#15 continued

Yesterday, I continued reading "Cite and insight." I agree that there is a big difference between "We have always done it that way" and "embracing all change for the sake of change." These are the two extremes and we need to find a comfortable compromise between these two extremes. This applies to life and to libraries. Since each library has it's own personality and public to serve, we need to adapt Library 2.0 to our individual libraries. Two important questions were raised on page 15 of the article. Will our patrons feel the same way about technology as we do? is Library 2.0 feasible, technologically and financially? The term permaconnected brought to mind a picture of the movie "Matrix." This refers to people who are continually connected to technology, not necessarily connected to the machinery and has a connotation of being socially connected through technology. I had to stop at page 17.

Today, I was able to finish the article. It is really true that we tend to give more emphasis to our own areas of interest. It seems that advocates for a complete technological library in excluding the traditional library, are purporting technology because it is what they are interested in and use. They are forgetting the large percentage of the population who do not use computers whether by choice or by financial limitations. At public libraries we have a diverse, wide range of interests to serve. We all would be shocked if a library didn't have science books because the librarian never reads science, therefore felt the library didn't need science books. A very good question was raised. If all libraries were Library 2.0 would the permaconnected get superior library service and the unconnected (traditional) library user be disenfranchised? We have to remember that technology is a tool and it takes skill to use this tool.

I strongly disagree that libraries haven't changed much lately. Over my 30 year career, card catalogs were replace, PC were introduced, and the Internet was introduced. All these innovations drastically changed the role of libraries. We have grown and changed for the better with all of these, and I can't see any difference with Library 2.0.

Halfway through this article I realized that I agree Library 2.0 is just hype. It really isn't anything new -- it's all about change to better serve the public which has been ongoing since the existence of libraries. It will continue as long as libraries exist. Maybe I'm optimistic, but libraries have survive movies, radio, television, videos, DVDs and computers. We will survive Web 2.0 or Library 2.0.

"Focusing on what the user wants is fine, as long as, those wants make sense within the library context." This was a great line and I fully agree with it. Change has to be appropriate to the library. The value of the Library 2.0 banner is it awakens librarians to an new call. We need to be aware of the current trends in society. We need to learn and expand ourselves in order to reach the public we serve.

In summary, the article was very thought provoking. It was long and difficult to read, but I'm glad to have read it. I came away with three things. 1) Library 2.0 is not something new, but an new twist with technology added. 2) It is much broader that just technology. 3) We need to get out there and do something with it. #15 is completed.