» The Radical Patron – extreme thoughts on public libraries

How much waste is mandated at your library?

RP — Thu, 09 Dec 2010 12:00:24 +0000

Last week I did data entry at my hometown library for stats reported to the Trustees and Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It’s been a while since I’ve helped with this task and it has become even more wasteful. There are more tally sheets with more tick marks to track transactions of every conceivable media type going back to 2001. This data collection is to comply with a state requirement and has no meaningful use for management of the library.

While my fingers busily keyed data, I pondered the impacts of these mandates. Excavating transactions from 10 years ago is hardly conducive to thinking creatively about how to service contemporary and future needs. And I shudder to think about the resources spent in library and state offices collecting, transcribing, transmitting and storing this useless data. Personally, I would find a requirement to make a tick mark for the activities I performed every day distracting and demoralizing — in fact, it didn’t take long before I grew irritable shuffling papers and keying data whose sole purpose is very likely to feed the patronage machine in our state government.

I worked through an afternoon on this nonsense. Why? Because the library staff are friends and I’m happy to take some gum off their shoes now and then. Also, the time I spend doing dumb work is time they can spend doing something that provides value to the public.

So, how much waste is mandated at your library?

Talking ’bout our library systems

RP — Tue, 07 Dec 2010 12:00:24 +0000

A few weeks ago, Library Journal published an essay I wrote highlighting systemic barriers to quality reference service. People from across the country responded and comments touched upon many aspects of library service delivery. I’m pleased the essay prompted an exchange that involved people within and (a few) outside the library community; went into detail about library services, operations and funding; and focused on the library as information resource — a function that hasn’t received much coverage in the past few years.

Here are selections from the comment stream (from the LJ site, except where noted):

