Group items tagged

p.6 the social networking site Facebook moved from a relative non-factor to near ubiquity in large libraries: for libraries serving communities of at least 500,000 people, the ratio of those with a Facebook presence jumped from barely one in ten in 2008 (11%) to 4 out of 5 (80%) in 2010.

-regular library web presence has plateaued, but social media presence is growing exponentially -"the social networking site Facebook moved from a relative non-factor to near ubiquity in large libraries" (2007 to 2011) -discussions have moved from social media to mobile apps *but why?? users access social media using mobile apps too! (shouldn't be an either/or) -"Revisiting the observational data from the first iteration of the study, researchers found that libraries identified as Early Adopters in 2008 saw significantly greater increases in visits and circulation between 2003 and 2008 than their peers who had not been as active in the adoption of these technologies. Regression analysis suggests that, even when controlling for staff and collection expenditures, adoption of web technologies is a predictor of these increases." *if you build it, they will visit!! -although Web 2.0 has brought new changes into the mix, the reality of the library's mission has not overly changed -libraries mostly use RSS feeds and blogs to convey info to patrons *one way information, doesn't reflect a desire to engage patrons -most literature published about Web 2.0 identifies the potential, not the actual *correlate social media presence to visits? -FB, Twitter and Flickr are the most popular social media sites for libraries

Foursquare at Topeka-Shawnee County Public Library

-easy way to market libraries, and encourage participation *a way to measure the online neighborhood in a physical sense *play games with patrons, connect! -add tags, tips, to-do lists, events and "shout-outs"

May 2011: From slides: among those living below the poverty line who use library Internet connections: 61% of 14-24 year olds used it for school; 54% of poor seniors used it for health/wellness. 85% of adults are cell phone owners; in May 2010 76% used cell phones to take a picture, 72% to send or receive text messages; 54% send photo or video via cell phone; in 2010, 24% of cell phone users use apps. 69% of Internet users watch videos online

-rise of 'networked individualism' where groups decline as social media rises *SNS allow like-minded individuals to find each other and form support groups, even over long distances -"5th Estate of content contributors" -broadband access allows more people to create and remix content, and share it too -consequences for info ecosystem: volume, vibrance, velocity, (rele)valance *more content can be created, consumed and shared faster... SNSs just heighten that effect -know what users need from the library, and offer it via multiple access points online -cell phones are smartphones are social tools *your network in your pocket

-libraries now need to seek out people, rather than being the place where people came for information *librarians can still guide patrons to good info, and help imprint good online practices -libraries can be "nodes" or weak links in social networks *the network in the pocket, and the resource a patron uses when info is needed... weak links accessed only for info purposes are fine -patrons are not literate in the online world, despite what they think! *there's where librarians can take charge

-"An interdisciplinary approach that brings together views and expertise from sociology, urban studies, interaction design, and related disciplines will assist with efforts to facilitate urban neighborhood community building, social inclusion, public consultation and debate, fair access to local information and services, urban sustainability, and healthier local economies." (66) *this interdisciplinary approach can work for libraries too! -""portfolio of sociability"" (67) *collection of virtual tools that help to establish and maintain connections (both close, weak and latent) -"The Internet has not substituted but supplemented off-line interaction with online interaction...the Internet as well as mobile communication devices such as mobile phones, laptops, and personal digital assistants (PDA) allow people to maintain social ties in different ways by taking advantage of new features." (67) *people use these devices to strengthen already existing ties, not create new ones, mostly -"Wellman argues that, while people become more accustomed with the features these tools offer, the nature of the social ties that people establish and maintain changes from "door-to-door" and "place-to-place" relationships to "person-to-person" and "role-to-role" relationships. He creates a holistic theoretical framework that builds on the dual nature in the interplay between community and the individual. He describes the emerging qualities of this behavior as networked individualism." (67) *as location becomes less important, networks become more important. People are less attracted to that which is in their geographical area, and more inclined to seek out like-minded people in similar areas of interest

-"The act of reappropriation (e.g., from the professional use of a pager to the social use of SMS) implies that there are opportunities to design and develop purpose-built systems from the ground up, which, instead of merely trying to make ends meet, take the unique requirements into account of the social- and place-based context in which they are used. (67) *tech can be re-purposed to market and develop community ties *people used to have to deal with geographical restrictions, and created social networks from geography, not interest or desire. This led, for some people, to an atrophying of interests, due to lack of community. SNSs allow people to find other people with shared interests, and develop them. Libraries can assist in shared communities over SNSs by providing links and resources to a variety of information. -"Place and proximity continue to matter in every socioeconomic context, because there are no Internet applications that can completely substitute real-time, co-located, face-to-face interaction" (68) *engage them online, bring them into the library proper *neighborhood ties still matter, but now they are place-independent. While proximity matters for some interactions, the majority of social ties can be maintained independently of physical location

-In the absence of a common enemy, a shared purpose or a pre-existing village-like atmosphere, are there other reasons and motivations for social encounters to occur and for the formation of residential networks in urban neighborhoods? (72) *the idea of urban tribes, still loosely held together by geography but now also united by common interest (people can find each other in large cities) -"The findings of these sociological studies provide essential insights for a new design methodology that can guide the successful development of interactive systems and devices that can stimulate local interaction and animate urban neighborhoods." (73) *bring people to libraries! (even if they just visit online at an eBranch) *in order to be effective, people must participate in the design and implementation of the project. They have to have a voice. *no more one-way channels of broadcasting, there has to be communication and an exchange of ideas between institution and people in order to foster that sense of community *where the author talks about the size, growth and critical mass of the perceived system, he is talking about FB (refers to it as an "urban tribe incubator")

-part of the social concept of Twitter is the re-tweeting, or reposting of others' tweets *this is how information spreads, or knowledge becomes viral (information diffusion) *displayed as: RT @ username "copied message" -56.7% of retweets have URLs in them while only 19.0% of regular tweets have URLs. *example of info diffusion.. content creation spreads across a network, creates links -retweets on a large scale take not just content but context *not just what you tweet, but who you tweet it to (followers) -"findings suggest that microblogging can be tailored to facilitate informal communication between colleagues in organizations" *libraries can tweet info to patrons? links, database promotions, etc -real-time concept of Twitter disseminates info faster (but... more accurately?) *much of Twitter is personal sharing/overshare? -URLs and hashtags help retweetability, as does age of account and number of followers/ees, but number of tweets does not affect potential for retweeting *libraries can establish accounts, and not worry about constant tweeting to get retweeted

Lee Rainie of Pew Internet & American Life Project Oct 20 2011

-mobile connectivity changes the way people interact with media, and how they learn -Internet adoption at home is at 78%, broadband at 62% -65% of Internet users utilize social media -as the speed of learning changes, social networks become more relevant in people's everyday lives -35% of adults own smartphones, which means they take the web/social networks with them (51% of Millenials own smartphones) *social networks are accessible anywhere, anytime -40% of adults use the smartphone as a primary internet connector

-texting is popular among younger users *how to sent/relate to users who text primarily? Tweets to phone? -the rise of smartphones means more access points for info *people can look for whatever they want, whenever they want... more real-time info access -"augmented reality" "a merger of real world and data" *layers of information arranged per need *networked connections are more established because of constant availability of network (via smartphone) *libraries can be a weak connection, there for information purposes? *an app/a networked friend/a connection! -small screen leads to "info-snacking" -mobile screens leads to more alone time together, a blurring of private and public spaces -people are more confident in searching (even to their detriment) -Old: knowledge is objective and certain (organized categorically) new: knowledge is subjective and provisional (organized organically) (learning as transaction versus learning as process)