySpace for lunch in this regard.
As for library use, unless my director gives me a direct order of making a MySpace profile for the library, I am not even considering it. While we do have some patrons who are MySpace users, there are not enough of them to justify the effort plus the overall lower quality of the site itself means it is not worth the effort at this time.
I have a Ning account, and I joined a couple of librarian-related networks. However, the networks were not active enough to hold my attention or interest. I don't miss them. I do see value in Ning as a tool itself, useful to build a social network for a group. This is something that could be explored further, but there is no urgency at the moment.
I have not used Twitter, and at this point in time, I am not interested in setting up an account. I don't say "never" because I know the only certain thing is change. However, I have no use for it at this moment, and I just don't have enough stuff to post in order to justify having it. For following things, my feed reader works fine for now. Besides, you really don't want to know what I had for breakfast, do you? What little microblogging I do gets posted on my FB feed. In essence, at this point in time, Twitter does not solve any problem or provide for any particular need for me. I have noticed a good number of the librarian celebrity bloggers use it, but that is not an incentive for me either.
In terms of work, my director did ask about Twitter and whether we should set up an account for the library or not. The university at large has one here. I can see how it can work for our Campus News and Information folks. At this point in time, I just don't see a need for the library to do it. We are still learning our way in Facebook, and keeping up the library blog is substantial work. As I've stated before, things could change, but I am not recommending implementation at this time.
In the next post, I will go on and discuss some of the lessons I have learned so far.
Facebook
Facebook (FB) has become a constant use tool for me. I have been using it personally for a while, and it has forced me to reflect on the idea of boundaries between my professional and my personal profiles online. My three readers know that I have a professional blog (this one) and a personal blog (see here). The basic goal was, and still is, to keep my professional writing and reflections separate from my personal musings and opinions. FB blurs that boundary quite easily. When I started using FB, FB was still a closed system just for college folks with a .edu e-mail address. FB back then was something I started so I would maintain a semi-professional profile and so I could do some outreach and reference work. I say semi-professional because I did include some small personal details in the profile. After all, you still want to come across as a human being. Once FB opened the gates, the borderline blurred a bit more as old friends and family joined the site and could find me. I found that I really had to learn how to tighten the privacy settings. I had to be extremely selective on what third party apps. I installed or even displayed. Some of my friends and family members love those little apps., whether it's some quiz or passing a virtual drink. That is fine for them, but in a setting where not only do students see me, but also colleagues, some administrators, and potential future employers, one has to be careful and somewhat restrictive on some things. Some degree of self-censorship has to be exercised; it's the price of having an online presence. I could go on, but we have other things to cover at this time.
Recently, I created an FB page for my library (I don't have enough fans yet to get the vanity URL, another peeve. Anyhow, just use Google to find it if you wish to see it; MPOW itself is linked on the right hand column of the blog). The purpose is to use it as an outreach tool. We make announcements. We post our events. We put photos of the library and what we do. I also linked the library's blog to the FB page so the blog's posts show up on the FB page newsfeed, a feature I like. We did a soft launch during the spring, and we are formally announcing it when the fall begins. So far, it is working out pretty well.
MySpace
I was never too keen on MySpace for starters. However, in the interest of experimenting, I set up a MySpace profile (it is linked on the right side column of this blog). After some time, I can say that I am not impressed. MySpace is extremely cluttered and clunky. It's value to me personally is minimal and questionable. With my presence in FB, MySpace seems redundant. Given its poor features, I am seriously thinking about deleting the MySpace profile. One thing that might make use MySpace more is if it was more present in sharing options. As many folks out in the Internet know, many sites and blogs offer a form of "share this link" for social networking sites. FB tends to be pretty prominent, and it allows me to do a bit of microblogging where I share a link and make a brief comment on it. MySpace shines by its absence in this regard, and even in the very few instances where MySpace has a share option on a site, it is clunky to use, assuming it even works. So I rarely bother for MySpace. Bluntly, FB pretty much ate MySpace for lunch in this regard.
As for library use, unless my director gives me a direct order of making a MySpace profile for the library, I am not even considering it. While we do have some patrons who are MySpace users, there are not enough of them to justify the effort plus the overall lower quality of the site itself means it is not worth the effort at this time.