Emilie Smart (via her blog): As the head of a reference division in a public library, I cringed as I read your post. And I live in fear that one day, a patron just like you will visit my staff and have a similar experience. But one point your post brought home to me was one I’ve been concerned about for awhile and am not sure how to address. Back in the day, when we used books (almost exclusively) to answer reference questions, we were answering more questions just like yours. The staff was familiar with that kind of question and was better armed to answer it — not because our resources were deeper then, but because the staff’s experience was. As I look over the questions we are asked today, I find very few that require the kind of knowledge of resources that yours did. In fact, I’m not sure how many of my staff would even know look for poetry explication sources to answer your question. I know that some of them would, but the younger/newer ones might not think of looking for an explication resource unless they had been lit majors. They may not even know the term to start looking for it. This isn’t entirely a matter of poor training — if it were, I wouldn’t be as worried about it. It’s a matter of using knowledge of resources plus acquiring more knowledge over time — and that’s just something that isn’t happening like it used to. I can train staff to use databases and books, but if they rarely have the need to use them after training, they lose what they learned. (Reference work ain’t like riding a bicycle.) I can also send out a tough weekly reference question as a training tool, but even that is only putting a tiny band-aid on an ever-growing sore. If our reference staffs don’t get constant reinforcement and regular challenges (the kind that can only be had by assisting patrons like you on a regular basis), they won’t grow into knowledgeable critical thinkers, and reference service will slowly atrophy into the the kind of service described in your post — a source of pleasant conversation and general information.
	Jean: Ms. Smart – thanks so much for your consideration of my essay. Your points are so well taken. I appreciate how out-of-the-ordinary the type of service I’m seeking is for the libraries in my area. Library work today strikes me as very challenging, particularly in the smaller public libraries that are staffed by a handful of individuals who must do everything from turning off the alarm systems in the morning to [name all traditional library services here], managing meeting rooms, programming, promotion, updating the website, and in the case of some directors also managing the facilities. There’s only so much that can be done given the way these libraries are currently conceived, structured and funded.
SJ: When libraries limit access to resources based on residing in a specific town or affiliation with a specific college, it is not because of “library culture and organization” rather it is due to the restrictions put on by the funders of these libraries. City taxes for example support local public libraries and the city sets the policy of who then is entitled to use the local services. Colleges are funded by districts or state governments and the these funding entities set who is entitled to free access. Let’s look at another example from the college sphere – tuition. If you live out of the district or state, you will pay a higher rate to take classes at those institutions. Likewise, a comparable example at the local level to public libraries is public schools. If you live in one city, you can’t send your children to public school in another.
	Jean: Hi SJ – I understand the library ecosystem reasonably well, and I’m suggesting we reconsider it. In my view, it’s an issue of vital national importance. The majority of funding mechanisms, jurisdiction, governance etc. were established at a time when information was scarce, people were significantly less educated and mobile. And of course we had no data technology. Particularly over the past 40 years, user needs have become more diverse and sophisticated, and libraries face competition from a range of for-profit and non-profit organizations. How can we expect them to evolve rapidly enough to stay viable if we place so many restrictions on them?
Karen: I have had this experience, too, esp when travelling. My husband and I are staying in a hotel, eating at local restaurants, visiting local museums, and are told we can’t use the library (to check our email via internet) because we’re not local residents (but we’re paying the onerous hotel tax). This has happened in Philly and other towns up & down the east coast. Whereas in Monterey, CA, where I used to work, we let everyone have 30 mins on the computer twice/day. It’s a big tourist town, so internet use at the library is just another aspect of being friendly to tourists. No, Monterey is not a wealthy library system–like many places in CA, it’s in trouble.
	Jean: Hi Karen – experiences like the ones you and I have described are the reason I’ve said our national library funding models are unsustainable. Chances are residents in the communities you’ve vacationed in also experience barriers and friction, as I do in my home area. What a downward spiral. Because we’re still using funding, organizational and service models that limit service levels, people like us stop thinking of libraries as resources and find alternatives. As library services become less useful and relevant for us (and because our home budgets are as tight as our municipal ones), we find it harder to support libraries at budget time. And the pattern repeats the next year. We need to break this pattern – and FAST. I believe we can do it with our existing human, material and capital resources … and would love to get a national dialogue going about it.
Nicolette: I am truly sorry for the experience that you had. I do believe that some of the experiences that you cite are functions of budgetary shortfalls, which we as a profession are trying to learn to address gracefully. The barrages of questions about your affiliation may fall into this category. We are advised as a profession, in order to justify funding, resource purchases, and, sometimes, our continued existence, to attempt to get information on the patrons we are serving, since, in most cases today, any purchase rules out some other potential purchase. Unfortunately, if a resource we are purchasing is primarily used by people outside our funding population, those dollars may need to be reallocated to a resource that might serve our core group of patrons better.
	Jean: Hi Nicolette – I know there are many restrictions placed on you and other library staff, which is why I ended my essay with the conclusion “it’s more than the system can provide”. The thrust of my advocacy is to disrupt the narrative about library funding and value. It’s true that funding levels are insufficient to support our existing library systems, however my argument is that those systems (which worked so well for half a century) are now woefully inefficient and often incapable of providing high-quality information service. What I call for is discussion about how we can use our resources to provide more service more effectively. We have the talent, money and technology to do it. All we need to begin is a change in perspective.
Tricia: I wish someone could have referred you to Gale’s Literature Resource Center. If you had come to my library, I wouldn’t have given up until you left with what you came for. Good, solid literary criticism is one of the hardest things to find, and frankly I was surpised to find it in LRC after you said it was unavailable in Lit Crit Online.
	Jean: Hi Trish – guess what? My consortia just added this resource in December. It wasn’t available to me or the people who tried to help me at the time I made my inquiry. What I also figured out based on the feedback here (and the nudge to look harder) is that the database web pages at most of the public libraries in my area aren’t up to date – so I’m going to bypass them from now on and go directly to the consortia page. There may have been more resources available to me than I (or perhaps also folks working in the libraries) perceived at the time.
SusanE: … I am an academic librarian, and I will echo that when I worked at a large, state university, I would often ask if the patron was a student or not. It’s not because I didn’t want to help our public patrons, but knowing whether they were working on an assignment as a student or simply seeking information would change how I conducted the reference interview. … If you were a student working on an assignment, I would have shown you how to use our databases, sat down with you and provided some preliminary searches for the information. Ultimately, though, I feel that it is up to the student to find and disseminate the information they need. For public patrons, I would most likely do most of the searching myself, and would leave less of the dissemination of the information to them. Basically, I feel like it is my responsibility and goal to help the student learn how to find information on their own and my responsibility to find it for the public patron.
	Jean: SusanE: Not sure how representative I am of the non-student users you support, but can share that even though the need for a specific piece of info brings me to the library, I seek the learning experience in most cases (though not all). Sometimes I just want the fish and don’t want to be taught to fish, but most often it’s the latter. I see it as my responsibility to let the library staff know what level of service I’m looking for and try to communicate that as part of my inquiry.
Marcie: I realize that by saying “I found your answer on the Internet,” I am not helping my own cause in keeping public libraries open and funded. The “other side” so to speak can always say, “But isn’t everything on Google? Why do we need librarians?” But my response would be, “Sometimes people need a little assistance in searching the Internet. Google seems so simple and intuitive, but the results may not be quite what a person is expecting. And you can’t always find magazine and newspaper articles for free, like you often can with subscription databases.” (Although I’ve been trying to refrain from such library language and not call them “databases.”) I think this may be what happened to you with your Dylan Thomas poem. I’m sure you could have searched Google yourself–and probably found the right level of criticism–but you wanted a little assistance with your search. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the librarian was ill-equipped to help.
	Jean: Marcie – Thanks for weighing in again, I just love having conversations like these about contemporary information needs and the enormous value librarians can deliver. I tried Google first, using a variety of search terms, and stumbled upon 3 types of unsatisfactory sources: loads of reprints of the poem itself, countless advertisements to purchase a term paper and a few articles written by poorly identified sources describing what they think the poem is about. That’s when I turned to libraries – and how I would have loved expert help from someone like you who could share a search strategy or tactic to help me mine info on the open web. And speaking of open web, I’ve recently argued that libraries and librarians are doing themselves a disservice by limiting their scope to resources within their own institutions or consortia. Here’s a link to some specific ideas I’ve shared about broad unmet needs librarians are uniquely suited to fill: (http://www.radicalpatron.com/category/participatory-librarianship/).
Erika: As an academic librarian, I feel the need to explain what may be going on w/ the librarians you speak to. When a patron comes to the desk, if it isn’t clear, I’ll ask them whether they’re a Univ. patron or not (in more politic terms than that)–not b/c I want to censure or shame them for coming in, but because that affects the resources I can offer them. It’s not a problem to show them the things we subscribe to, but if they’re not a Univ. staff/student/faculty, then I can’t offer to get something through ILL for them. However, other universities have different policies. We’re a state institution, so we can allow anyone to walk into one of our libraries and use our online resources. This isn’t without its problem–the database vendors hate this, and are always trying to get us to limit access. B/c we get public funding, we have a leg to stand on. But a private college/univ. may not be able to allow that sort of access, even though they may want to.
	Jean: Hi Erika – I worked part-time at an academic library from 2002-2005 and understand some of the limitations. I’ve also done loads of backoffice volunteer work for public libraries and that has also helped me interpret my experiences. I’d argue that our existing library governance and management systems are hurting patrons and libraries themselves. A far better approach, I think, are more open systems like the “OneCard” program pioneered by the Whatcom County Library System in Washington State that provides seamless access to area academic and public libraries. They describe it as an initiative “spearheaded by Whatcom Libraries Collaborate, a group of library directors and deans dedicated to expanding library access for better stewardship of resources and greater community impact.” I’d love to think about how fruitful my reference experiences might be if I could easily leverage the resources of the 26 libraries in my immediate area.

