Thing #2

I didn't think I needed much convincing about the Library 2.0 tools. The short video really didn't tell me much I didn't already know.

Meanwhile, the blog post by John Nyberg and the article from Library Technology Reports didn't really sit well with me. Rather than motivate me, they only served to make me angry. Nyberg says that Library 2.0 "requires fundamental change" in our mission, which I'm not sure I agree with. Certainly, it is less of a change than we have already seen since the early 1990s.

Much of the debate is semantic. What is a Library 2.0 tool? Nyberg quotes a definition as:

"Library 2.0 simply means making your library’s space (virtual and physical)

more interactive, collaborative, and driven by community needs."

Is that all there is to it? Because I think we were all in favor of that before we heard the term Library 2.0. I think people get hung up too much on the terminology. This is the same thing that happened with "blogs". People had blogs before anyone knew the word. But, now that we call them blogs, they're somehow more important.

Nyberg really crosses the line later, though, with this gem:

"It’s obvious that the Millenials have very little interest in the “traditional” library."

Really.

I can't stand this generational stuff. Could you possibly paint with a broader brush? And, it's obvious? To whom? Not to me. I have been lobbying for blogs and extra content on our web page, among other things. I'm all for it. It's going to be nice and useful for a segment of our patrons, but let's not get carried away. Last time I checked, we circulated over 4 million "traditional" items last year. When we've got more blog replies than that, let me know. Until then, I'm going to assume everyone still has interest in the "traditional" library -- in addition to whatever "non-traditional" services we end up offering.