This was a writing exercise I did in my journal a couple of months ago.
http://www.switchpod.com/users/lsscils598s08/pocast.mp3
Friday, March 28, 2008
Dewey death-imal System
What is abundantly clear to me after finishing The Long Tail is that the only way to truly have a long tail is to take your "business" online. Any permutation of a brick and mortar location, be it store or library, is going to severely truncate the tail. You need to have "room" for unlimited inventory and you need to make that inventory accessible, searchable, and rateable in a thousand different ways or you are really just shoe-horning your services into a long-tailed model, not really extending your tail.
Libraries, even taking into consideration cooperatives which serve to extend the tail, are limited not only by a physical brick and mortar building but also by the classification system that defines pretty much everything within its walls. The Dewey decimal system is antithetical to an essential concept of the long tail: giving people mutiple and varied ways to organize and sort through the massive amount of stuff that populates the tail. Surely our library databases circumnavigate some of that, but bottom line is the library system is based around Dewey and as a result even our filters are limited. A lot of work is being done now on different ways of classifying and searching digitized material (this is one that I find interesting: http://www.cs.umass.edu/~mimno/papers/f129-mimno.pdf), and this is where I think libraries should be placing their focus. How can they build digital materials into their collections? Saturating your collection with digital materials will insure that your tail is legitmately, and not artificially, extended. Undoubtedly there are question marks out there as to who will be supplying the content, how much content can reasonably be expected to be digitized, and will people respond to digitized material, but the reality is that preparation made now will not only extend the library's tail but may well determine their future viability.
Philosophically libraries are aligned with the long tail: universal access to almost anything you need. Can libraries truly be living this philosophy without serious exploration of digital collections and innovative ways to search them?
Libraries, even taking into consideration cooperatives which serve to extend the tail, are limited not only by a physical brick and mortar building but also by the classification system that defines pretty much everything within its walls. The Dewey decimal system is antithetical to an essential concept of the long tail: giving people mutiple and varied ways to organize and sort through the massive amount of stuff that populates the tail. Surely our library databases circumnavigate some of that, but bottom line is the library system is based around Dewey and as a result even our filters are limited. A lot of work is being done now on different ways of classifying and searching digitized material (this is one that I find interesting: http://www.cs.umass.edu/~mimno/papers/f129-mimno.pdf), and this is where I think libraries should be placing their focus. How can they build digital materials into their collections? Saturating your collection with digital materials will insure that your tail is legitmately, and not artificially, extended. Undoubtedly there are question marks out there as to who will be supplying the content, how much content can reasonably be expected to be digitized, and will people respond to digitized material, but the reality is that preparation made now will not only extend the library's tail but may well determine their future viability.
Philosophically libraries are aligned with the long tail: universal access to almost anything you need. Can libraries truly be living this philosophy without serious exploration of digital collections and innovative ways to search them?
Media can be both wave and particle
If Long Tail has taught us nothing else, it has taught us that just because you can compare something doesn't make that comparison particularly meaningful. That said, I'm not sure that you can actually compare podcasts to text based blogging on a particularly meaningful basis. They are two very different mediums that would appeal to people for very individual reasons. As a blog lover I choose text blogs for some things and podcasts for others. When I am in my car or at the gym I'm listening to podcasts because they are portable and the perfect accompaniment to my incessant multitasking. When I am home and can concentrate on one thing at a time I am visiting text based blogs because I can focus a little more on the content, although I am often bouncing back and forth between work and blog.
Some people prefer to get their information aurally (not orally, but imagine if you could get your info that way...) some prefer reading and/or visually absorbing their info. Some subjects are better suited to a particular medium. A political debate blog, for instance, that might be a snooze in a text-based format, becomes someting dynamic and compelling in podcast form.
With all of the plug ins and widgets available for blogs, your text-based blog can become both text-based and podcast at the same time. The best podcasts, in my opinion, are ones that incorporate some kind of text-based blog as part of their package. That way, if you don't catch something you can hit the blog and see what you missed. Double the fun, double the learning.
Instead of a head to head comparison, just ask yourself these questions to determine which medium suits best:
Some people prefer to get their information aurally (not orally, but imagine if you could get your info that way...) some prefer reading and/or visually absorbing their info. Some subjects are better suited to a particular medium. A political debate blog, for instance, that might be a snooze in a text-based format, becomes someting dynamic and compelling in podcast form.
With all of the plug ins and widgets available for blogs, your text-based blog can become both text-based and podcast at the same time. The best podcasts, in my opinion, are ones that incorporate some kind of text-based blog as part of their package. That way, if you don't catch something you can hit the blog and see what you missed. Double the fun, double the learning.