What makes a great library?

RP — Tue, 30 Nov 2010 12:00:41 +0000

It’s hard not to be wowed by the facilities at Anythink Libraries in Adams County, Colorado — but make no mistake — this would be a great library system even if it was located in a set of original Carnegie buildings.

Prompted by this month’s Library Journal cover story, I phoned Director Pam Sandlian Smith to better understand what makes this library exceptional. A key is her emphasis on the competencies and people needed to deliver outstanding service. When creating Anythink, a priority for Ms. Smith was to build a high-caliber management team and she recruited talent from within and outside the library world. Their priority was to analyze library work and then structure roles to support it. The team listed all the work and then organized it into buckets, she explained. Next, inspired by policies at Apple Computer, they crafted job descriptions that included competencies to reflect “the how as well as the what”. The competencies are vitally important, Smith said, for “they provide a language to discuss performance” whether it’s high or when it needs improvement.

Take a look at the job descriptions below; they’ll quickly convey what Anythink is about. Then consider your library. What are the focus and priorities of your work?

Library Assistant (Concierge)

You’re the essence of the customer’s experience at the library. You greet people with a smile and welcome them into our library. You enrich people’s lives through meaningful dialogue about our products and services. You earn trust by being knowledgeable about our products and making recommendations that connect with the customer. You help our library customers find the fuel and the spark to unlimited ideas and opportunities.

