L&P@CML: Podcasts

Many libraries are already podcasting. I like the Central Library (LA) podcast, which casts the content of programs at the library; the cast about the Dalai Lama was very interesting to hear. Other libraries seem to be casting about how to use their databases or the different services they offer. I was a bit dismayed at how infrequently many of the podcasts seem to occur. To the extent that podcasts primarily offer audio, they might be losing the war for survival to streaming video: for subjects that can be treated in a brief period of time (say 10 minutes), I suspect they may be less attractive than videos. Their ability to replay lengthy content (1 hour plus for the Dalai Lama program) and to save to portable listening devices in MP3 format may make them attractive for longer programs. CML might well be able to cast programs of interest. Perhaps we could feature a regular reader's advisory cast touting some hot new picks in fiction, non-fiction, children's, etc., on a monthly basis.

L&P@CML: YouTube

Hey, what's not to like about YouTube? Sure there's a lot of junk but there are also many gems. The site has contributed to making the web a more democratic (small "d") medium, allowing people with a camera and relatively little means to air their views. I go to the site to watch windsurfing videos; since we don't live in a high wind area, it is one of the few ways I can easily see the people good at the sport (unlike my own earnest but inept efforts) in motion. Librarians have already begun to exploit the medium, of course, creating their own generally low quality but fun and tongue-in-cheek content. One way we might be able to quickly use the site is to take advantage of the fact that publishers and authors are creating videos about BOOKS; they are advertisements, of course, but do provide information about the titles in a fun way. We could have a new book page and link to content, including YouTube vids, in addition to the ubiquitous Amazon.

Here a YouTube favorite, from Weird Al himself. Many of you have probably already seen it. It inspired me to become a librarian:

L&P@CML: Creative Commons

I've known about Creative Commons for some time and taught about this trend and its use. As libraries, and particularly academic libraries, become increasingly involved with open access publishing and digital repositories, every librarian should learn about creative commons copyright and how it can help a library guarantee access to information, even after that information is picked up by a publisher (who increasingly are having to negotiate in some settings where authors have Creative Commons rights). It is very cool to see a sight that provides tools to help promote CC. If you haven't checked it out yet, take a look: http://creativecommons.org/ . Informative, with useful news and services--very cool and important for libraries and librarians to know!

L&P@CML: LuLu

Lulu is a site that allows would-be Grishams and Evanovichs self-publishing services. Basically, it is vanity press writ (posted?) large. All the next Shakespeare has to do is write the masterwork. Through Lulu, he/she can then choose a format, size, etc. Lulu offers more advanced services, such as having a designer create a cover for the book, perhaps enhancing sales.

One can also upload files to create music CDs or visual DVDs.

Lulu adds a marketing feature, so that one can put one's materials up for sale.

Library use? Well, a library could use Lulu as an option for printing/selling an annual report or a library history. I think it more likely that this will be a source from which we are asked to purchase items. Without any reviews other than user comments, I'm not sure how authoritative/reliable/high quality the materials here will be. It represents an interesting dilemma, doesn't it: we may wish to foster web/library 2.0 content, but how much will we trust such content in guiding purchases with tax payer $. Libraries with local history/author collections are perhaps likely to benefit from having another source where such materials could be obtained.

L&P@CML: Web-based Apps

Long time (well, since fall of 2006, a whopping two years) user of web-based apps. In the past, I've advocated dumping Microsoft Office, with its licensing fees per computer, and advocated teaching our customers about web-based apps, touting the freedom from costs and licenses and from the desk-top. I've had some time to re-think this position, and suspect that too many people find MS Office too familiar and too necessary for work purposes to dump. Still, I find the web-based apps easy to use and convenient to access; they free one from the need for a flashdrive in many instances. The word processing and spread sheets are as easy and pretty much as powerful as MS Office. I enjoy using them.

Leanr & Play @ CML: Wikis 2

It's a treat to see what some of my fellow employees enjoy as a favorite book, vacation spot, leisure activity, sport, etc. I look forward to the day when CML has a more extensive Wiki--it could, properly tagged, make for an excellent reader's advisory tool. Lots of good readers submitting!

L&P@CML: Wikis. Our Branch Wiki Rocks!

Our Branch Wiki, Shamrock, is a valuable tool for us. We use it for many purposes: we post policies and procedures, especially for using anything electronic at CML, and it makes a good one stop place to check on how we are supposed to be doing things, combining content from other sources with our particular take or interpretation.. We post schedules, so that staff can log in, even remotely, and see when they are supposed to be working or how some day might look for asking for PTO. Perhaps most importantly, we use it for reader's advisory. The whole branch can (and does) post reviews of their reading; we are developing a base of reviews that staff find helpful when making suggestions to our customers. W eall look forward to the day when CML has a larger scale Wiki, but our branch Wiki is a good start for learning and for providing content that we can use.

Work&Play@CML: Web/Library 2.0, or Who's using Who?

Allowing users to create and post content in meaningful ways for the purpose of enhancing information and creating a digital community (a brief and hardly profound definition of Library 2.0) is likely to be a substantial challenge for public libraries. It will offer rewards but we will have to overcome some serious obstacles, including the inability to compete with other Web 2.0 entities due to lack of funding, user base, and "cool factor." How will libraries become the go-to place for creating content? Are we going to create a community of users with librarians only? Seems unlikley. Even web 2.0 sounds attractive, however, in comparison to some futurist scenerios, such as Library 4.0. By principle, we seek accurate, authoritative sources; in a time when studies do indicate that, say, Wikipedia is less accurate than some traditional library sources (details provided upon request), we might well wonder about the wisdom of fostering access to 2.0 content, much less trying to create our own. Surely this is especially so if providing content means joining with other "private partners" (a term from Dr. Wendy Schultz). Our strength, other than knowledge (a strength surely not restricted to libraries), has long been the ability to combine the resources of the public in a responsible way to offer sources that few individuals can afford individually and to promote an ethic of using those sources with balance and accuracy. What happens to our ethics if we need private partners to provide Schultz's virtual "knowledge spa"? What happens when one of those private partners comes forward to demand we tacitly approve their content, even if it happens to be erroneous, or else they turn off the tap? And in a time when public discourse seems to be increasingly venomous, how much of a spa will Library 4.0 be in any case? That we need to adjust our behaviors and adapt, I do not doubt. But let's think about how we do so and be guided by the values and ethics of our enterprise. If something like Library 4.o requires giving up our profession, is it worth it?

L&P@CML: del.icio.us

I've been onboard with del.icio.us for a while now. I primarily find it useful to maintain a list of bookmarks, but it is also great for discovering bookmarked sites (that I wouldn't perhaps otherwise have know about) on a variety of topics. Research into how people tag ("folksonomies") are continuing; in the library realm, tagging seems to offer some possibilities in providing natural language access (rather than LSCH) to sources in catalogs that have overlays. A useful site!