Ning
I have a Ning account, and I joined a couple of librarian-related networks. However, the networks were not active enough to hold my attention or interest. I don't miss them. I do see value in Ning as a tool itself, useful to build a social network for a group. This is something that could be explored further, but there is no urgency at the moment.
Twitter
I have not used Twitter, and at this point in time, I am not interested in setting up an account. I don't say "never" because I know the only certain thing is change. However, I have no use for it at this moment, and I just don't have enough stuff to post in order to justify having it. For following things, my feed reader works fine for now. Besides, you really don't want to know what I had for breakfast, do you? What little microblogging I do gets posted on my FB feed. In essence, at this point in time, Twitter does not solve any problem or provide for any particular need for me. I have noticed a good number of the librarian celebrity bloggers use it, but that is not an incentive for me either.
In terms of work, my director did ask about Twitter and whether we should set up an account for the library or not. The university at large has one here. I can see how it can work for our Campus News and Information folks. At this point in time, I just don't see a need for the library to do it. We are still learning our way in Facebook, and keeping up the library blog is substantial work. As I've stated before, things could change, but I am not recommending implementation at this time.
In the next post, I will go on and discuss some of the lessons I have learned so far.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Article Note: On the utility of social networking sites for libraries, and some additional thoughts
Citation for the article:
Steiner, Heidi, "Reference Utility of Social Networking Sites: Options and Functionality." Library Hi Tech News Number 5/6 (2009): 4-6.
Read via Emerald.
This started out as one of the usual article notes I write for the blog, but it kept getting longer and longer as I kept thinking about the topic. So, I have decided to turn it into a series of posts. This is the first part, which mostly looks at the article, with two other parts in the next few days with my observations and comments.
I have been using social networking sites (SNS) for a while now. I have had a thought or two on the topic like this post. I have pondered use of SNS, even if I am not as vocal as some of the librarian celebrity bloggers. I have used them both for personal and professional use. The article I am discussing in this note deals with the use of SNS for reference use.
My three readers know that I rarely discuss my workplace, except when I can draw a general reflection or lesson, or when something goes really well, and I want to highlight it. This other article via MarketWatch I recently read provides some of the reasons for my approach; I may not agree with all of the article, but I know the reality of our profession. I also know that it is a very tight marketplace. Whether we like it or not, we do some amount of self-censoring for the sake of professional appearance. Reflecting on that is a separate topic. I am leading to a point, so bear with me a bit. As of this writing, we have one open reference librarian position. We are currently in the process of phone interviews. One of the questions we are asking the potential candidates is the following:
The question is pretty good; maybe it could be slightly better phrased. For now, I want to look at the question itself in the context of Steiner's article.
Steiner basically looks at four SNS applications--Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Ning-- and looks at their potential for reference work at a library. I would like for some of the candidates as well as library school students in general to read the Steiner article. While Steiner's article is pretty basic in its overview, I think it can spark some substantial conversations. The article could also make good reading for libraries that are considering a jump into Facebook or Twitter. Innovative libraries are continually looking for ways to make Web 2.0 work for them. With so many services available, and many more emerging, the challenge is knowing what to choose and asking does it work for your particular situation. Steiner puts the question very well:
The last part of that statement is crucial. What can you do given your specific and unique mission and goals. A lot of libraries rush to create SNS profiles or pages, often due to the cool image concern, without thoughtful regard to mission and goals. If you add a lack of commitment to this equation, you end up with a dead site once the initial interest is lost. The resulting debris leaves an impression that is worse than not setting up that profile in the first place. The point is to experiment but do so judiciously.
Steiner looks at the advantages and disadvantages of each service, and she does compare between services. In her conclusion, she some good points. First, the key to successful use of SNS is promotion. Second, you have to make your SNS use known on your library website. Third, use signage at the desk to let users know about your SNS presence. And finally, updating is important (6). I would add the following: once you choose an SNS application, you are making a commitment. I am not saying it is permanent, but you are making the commitment of time and personnel. The library use of the applications should be treated seriously. I am not saying you can't have some fun with it or be playful. What I am saying, and this goes specially to administrators, is that use of SNS is not an afterthought, just something your geeky librarian does on the side, or simply slacking or goofing off. By the way, those are statements I have personally heard at one time or another. Use of the SNS should be part of the library's strategic plans for service and outreach and treated accordingly. After all, you are using those tools to better reach and serve your patrons. So you should put in the time, effort, and a positive constructive attitude when it comes to implementation.