You warmly welcome customers into our library and ensure a great experience and a fond farewell.
Out on the floor and in the stacks, you provide an amazing library experience to each and every customer by helping them find the book they want or assisting them with self-checkout services.
You are an explorer of great conversations, talking to our library customers about the promotions, programs and services available at the library.
You take pride in our library, ensuring it is clean and tidy and the displays are refreshed and looking beautiful. View the full Concierge job description.

Librarian (Guide)

You create amazing experiences for our library customers. You are the person who connects the customer with information they seek. You develop and implement outstanding experience zone programs. You are a trainer and program coordinator at the branch. You are a natural leader, knowledgeable on all library operations and respected for your ability to have the customer leaving thrilled about the library.

You conduct presentations and workshops for our experience zones whether they be technology training, a children’s story time, a teen library program or a creative writing workshop.
You are a wizard at teaching our library customers how to use our online databases.
You make connections that enrich our library customer experience through developing online/paper bibliographies, adding content to the wikis, displays and creating transformational programming.
You do the right thing. Every decision you make and action you take is an opportunity to demonstrate our collective integrity. View the full Guide job description.

¹Images from Anythink’s You Say You Want A Revolution presentation.

What makes library sources trustworthy?

RP — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 12:00:29 +0000

Brigham Young University’s Harold B. Lee Library has produced a set of 3 video commercials to get students to use the library. Their message is simple: trust the library. To underscore the point, the clips open with an outlandish character (used car salesman, hyperactive adolescent boy, tarot card reader) representing untrustworthy sources and then cut over to happy, bouncy music and a list of citable media types found in the library’s collection. They end with the words “Trust Us” and the name of the library.

My sense here is that library staff and existing users will like the campaign, and anyone else who sees it will probably be unpersuaded. This is because the ads don’t tell us anything new: they say libraries have books and digital media, which everyone pretty much knows, but do not reveal what makes those holdings trustworthy. They also provide an exaggerated picture of alternative sources that is easily dismissed.

In today’s complex and dynamic information landscape, people have a proliferating number of information choices. Many are more convenient than the library, many are more robust (especially in the case of smaller public libraries) and many are highly credible. Simply saying “trust us” to undergraduate students or the general public is not enough. We need to know when libraries are an equal or better information source and why.

We also need help sorting out the myriad information that comes to us from outside a library. Librarians could help themselves and existing or potential users by expanding their view beyond the library’s walls — by creating public service messages that engage the topic of how to establish authority, credibility and trustworthiness of information sources regardless of where they’re aggregated. Who knows … reaching out to us where we live just might prompt us to seek you out where you do.

Auctioning off library heritage and authenticity

RP — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:00:12 +0000

For more than 30 years, children in Dyersburg Tennessee have enjoyed reading from the comfort of brightly painted cast iron bathtubs in the school library. A creative librarian installed the first one and “the original tub was so popular that three more were added over the years.” Students have found lasting value in the tubs and reportedly speak of them and visit the school to see them long after graduating. Others, however, see them as part of a bygone era and so the reading tubs will be auctioned off today to benefit a newly constructed library.

This makes me so sad. The tubs created an enduring, positive experience around one of life’s greatest skills and pleasures. Is Dyersburg school library auctioning off some of its heritage and authenticity? Would it have been possible to incorporate the tubs into the new library plan as a way of building upon past successes while articulating its vision for the future?

It would be interesting to see what the new library is like, and what will replace the tubs as something people might return to decades later as a fond memory of their early reading experience.

Libraries featured on public radio

RP — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 11:00:35 +0000

In October, public radio produced a multi-part series on libraries with Bob Edwards, former host of NPR’s Morning Edition. The series explores the different types of libraries and programs, and concludes with an episode on privatizing public libraries. The complete program is available from this page. Simply click the link below the episode number to listen.

I thought it might also be interesting to reflect on how libraries are portrayed to the public today versus 60 years ago, as seen in the Vocational Guidance Film below (via LISnews and the Internet Archive).