Instead of a head to head comparison, just ask yourself these questions to determine which medium suits best:
- Medium preference--are you in a listening mood or a seeing mood?
- Subject matter--is it something that can be easily absorbed in podcast form or is it so complex that you will need to track back and reinforce what you just learned by re-reading?
- Portability--where are you? what are you doing?
- Concentration/distraction level--how much energy can you devote to the medium? How much are you bothered by distraction?
Friday, March 14, 2008
Make it Work
As an online student of just about one year I am generally satisfied with my SCILS educational experience. I have learned a lot in the classes that I've taken, and have been able to make use of the concepts that I've learned both in other classes and in practice. I still feel a bit disconnected from the process though and less like a "serious" MLS candidate than I think I should. Likely, it's the lack face to face interaction with the SCILS community. You have to work a lot harder to make connections with your peers online, and sometimes it feels like you are living from assignment to assignment, rather than participating in an active, educational culture.
Also, there is still a bit of learning curve when it comes to online instructors. Some get it, some almost have it, and some have not a clue. Teaching online requires instructors to work a little harder to ensure engagement with the material. You cannot engage by lecture notes alone. I think that using the journal section of e-college, blogs, and "discussion" tools make all the difference. And I did not realize this until I took a class that used very little of these tools in instruction. I was still able to learn the material, but I had to work hard to engage myself. Interaction is the cornerstone in the foundation of most of LIS theory (can you have a IR system without it? a reference transaction?) and shouldn't it be would obvious that interaction is key to preparing professionals for the field, particularly is you will never see these students face to face?
I think I may be sounding more negative than I actually am. I think you get out exactly how much you put into your educational experience. I actually love "going" to school, so I would make it work with two tin cans and a string if I had to.
My flickr pictures reflect my lonely alienation with only printed articles, wires, and a stuffed owl for company. Or check out the rest of the class.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Are Libraries the Manx of the Long Tail Economy?
Manx
The Long Tail is driven by individuals, individual preferences, individual opinions, individuals having the tools to create and accomplish things that before took the financial backing and marketing support of corporate entities. The individual undoubtedly benefits from the Long Tail, but the corporation/business that can harness the power of those preferences, tools, and opinions are the ones that profit. If libraies are to be any kind of player in a Long Tail economy, they have to learn how to leverage the power of the individual with their institutional systems. Remember, libraries may not be in direct competition with retailers, but retailers and their processes have a direct impact on the function and purpose of the library. Bottom line, getting libraries anywhere near being new producers, new markets, and new tastemakers is engaging individuals in their quest and taking a lot of that quest online. The true power of the Long Tail takes place not in a building, but in a constructed community. If a library is to be successful, then, it needs to extend outside its walls and into the community. Let's take a brief look at where libraries can contribute in each of the areas.
New Producers: Let's face it. When you think innovation you don't think library. But in a niche driven culture, libraries can, individually, postion themselves as new producers. They can create innovative programs, using Web 2.0 tools, that can draw in patrons and redefine who the library is within their community. Do this over and over again and you can have a revolution. The key here, though, is not to use technology, but to engage and involve others with that technology. Individual libraries don't need to concern themselves with world domination, but they do have to be concerned with community domination.
New Markets: Libraries have tried to harness the power of aggregation with inter-library loan systems, but they need to seriously embrace technological advances. As material is digitized and print on demand becomes more common, libraries need to have a plan to incorporate these technologies into their offerings. Further, I think there is a new market where libraries can dominate: Information is easy to get nowadays. Navigating that information and deciding which information is valid and meaningful to you is not. Libraries can lead the way in information navigation--if they fully understand the technology and market themselves to their communities as such. Why isn't every library in the world offering up their experts at every school, continuing ed class, senior center, and coffee shop in the country?
New Tastemakers: While libraries may not have the database power of Amazon, they do have a database and a community of people with opinions. Of course, the library has an absolute commitment to protecting the privacy of its patrons so any information culling would have to be done extremely sensitively, but perhaps libraries could take a page out of Amazon's book and have pop-up recommendations added to their search function. Even seeking opinions from people as they circ materials, put a slip in books that direct people to a website to give their thoughts on the book/movie/music they just borrowed. Part of the slip can be set up for manual entry as well to include those not familiar/fond of the internet. The review can be attributed or anonymous. Get that program going and market it, create traffic to the site, spark interest and see where the community takes it.
