CCLS 23 Things #14: Library 2.0

After several years of reading about Library 2.0, I no longer think it's all that revolutionary. Shouldn't any organization that is providing a public service be responsive to its patrons? As far as having patrons "create content" in the library OPAC, I'm not sure whether this is a practical way to involve patrons. I can't see Innovative ever getting as good as Amazon, in terms of a flexible search engine, ratings by users, comments by users, etc. So rather than compete with Amazon, maybe our OPAC should link to it. I'll bet most librarians have Amazon bookmarked on their browsers anyway, and use it on a daily basis, as a research tool instead of (or as well as) a vendor. On second thought, public libraries probably can't link to commercial sites, so maybe a site like Librarything or Shelfari would provide similar advantages.

I read a few of the resources linked to wikipedia. Is your OPAC fun? (a manifesto of sorts) is a nice "wish list" of some practical and some impractical suggestions. It reminded me of Dr. Seuss's comment "If you never did, you should. These things are fun, and fun is good" (One fish, two fish).

Library 2.0 and the Problem of Hate Speech raised an issue that never would have occurred to me. Maybe it's a realistic fear, but then again maybe it's more paranoia. Some librarians (and other people as well, but librarians seem especially cautious by nature) seem to go around looking for reasons not to make changes, especially changes that might challenge their hold on their pathetic little fiefdoms. My inclination would be to just have a strategy in mind to deal with the problem if it should happen to arise (e.g. moderating comments posted to the library website or OPAC), but otherwise don't even worry about it.