Episode	Time	Description
Episode 1 Click to Listen	15:10	To celebrate National Book Month, we begin a new series examining the successes and failures of our national library system. American Library Association president ROBERTA STEVENS discusses how libraries have changed over the past 20 years, and shares librarians’ struggles to meet the growing demands of their communities even as library budgets are slashed.
Episode 2 Click to Listen	23:41	We continue our series with library historian MATTHEW BATTLES as he gives the then-and-now of world libraries, from the famed library at Alexandria to the genesis of modern public libraries. He is the author of “Library: An Unquiet History.” Then a visit to the New York Public Library and the men and women behind ASK NYPL, a service that librarians provide for those questions not easily answered by the Internet.
Episode 3 Click to Listen	23:42	Continuing our series SHHHH… LIBRARIES AT WORK! today’s program focuses on how libraries and reading can enact change in the lives of patrons and readers, even when change is difficult. We visit a book group discussion among inmates at the Jessup Correctional Facility, then Bob talks with GLENNOR SHIRLEY, the Library Coordinator for the Maryland Correctional Education Libraries. She organizes prison book clubs, family literacy programs, and author visits for the thousands of prisoners living in the Maryland State penitentiary system.
Episode 4 Click to Listen	18:24	In this segment of our library series, we’ll examine an alternative sentencing program in Fairfax County, Virginia, where offenders report to the local library instead of the local jail. We hear from some of the girls participating in the program, then KATIE STROTMAN joins Bob to discuss the success of “Changing Lives Through Literature.”
Episode 5 Click to Listen	15:56	We continue our series SHHHH… LIBRARIES AT WORK! by focusing on that dwindling but important institution, the school library. Although many studies show that students with access to a full-time, fully staffed school library perform much better academically, school librarians across the country are getting the axe. We’ll visit a middle school in Laurel, Maryland where the librarian is pulling out all the stops to get students reading. GWYNETH JONES has turned her library into the coolest place in school by using technology and even television to get kids interested in reading and learning.
Episode 6 Click to Listen	10:25	We continue the latest entry of our series on libraries with GWYNETH JONES, “The Daring Librarian” at Murray Hill Middle School in Laurel, Maryland.
Episode 7 Click to Listen	24:42	In this segment of our library series, Bob talks with KEITH CURRY LANCE, the founder and director of the Library Research Service of the Colorado State Library and the University of Denver. Lance studies the impact school libraries and professional librarians have on student achievement.
Episode 8 Click to Listen	13:16	We talk with Barbara Jones, director of the American Library Association’s Office for Intellectual Freedom. The OIF tracks formal requests to remove a book from a library or classroom because of an objection to the book’s content.
Episode 9 Click to Listen	24:33	We conclude our series “Libraries at Work” by exploring the library’s role in society. The trend to privatize public libraries is growing but when it happens, communities often fight back. We’ll talk to Stephen Klein and Jackie Griffin, two librarians who are fighting to keep their counties from outsourcing their public libraries.

Reader response to a National Public Library Corporation

RP — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:00:11 +0000

A kind reader has shared questions and concerns about a National Public Library Corporation via comments to Tuesday’s post. Others within the library community probably have similar reactions and so I wanted to give the discussion visibility by publishing it as a post. Please join the conversation!

An anonymous commenter wrote:

… in the current political climate an “NPL” campaign would just be an excuse to cut public library funding further since we wouldn’t “need the public dollars”. I think that the kind of project you envision could be accomplished through IMLS …

And I replied:

… I’m convinced that without fresh thinking and bold leadership our public libraries will wither in all but the most affluent communities. ALA, OCLC and IMLS cannot effectively provide what’s needed; they would have done it already if they could.

A key strength of the NPL model is that it is well-established with a successful track record. PBS and NPR continue to make great strides in content & delivery and seem to be holding their own on the funding side. Rather than put local public stations out of business, they’ve helped sustain and nurture them through an array of good programming to draw listeners and funding support to draw contributors. (For some examples of how public radio is expanding, see last week’s article by Outsell news analyst, Ken Doctor.) I believe an NPL would do the same for local libraries.

The commenter responded:

I just can’t see it…it seems to me that only affluent communities would support this model, and it sure wouldn’t be in my urban rust belt community! And the other issue is basing public libraries on a national model of content and programming. Libraries are not one size fits all. I don’t want a national consortium telling me what topics my community should have or what programming we can offer. Not trying to be difficult here…honest!

And here is where I’d like to pick up the conversation …

Looking at public TV and radio can provide info and insights about how an NPL might work.

