Library 2.0 (#15)

Reading all the example articles from the Queens Library Learning blog has definitely helped me better understand the concept of Library 2.0. I've been hearing the catchphrase bandied about for so long, but it didn't mean much to me beyond thinking I had to learn how to use myspace or something - ha ha. Now that I've read the articles, I not only have a better understanding, but I also feel, dare I say it, kind of excited about the whole idea. I found Library Journal's article "Library 2.0: Service for the next-generation Library" the most clear-cut, jargon free, and impartial of the lot. The author defines Library 2.0 as any service that reaches users, is evaluated frequently, and makes use of customer input. This means Library 2.0 doesn't have to be technology related if it's an especially good idea, but technology is a great facilitator. I like the idea of having an OPAC that customers can input to, and I think pointing customers to on-line applications that do what in-house apps used to do (i.e. Wrightley for word processing instead of MS Word - fight the power!) is a fantastic idea. However, I'm wary of the all beta all the time part of Library 2.0 where we implement new programs/ideas as fast as possible in a potentially imperfect state and then fix them as we go. It seems to me that that is already the modus operandi of the public library and it often bites us in the rear. I realize we sometimes spend far too long in the "planning" phase without moving quickly to "doing,"but in reality things that aren't fairly thoroughly planned out have a way of becoming a morass that is never really fixed. Also, I worry about the phrase "the just in case collection," as in, we really need to get rid of the "just in case collection." Until the majority of books are accessible digitally/on line, we still need repositories of possibly obscure and arcane books, because I think those books are still a part of the collective knowledge/information that libraries should preserve. The public library may not be the place for them, but in the OCLC article I read, the person advocating getting rid of these kinds of things was an academic librarian. I sometimes feel afraid that the democratization of our culture via the web, blogging, etc can also be a kind of dumbing down of it, or a reducing of it to the lowest common denominator. Just because it's not for everyone doesn't mean it shouldn't be preserved. And, I wish my library had some cool blogs about what to read or what's going on in the community, but I'm not sure anyone would read them except librarians. There is also always so much going on on the OPAC that it's hard to find stuff like this on there. But, I guess it is true that if we all start thinking in 2.0 mindset, we'll be ready for it before the customers. And the customers wil eventually want these things I am sure.