I feel the need to stress that libraries are not ever going to have the Long Tail that internet retailers have, but in an individual driven Long Tail economy, libraries can extend their tail further into their community (and surrounding communities) than they ever thought possible. The challenge is this: engage your community or lose it to an interactive, responsive corporate system.
The Long Tail is driven by individuals, individual preferences, individual opinions, individuals having the tools to create and accomplish things that before took the financial backing and marketing support of corporate entities. The individual undoubtedly benefits from the Long Tail, but the corporation/business that can harness the power of those preferences, tools, and opinions are the ones that profit. If libraies are to be any kind of player in a Long Tail economy, they have to learn how to leverage the power of the individual with their institutional systems. Remember, libraries may not be in direct competition with retailers, but retailers and their processes have a direct impact on the function and purpose of the library. Bottom line, getting libraries anywhere near being new producers, new markets, and new tastemakers is engaging individuals in their quest and taking a lot of that quest online. The true power of the Long Tail takes place not in a building, but in a constructed community. If a library is to be successful, then, it needs to extend outside its walls and into the community. Let's take a brief look at where libraries can contribute in each of the areas.
New Producers: Let's face it. When you think innovation you don't think library. But in a niche driven culture, libraries can, individually, postion themselves as new producers. They can create innovative programs, using Web 2.0 tools, that can draw in patrons and redefine who the library is within their community. Do this over and over again and you can have a revolution. The key here, though, is not to use technology, but to engage and involve others with that technology. Individual libraries don't need to concern themselves with world domination, but they do have to be concerned with community domination.
New Markets: Libraries have tried to harness the power of aggregation with inter-library loan systems, but they need to seriously embrace technological advances. As material is digitized and print on demand becomes more common, libraries need to have a plan to incorporate these technologies into their offerings. Further, I think there is a new market where libraries can dominate: Information is easy to get nowadays. Navigating that information and deciding which information is valid and meaningful to you is not. Libraries can lead the way in information navigation--if they fully understand the technology and market themselves to their communities as such. Why isn't every library in the world offering up their experts at every school, continuing ed class, senior center, and coffee shop in the country?
New Tastemakers: While libraries may not have the database power of Amazon, they do have a database and a community of people with opinions. Of course, the library has an absolute commitment to protecting the privacy of its patrons so any information culling would have to be done extremely sensitively, but perhaps libraries could take a page out of Amazon's book and have pop-up recommendations added to their search function. Even seeking opinions from people as they circ materials, put a slip in books that direct people to a website to give their thoughts on the book/movie/music they just borrowed. Part of the slip can be set up for manual entry as well to include those not familiar/fond of the internet. The review can be attributed or anonymous. Get that program going and market it, create traffic to the site, spark interest and see where the community takes it.
I feel the need to stress that libraries are not ever going to have the Long Tail that internet retailers have, but in an individual driven Long Tail economy, libraries can extend their tail further into their community (and surrounding communities) than they ever thought possible. The challenge is this: engage your community or lose it to an interactive, responsive corporate system.
Friday, March 7, 2008
I'd rather die than give you control
OK so I'm a control freak when it comes to my work--collaboration is a challenge. Google docs and wikis can be uncomfortable places for someone like me. They push you out of your comfort zone by opening up work for the input of others. This is a good thing (thisisagoodthing, thisisagoodthing, thisisagoodthing) because it forces you to cede some control to the group and it absolutely streamlines the work process. People can log in and work within their time frame instead of having to wait for an email trail back and forth between participants. No email trail is needed because the process is organic. It is all there for you to see without having to wade through your inbox. Perfect, of course, for online students.
I can't imagine why a faculty member wouldn't embrace this technology. Consider that in the "old way" the faculty member only has access to the final product of a project. S/he may require submission of outlines or other supporting materials, but s/he can't really see the process. With things like googledocs and wikis, s/he can see the process laid out from first word on the page to completed project and all the steps in between. It can be a failsafe to be sure all members of a group participate or it be used simply as part of an evaluation of the project, whether a group project or a singular project. To make the process transparent would be a big draw for me if I were an educator.
What might keep faculty from accepting it might be the usual fear of anything new or even the belief that because the work is created online it is somehow inferior to "real" research.
I actually had a revelation while working with googledocs/wikis and it was this: while it may seem I am giving up control in working in these environments, in reality I have more control than ever before because the process is transparent and trackable. My group members can see my process and I theirs. Suddenly the unknowable becomes knowable. Maybe that's what would scare faculty the most?