Evidence suggests people will support quality programming and services, even in areas with less affluent communities. U.S. Census data for 2007 lists West Virginia residents with the lowest level of personal income in the nation, yet they seem to support a healthy public broadcasting system. Its 14 radio stations and TV station attract 500,000 viewers weekly and produce 1,600 hours of content locally per year.

This model helps reduce inequities between income levels by creating resources that can be shared by all. In West Virginia, 30% of their public broadcasting operating budget comes from community support. Over 12,000 individuals and 100 businesses contribute to a resource used by half a million people each week. The poorest person in West Virginia can turn on the TV or radio and get the same programming as the richest. This isn’t true for libraries where differences in income levels result in significant disparities in facilities, collections and programming. Which is a nice seque into your concern about programming …

Public broadcasting makes good content available for local stations to choose for their individual communities. Some is produced by the broadcasting networks and some by local stations. Consider a few of the most popular programs on public radio. Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me is produced by NPR, This American Life by Chicago Public Media, WBUR of Boston produces Car Talk and Philadelphia’s WHYY produces Fresh Air. Though these programs are produced by four different entities, stations all across the country position them alongside their own local news and programming. Each station picks and chooses what best suits its needs. Sometimes the local stations are the consumer and other times they are the producer.

I envision things working this way with public libraries. Let’s say you needed content for an early literacy program at your library. Today you might create your own, or use something you got from a neighboring library, or you might trawl the web to see if any other libraries posted their materials. Wouldn’t it be great if you could access a nation-wide library intranet and easily get the info you needed? You could use it as-is or modify it — and upload your changes so other libraries could benefit. The NPL infrastructre I envision would make this internal sharing possible and provide tools so you could easily share information with the public. So let’s say PBS was running a documentary and your library wanted to host a discussion group about it. You could easily find materials other libraries had compiled and quickly post them to your website or pop them into your newsletter (also using tools provided by the NPL).

And this brings me back to the point about smoothing out inequities. A key reason public libraries struggle and the quality of their output is low is because their staffs are spread too thin, recreating the wheel over and over again. Having an efficient, shared resource pool would make content created by the wealthiest communities available to the poorest. Top-notch information tools would mean every library could have a good website, an electronic newsletter, etc. The availability of these resources would free up staff in the overburdened libraries to do what they cannot do today … so we might find them creating materials of value to the better funded libraries. The sharing would go both ways and everybody in the system would benefit.

Lastly, the NPL would help recruit funding for itself and also to local libraries. It would provide visibility and ROI for large donors and turn those funds into services for the public and local libraries, just as the public broadcasters do today. ALA & OCLC currently receive large donations on behalf of libraries and are unable to put them to widespread good use. They fund useless studies or create new library holidays or launch high cost projects with meager impact such as Privacy Revolution and GeektheLibrary. On the other hand, donations to PBS and NPR bring us things like documentaries and news reporting that contribute to the public good. As is true of PBS and NPR, the NPL would be staffed with professional fundraisers who would structure local funding campaigns that would augment local book sales, bake sales and raffles.

Two key points about the NPL: it is additive. Nothing is taken away from your library; you’d still have your local funding and your local autonomy. There would also not be competition for donations within your community. Like NPR, the National Public Library Corp would not accept individual donations but rather would direct contributors back to their local libraries. (I know, because I’ve tried to contribute directly to NPR and been forwarded to my local station.)

Participation in the NPL would also by voluntary. You could choose to become a member or not — and if your library was a member, you would choose which technology tools, content and fund-raising campaigns you wanted to use.

A History of the World: the right way to use digital technologies

RP — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 11:00:54 +0000

Yesterday I wrote about A History of the World in 100 Objects as an example of the extraordinary value that can be produced through collaboration between strong public partners. Today I’d like to touch upon the project’s effective use of digital technologies.

Rich Content, Rich Presentation

All the material offered by this project is worthy of publication. The care shown to the physical collection extends to the virtual collection; the website design, photos, podcasts and interactive features are all expertly produced, informative, attractive and easy to use. I’ve enjoyed quite a bit of it and haven’t once had the impression that an element was thrown in because it might have value to someone or validate the use of public funds. Nothing has felt like an add-on or afterthought and the integral sense of balance and fit has kept me engaged. I would have bailed if the virtual exhibit was merely the poor stepchild of the physical one. Everything here has been worthy of my time and attention — and my recommendation to others.

