I'm really going to have to rein myself in on this one, because this whole Library 2.0 thing is sort of a hot-button of frustration for me. I do believe that some good things will come out of the whole Library 2.0 debate / discussion / conversion. However, there's A LOT of garbage that will come along with it. To get to the pearls, we'll have to muck about the slope with the swine.
My Thoughts:
Library 2.0 may have meant something once upon a time. Now, IMO, it is a buzzword used to
justify trying some bad ideas with new packaging and justifying it as "forward-thinking",
"proactive" and " innovative". The biggest problem I see with Library 2.0, is that the "try something and if it doesn't work, ditch it" aspect rarely comes into play. More often, I see a stubborn insistence on trying something packaged as "Library 2.0 inspired" that clearly doesn't work until reality leaves no options other than change.
I worry that inthe efforts of some of our 2.0 colleagues to make is "hip, cool and relevant" to the Web 2.o, we will lose our biggest asset: being useful. I see value in trying to make our services more available to more people. But the question is, does Web 2.0 want Library 2.0? I sometimes see as as being like the tea-toddling preacher going to the bar to preach because that's where the people are. Sure he's got a message, but does anyone want to hear it? Are we positioning ourselves to where people actually want and need us to be or are Geek 2.0, trying to hang with the new, popular kids of Web 2.0?
I'll end with by saying that, contrary to what some will tell you: not everything is online. Let me repeat that:
NOT EVERYTHING IS ONLINE
People may expect that beacuse that's what the Snakeoil Salesman 2.0 has told them. But, that doesn't make it true. There's a whole lot of questions that need answering that simply cannot be done online. Sometimes, it takes "the old way". Let's hope the old way is still an option and not discarded in a misguided quest to make the Library into something it was never intended to be.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
You may be right about "web 2.0" and "library 2.0" having devolved into meaningless terms. Their definitions were never clear to begin with, and they seem to get stretched to fit whatever people want them to fit.
Post a Comment