I can't imagine why a faculty member wouldn't embrace this technology. Consider that in the "old way" the faculty member only has access to the final product of a project. S/he may require submission of outlines or other supporting materials, but s/he can't really see the process. With things like googledocs and wikis, s/he can see the process laid out from first word on the page to completed project and all the steps in between. It can be a failsafe to be sure all members of a group participate or it be used simply as part of an evaluation of the project, whether a group project or a singular project. To make the process transparent would be a big draw for me if I were an educator.
What might keep faculty from accepting it might be the usual fear of anything new or even the belief that because the work is created online it is somehow inferior to "real" research.
I actually had a revelation while working with googledocs/wikis and it was this: while it may seem I am giving up control in working in these environments, in reality I have more control than ever before because the process is transparent and trackable. My group members can see my process and I theirs. Suddenly the unknowable becomes knowable. Maybe that's what would scare faculty the most?
Wikispaces v pbwiki--No contest
Full disclosure here: I loooooove pbwiki. I've used it for a project in another course and also helped my son use it for a project of his and it so easy and so intuitive to use that I couldn't imagine liking another service more. I did approach wikispaces with an open mind, though. I spent about three minutes browsing the site and at that point had to be shaken awae because I had dozed off. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...boring! Very dull interface. The service would seem to appeal to the two far ends of the spectrum: those who want to do a quiki-wiki and don't care much what it looks like or those who are particularly skilled in html coding and want to basically write their own ticket. This leaves out the bulk of wiki users: the ones who need to make a wiki that is visually interesting, but need to spend time on content, not figuring out how to make it pretty. I think pbwiki appeals to me because I can rely on templates and backgrounds and navigation structure they provide, while still being able to play around with elements if I choose to with html code. The source button in pbwiki lets you easily switch back and forth from wysiwyg and code. The wikispaces wysiwyg interface doesn't have a source button (that I could find). The whole interface felt counterintuitive. My critical comment--blech!
Good point on wikispaces: you can tag the page right from the editing screen and they also provide a notes field on the editing screen as well which is appealing to me because I like nothing better than to talk my projects to death.
pbwiki is so easy to use. wikispaces seems a bit more complicated than it has to be, especially considering the endproduct. Maybe it's just because I am accustomed to pbwiki, maybe not. In any case, wikispaces did not have any compelling features to lure me away from pbwiki.
Good point on wikispaces: you can tag the page right from the editing screen and they also provide a notes field on the editing screen as well which is appealing to me because I like nothing better than to talk my projects to death.
pbwiki is so easy to use. wikispaces seems a bit more complicated than it has to be, especially considering the endproduct. Maybe it's just because I am accustomed to pbwiki, maybe not. In any case, wikispaces did not have any compelling features to lure me away from pbwiki.
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Libraries--Chasing Their Own (Long) Tails?
In theory, libraries could be a casualty of the long tail because much like brick and mortar retailers they are limited in both geography and by what they are logistically able to keep in circulation. Weeding, the key to maintaining a robust circulation, is in fact counter-intuitive to the long tail premise. Library cooperatives, digitization of materials, and online access to the library system can help to lengthen the library's tail by extending collections beyond its phyiscal walls.
There is a limit, however, to how long a tail a library, even a cooperative supported library, can support. More and more people are used to creating their own niche market. One look at the average ipod playlist illustrates this well. Can libraries fulfill a person's every whim the way the internet can? Probably not. And while they can't duplicate the sheer volume of an itunes or an amazon, they can emulate the model.
How?
There is a limit, however, to how long a tail a library, even a cooperative supported library, can support. More and more people are used to creating their own niche market. One look at the average ipod playlist illustrates this well. Can libraries fulfill a person's every whim the way the internet can? Probably not. And while they can't duplicate the sheer volume of an itunes or an amazon, they can emulate the model.
How?
- Don't weed collections into oblivion. Work to circ.
- Be a proactive viral marketer. Virus don't originate in a vacuum. Be the mother virus.
- Identify your niche markets, including your micro-niche markets. Expand on them.
- Pimp your online resources. This is your best and easiest way to lengthen your tail. If it feels as easy to use as amazon and the results are comparable, the public is more likely to use it.
- Be aware of what is going on beyond Publisher's Weekly. Be out and about in the cybersphere. Borrow someone's tween or teen and ask them what they think.
- Accept your limitations--you are not ever going to be amazon. Never. Get over it.
All in all, I came away from the Anderson reading feeling that libraries were lucky that they were non-profits and not subject to the immediate economic effects of the long tail (i.e. Tower Records), but that they are not exempt from reacting to it.
