Ok, after taking last week off from blogging, I'm back for this week to talk about user participation, and specifically how web 2.0 is affecting that.
In September the public library where I was working in my hometown of Darien, CT, launched a new website designed by our head of technology, with idea of social networking and library 2.0 in mind. The website consists of an online catalog that is being called SOPAC 2.0, which stands for "social OPAC." The SOPAC centers on user generated content, and allows library patrons and staff to interact with eachother about materials, in the same way that websites like Librarything.com allow, while using the catalog to see what is available at Darien Library. Features include blogs, ratings, reviews, tags, and other aspects common to web 2.0 and social networking. The idea behind this is great, patrons can find items that they are interested in by using tags from book they like, or follow the reviews of other users that they agree with. However, there are questions to be asked, regarding how patrons will respond to this ability to be heard in a public forum.
When implementing a website that is very focused on user content and participation, you can't guarantee that patrons will participate, and to the level that you had hoped. I think that it becomes the responsibility of the librarians to attempt to get students or patrons involved, if that is the program's intent. Librarians also have to take a role as early adopters and create user content themselves, to provide examples for others. There are concerns about allowing users to provide content that other patrons could be relying on. Librarians cannot guarantee that users' reviews or tags are accurate or will be helpful, and patrons may expect too much. I think that this is even more of an issue when dealing with children. I know that the Follett catalog software that is used by the majority of public schools in the city allows for user reviews, and with this librarians have an added responsibility to keep an eye on what is being posted.
I was interested by the chapter in Convergence Culture about participation with Harry Potter fanlit. I think that this concept of a fanlit forum could be implemented into a library setting, as a way of getting readers involved and promoting media literacy. However, the issues that the creator of "The Daily Prophet" faced, would be faced by librarians, and there would be definite legal as well as ethical issues.
2 years ago
The issue of user-generated content always seems to be a fuzzy one (I'm thinking of Wikipedia here). I just started a staff picks display at my library and, apparently, a patron suggested a patron picks section. Part of me thinks it's a great idea, but wonders about how it could work. The issue of "authority" generated content also complicates matters since part of the point, at least I think, of staff picks is to have a level of familiarity with the collection and comparable titles. As you say, you can't gauge how much patrons participate (or what they will produce) which makes the whole proposition that much more confusing.
ReplyDeleteI see a difference between the SOPAC, if I understand it correctly, and Wikipedia. The SOPAC sounds like it has a social function that allows users to give opinions, whereas Wikipedia invites users to write entries that are based on factual knowledge. Users must understand that the SOPAC is more like reader's advisory and less like an encyclopaedia, and perhaps this is the tricky part for librarians, who may shoulder some of the responsibility for clarifying that detail, no easy task!
ReplyDeleteAlso, this makes me think that there could be a great project here, around teaching library patrons how to use an OPAC socially, or to use a site like Librarything to enhance their reading repertoire.
ReplyDelete