Technology as the Means Versus the Ends

A History of the World in 100 Objects incorporates just about every technology in mainstream use today: multimedia, social media, interactive features, blog, online survey … and each is used appropriately and to great effect. The project architects clearly understand their means and ends; the exhibit is what they’re building and digital technologies are their tools. It’s like the project is a virtual house and video, timelines, podcasts, Facebook and Twitter are their skillsaws, levels and hammers.

There’s widespread confusion about this, particularly around social media. Loads of pixels have been spilled and plans laid for how to get more Facebook fans or Twitter followers with nary a mention of the reason for doing it — or how to assess whether or not it was worth the effort. I’m really interested to know what success metrics this project team has established and have sent an email inquiry to them. I’ll let you know if I receive a reply.

Exemplary Use of Multi and Social Media

The website is a multi-media extravaganza. Audio and stunning photography abound. The podcasts are beautiful soundscapes and just the right length. I’ve enjoyed the music, the sound effects and the narration as much as the information they convey. The photos are gorgeous and can be viewed individually or in slide shows, in one size or many and the interfaces to do so are are intuitive and elegant - no distracting control panels or layers popping up everywhere. Videos present users talking about the objects they have contributed. While less formal than the photos, each is expertly produced and add to my sense of participation in the project.

Social media is used as part of a unified strategy to help users engage with the material and each other. It complements explicit outreach, such as the encouragement to “Make history – add your object now”. Facebook and Twitter help promote the site and let users conveniently weave the project into the stream of their daily lives. The blog provides informal narrative and engagement opportunities. The blog comments I saw were concise and on-topic, with pointers to related historic information or requests for new features/uses for the material. The Twitter feed and Facebook page had the same qualities and provide a nice platform for people around the world to share the experience of this UK-based program.

This is a great use of social media. The project’s creators have made it a prominent but not distracting part of the experience. Social media is positioned as informal narrative around the content rather than an integral part of it. This positioning, and the BBC and British Museum’s focus on delivering something of value implicitly model the type of enagement they’re seeking, and the public seems to be responding.

Each Page a Destination and a Portal

The “100 objects” concept is an effective organizing principle, for each item has individual merit as well as wider symbolism and meaning. This is reinforced technologically, with each object having its own page and each page being an intuitive gateway to the entire collection, to related topic areas and supplemental resources. Check out today’s object, the Throne of Weapons, a sculpture “made out of decommissioned weapons from the Mozambique civil war.” The page foregrounds a compelling visual and textual narrative including curator and visitor commentary. It also provides easy access to other objects in the collection based on facets including contributor, location, culture, time period, etc. Accompanying material, such as the podcast in audio and written form, is also readily accessible.

Going Local via the World Wide Web

In addition to the faceted search on the object pages, the website has a dedicated page from which to explore the locations of the collection’s UK contributors. Each link opens a rich pathway to exploration of the United Kingdom. Here again, the collection anchors the visitor experience and local context is seamlessly woven around it. I found myself drawn to this information and explored news, history, and things to do for various counties. Each local site shares the same display template and navigation, which helped me focus on the content rather than having to take time to figure out how each local site works. At one point, I drilled deep into a local site and was unclear on how to navigate back – so I typed “100 objects” into the search and immediately found what I was looking for. Now that’s good information architecture and ease-of-use.

Promote that Brand

The virtual project is accessible exclusively within a British Museum site or a BBC site. Every part of the user experience, from the site display and navigation to the URL structures, reinforce those brands. This is really important.

Many public library sites I visit send me off to a 3rd party site like Flickr, Slideshare, etc. – which perpetuates the 3rd party brand instead of the library’s. In addition to disrupting the navigation and context, this can raise privacy concerns and cause me to abandon the content. (I don’t consume content on popular 3rd party sites that have aggressive user tracking and data collection policies.) Those concerns were not raised on the British Museum/BBC sites that were persistent reminders of the institutions responsible for delivering this wonderful value.

Let’s hope the team that put A History of the World in 100 Objects together does another one soon!

How librarians can advocate for authoritative sources, part 2

RP — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 11:00:10 +0000

It strikes me that while the methods librarians use to identify authoritative sources are still sound, the sources themselves have become less credible. The industry influence in medical research described by Physician Mark Hyman is but one example.

The library community could help restore authoritative sources, I think, with some organization and coordinated sense of purpose. As a first step, I’d recommend a self-audit to ensure that professionals within the library ecosystem represent themselves well and choose the most authoritative sources for materials they produce. A next step could be for librarians to substantively engage with an issue of information authority.