My links laid bare
Using del.icio.us as a "virtual introduction" is a good idea, particularly if people have some experience with it and the "intro" premise is set up well (which I have no doubt would be the case). Bookmarks can tell you an awful lot about a person.
Upsides:
Upsides:
- People can be as revealing or private as they wish since they make the decision about what to link to.
- Encourages people to get to "know" classmates a little better. Since we don't have the benefit of in-person conversation, every little bit of extra information helps us cement an "idea" of who a person is. We get to have a personality!
Downside:
- Falling into the link wormhole. First, you're casually checking out classmates links, next thing you know it's 2am and you haven't gotten one assignment done. The internet is an evil place for the easily distracted.
Saturday, March 1, 2008
If you show me yours, I'll show you mine...
I never enter another person's living space without checking out their bookshelves. Leave the medicine cabinets to the amateurs, nothing tells you more about a person than the books they have on their shelves. Shelfari (LibraryThing's prettier cousin) lets you examine the virtual shelves of its members. The books are displayed cover-front on a shelf, and there are multiple ways you can browse. If you just feel like taking a peek at what other people are reading you can just browse the covers. If something interests you, you can click on and get a brief desctiption, ratings, links to other people who have this book on their shelves, groups using the book and a link directing you to amazon for purchase. It's all right there on one easy to navigate page. All of your browsing needs are fulfilled in just a few clicks. If you're a joiner, there are plenty of groups to join, with something to appeal to just about everyone (the Harry Potter group scares me a little, personally).
You can simply be a voyeur, checking out everyone else's shelves or start to build your own shelves, which includes categories such as read, reading, planning to read, and wish list. The site can easily be used to track your own reading habits (but remember, others can see you too!) and beats the old pen and paper method any day. Over time, it may be able to tell you more about yourself than a shrink, a psychic and your mother combined--and it's cheaper, won't judge you, and is more fun to use!
You can simply be a voyeur, checking out everyone else's shelves or start to build your own shelves, which includes categories such as read, reading, planning to read, and wish list. The site can easily be used to track your own reading habits (but remember, others can see you too!) and beats the old pen and paper method any day. Over time, it may be able to tell you more about yourself than a shrink, a psychic and your mother combined--and it's cheaper, won't judge you, and is more fun to use!
garden party or dive bar--you choose
Magnolia vs. del.icio.us
I'm a half hearted social bookmarker who currently uses del.icio.us. In theory, I like to have all my links on one page so I can get them whereever I want them, but in reality, I'm accustomed to my favorites folders and feel that I have them pretty well organized there. It is the "social" part of social bookmarking that ultimately makes it compelling, and it is in the social aspect that I think Magnolia has the edge (although I still prefer del.icio.us)
First, it's prettier and makes you more likely to linger. del.icio.us is downright ugly. It serves the purpose, I suppose, but the magnolia site is almost soothing. Second, the starred ratings system in ma.gnolia is more user interactive and user friendly. I don't really like the "number of people" tag on del.icio.us entries. It is not meaningful info for me. After all, 1000 people may tag something but that doesn't mean it has quality. On the plus side for del.icio.us I had no trouble downloading their bookmark icon on my toolbar, but was unable to do this easily in ma.gnolia. As with most of these programs it all comes down to personal preference. Their basic features and mission are about the same, ma.gnolia brings the pretty and del.icio.us brings the functionality. Ma.gnolia is like a garden party and del.icio.us is like a dive bar, just depends on which atmosphere you'd rather hang out in.
I'm a half hearted social bookmarker who currently uses del.icio.us. In theory, I like to have all my links on one page so I can get them whereever I want them, but in reality, I'm accustomed to my favorites folders and feel that I have them pretty well organized there. It is the "social" part of social bookmarking that ultimately makes it compelling, and it is in the social aspect that I think Magnolia has the edge (although I still prefer del.icio.us)
First, it's prettier and makes you more likely to linger. del.icio.us is downright ugly. It serves the purpose, I suppose, but the magnolia site is almost soothing. Second, the starred ratings system in ma.gnolia is more user interactive and user friendly. I don't really like the "number of people" tag on del.icio.us entries. It is not meaningful info for me. After all, 1000 people may tag something but that doesn't mean it has quality. On the plus side for del.icio.us I had no trouble downloading their bookmark icon on my toolbar, but was unable to do this easily in ma.gnolia. As with most of these programs it all comes down to personal preference. Their basic features and mission are about the same, ma.gnolia brings the pretty and del.icio.us brings the functionality. Ma.gnolia is like a garden party and del.icio.us is like a dive bar, just depends on which atmosphere you'd rather hang out in.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