This is now getting a bit long, and I still have more to say. I also want to add some personal notes on specific SNS use and lessons learned. I will do that in my next two posts. So my three readers, and everyone else out there, is invited to come back later in the week.
Steiner, Heidi, "Reference Utility of Social Networking Sites: Options and Functionality." Library Hi Tech News Number 5/6 (2009): 4-6.
Read via Emerald.
This started out as one of the usual article notes I write for the blog, but it kept getting longer and longer as I kept thinking about the topic. So, I have decided to turn it into a series of posts. This is the first part, which mostly looks at the article, with two other parts in the next few days with my observations and comments.
I have been using social networking sites (SNS) for a while now. I have had a thought or two on the topic like this post. I have pondered use of SNS, even if I am not as vocal as some of the librarian celebrity bloggers. I have used them both for personal and professional use. The article I am discussing in this note deals with the use of SNS for reference use.
My three readers know that I rarely discuss my workplace, except when I can draw a general reflection or lesson, or when something goes really well, and I want to highlight it. This other article via MarketWatch I recently read provides some of the reasons for my approach; I may not agree with all of the article, but I know the reality of our profession. I also know that it is a very tight marketplace. Whether we like it or not, we do some amount of self-censoring for the sake of professional appearance. Reflecting on that is a separate topic. I am leading to a point, so bear with me a bit. As of this writing, we have one open reference librarian position. We are currently in the process of phone interviews. One of the questions we are asking the potential candidates is the following:
"What software/Web 2.0 technologies are you familiar with? How would you use them in this position?"
The question is pretty good; maybe it could be slightly better phrased. For now, I want to look at the question itself in the context of Steiner's article.
Steiner basically looks at four SNS applications--Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, and Ning-- and looks at their potential for reference work at a library. I would like for some of the candidates as well as library school students in general to read the Steiner article. While Steiner's article is pretty basic in its overview, I think it can spark some substantial conversations. The article could also make good reading for libraries that are considering a jump into Facebook or Twitter. Innovative libraries are continually looking for ways to make Web 2.0 work for them. With so many services available, and many more emerging, the challenge is knowing what to choose and asking does it work for your particular situation. Steiner puts the question very well:
"As the number of social networks grow, it becomes harder for libraries to determine which services are appropriate for their users and doable given the library's mission and goals" (4).
The last part of that statement is crucial. What can you do given your specific and unique mission and goals. A lot of libraries rush to create SNS profiles or pages, often due to the cool image concern, without thoughtful regard to mission and goals. If you add a lack of commitment to this equation, you end up with a dead site once the initial interest is lost. The resulting debris leaves an impression that is worse than not setting up that profile in the first place. The point is to experiment but do so judiciously.
Steiner looks at the advantages and disadvantages of each service, and she does compare between services. In her conclusion, she some good points. First, the key to successful use of SNS is promotion. Second, you have to make your SNS use known on your library website. Third, use signage at the desk to let users know about your SNS presence. And finally, updating is important (6). I would add the following: once you choose an SNS application, you are making a commitment. I am not saying it is permanent, but you are making the commitment of time and personnel. The library use of the applications should be treated seriously. I am not saying you can't have some fun with it or be playful. What I am saying, and this goes specially to administrators, is that use of SNS is not an afterthought, just something your geeky librarian does on the side, or simply slacking or goofing off. By the way, those are statements I have personally heard at one time or another. Use of the SNS should be part of the library's strategic plans for service and outreach and treated accordingly. After all, you are using those tools to better reach and serve your patrons. So you should put in the time, effort, and a positive constructive attitude when it comes to implementation.
This is now getting a bit long, and I still have more to say. I also want to add some personal notes on specific SNS use and lessons learned. I will do that in my next two posts. So my three readers, and everyone else out there, is invited to come back later in the week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)