Take medical research. As a start, librarians might assemble and synthesize resources on contemporary methods of creating medical knowledge. Who does it, how do they do it, who pays for it? They might also create and promote high quality guides for the public on how to authenticate medical information. These would be valuable resources. So too would a few thoughtful newspaper articles and public letters to national legislative leaders, written by librarians, identifying industry influence as an issue of public concern. Take a look at this wonderful piece by Jim Leach on Civility in a Fractured Society for an example of how to persuasively call for high standards in public matters.

Concerted efforts like these by an organized library community might increase public awareness and spark civic conversation on this important issue. They might motivate journalists to do better work when covering medical topics. They might even prompt journalistic or congressional investigations into industry’s influence in medical research and practice.

It would be a mistake for the library community to shy away from activities like these by deeming them political. They’re not; they’re about education and advocacy. They’re about being stewards of the public trust and safeguarding the integrity of the information we rely upon to live healthy, productive lives. They’re about participatory librarianship, a public service that’s sorely needed these days.

** ADDITIONAL READING **
Docs on Pharma Payroll Have Blemished Records, Limited Credentials, ProPublica, 10/18/2010

Imagine scarcity – it can save public libraries

RP — Tue, 05 Oct 2010 11:00:22 +0000

What is scarce in what we do? And how do we leverage that to create new value?¹

Join me in imagining the future, when information comes to me.

Devices

Information comes via a device in my pocket, or the tablets lying around my house or in my backpack, large screens on my walls, and computers in my car. They’re all synchronized to provide a seamless flow, so I can start reading content on a tablet while sipping coffee in the morning and have it read aloud to me as I drive to work. If I start watching a movie on the big screen, I can finish while lying in bed with a smaller device. Information flow is bi-directional, so I can annotate, filter, forward and file content, or create new information using manual or voice controls.

As happened with electronic calculators and cell phones, cost for smart devices has become so low that they’re ubiquitious in the used market and given away as promotional items by businesses and as personal gifts by family and friends. In fact, disposing of them is a greater challenge than acquiring them.

Filters

My online interactions have become as sensitive as my physical ones, for sophisticated filters let me easily and continuously determine what content gets through and what gets set aside.^* I have a single online profile through which I filter and organize content. Recommendations for related information abounds based on rich metadata supplied by content providers, content assembled by trusted curators and active & passive indicators from friends — and I determine where and when I want them. My personal preference is to take recommendations in real time when I’m searching content and park them when I’m consuming it. When shopping, I make the decision on a case-by-case basis; sometimes I know exactly what I want and simply need to locate it and other times I’m looking for ideas and alternatives.

* On a historic note, businesses caught on pretty quickly that chasing superficial markers like Facebook fans, thumbs-up indicators or trivial broadcasts did not increase the bottom line, so they abandoned them. Mechanisms evolved to explicitly let people establish their product and marketing preferences, which proved much more effective.

Access

Access is also sophisticated and transparent. It’s managed through my profile and like my filters, it’s easy to adjust the combination of subscriptions and micropayments I use to pay for content. To manage my spending, I’ve set limits on the per item and monthly amounts I can purchase without explicit approval. My usage is updated in real time and clearly displayed in my profile, so I always have a good sense of my information costs.

In addition to paid content, an astounding amount of high-quality free content is available. I’m so glad academia recognized curation as a mechanism for advancement, for the work scholars have done is truly magnificent. It’s like each content search brings me to the best courses I remember taking in college. I’ve even discovered new interests by following the best curators who provide inviting and accessible introductions to new topics.

So, what might be scarce in my future? What could public libraries provide that I would value highly?

¹Kent Anderson, The Asymmetry of Waste in the Age of Abundance — A Reversal of Scarcity’s Balance, Scholarly Kitchen blog, 9/27/2010. Kent continues his exploration of scarcity in the publishing domain with today’s post, Anchoring Communities and Trust Markets — Advantages Shift to the Users.

** ADDITIONAL READING **
Kevin Kelly, Free Kindle This November, The Technium, 2/25/2011
Chris Taylor, Introducing Zite, the iPad’s Smartest Magazine Yet, Mashable, 3/09/2011
Jenn Webb, Getting your book in front of 160 million users, O’Reilly Radar, 4/15/2011