Invasion of the Podcasters

Podcasts: what are they? What do they do? Who do they serve? Do I actually need an iPod to listen to one? All very important questions I hope to answer here today.

Podcasts are not a new technology, when one considers the fact that they are simply recorded audio (or video) programming meant for people to listen to/watch, enjoy, and perhaps learn something from them. Plus, you can use any type of mp3 player or your computer to listen to view a podcast. In fact before the dawn of web 2.0 (or what we now consider the dawn of web 2.0) there were multiple podcasts that were in syndication and used by patrons of the internet in the late 90's and early 2000's. Personally, I had no idea these sorts of thing existed, at least in the context of the word podcast. I was aware there were radio shows both through a radio and the computer, and assumed these were the same.

There are a couple of differences between radio programs and podcasts, however:

• While a podcast may record a live event, it isn't until the podcast is uploaded onto a server that it may be listened to, thus making it not as live as a radio show.
• There is no set function, format, or role to fill for podcasts, as this varies by the person or venue producing the podcast.
• While radio programs can be both through the radio and online, all podcasts are available online (although they are not all for free) and are much more portable.

For example, during a lab we were required to listen to three different types of podcasts. The first group was a collection of "story time" podcasts, primarily directed it seems towards younger children for them to listen to popular stories. I picked the LA Public Library's podcast on The Giving Tree by Shel Silverstein, whose poetry I have loved since grade 4 when my teacher read several of his books for us. Reading stories definitely requires the right tone of voice to capture the attention of and entertain children. I'll actually discuss later how important tone and voice qualities are when it comes to things like podcasts. In any case, I feel podcasts like these are very important because they allow children access to public library events that perhaps they can't get to due to monetary issues, but they can instead download for free at home to listen to. These are also helpful for children who are auditory learners, or children who have visual disabilities.

The second podcast I listed to was from a group involving book suggestions, book readings, and author readings. Personally, I don't really care to listen to books being read to me. I am very much NOT an auditory learner; I fall somewhere between visual and kinesthetic (something I'll also discuss later in this entry). So I ended up choosing something I would actually enjoy listening to, which was the Seattle Public Library's "Seattle Biblio Café" (which I think sounds very hipster, but it's Seattle). The specific episode I listened to involved three librarians discussing the books they had just recently read and wanted to recommend to others. At first I didn't think I would like any of these suggestions, but one of the books recommended I now have on my Chapters.ca wishlist (as well as my Goodreads "to-read" shelf): The Taqwacores by Michael Muhammad Knight. Because quite frankly, I will never have enough books to read. Never.

My third podcast choice (from the group of Instructional or Informational podcasts) I think is an excellent example of "You're trying too hard. Stop it." I chose Fairfield University's podcast for students wanting to learn about Google Scholar, thinking it would give me some new information on a part of Google I am aware of, but don't have much knowledge of. It did not. The podcast consisted of who I assume was a staff member asking Google Scholar on how students can search for scholarly articles for their classes. I mean literally asking Google Scholar, who was anthropomorphized into a Californian surfer boy, complete with accent and space-case attitude. It didn't even really tell me anything about search functions or perhaps things unique to the Scholar search engine that's different from Google's regular engine. Actually it sounded more like an ad paid for by Google just to get students to use their services. So if there are podcast producers out there wanting ideas, pay attention: do not follow the lead of this podcast! It's demeaning to students to assume this kind of asinine advertisement is somehow useful or educational when it seems like we are being talked down to the entire time. Maybe even put something actually useful in it? Just a tip.

All three of my podcast choices had different types of tone and speaking styles in them, each seemingly specific to what the producer of the podcast was trying to get across. The woman in the first podcast had a soft but engaging voice, perfect for capturing the attention of children to listen to a story. In the second podcast they sounded a bit "boring" (and I won't lie: my attention was a bit shot after hearing about the first book so I wasn't really interested in the others. I mean come on: Islamic punk culture! What can top that?!), but then again I felt the podcast was definitely for those who are already established readers and are looking for something new to read, so this can be anywhere from 12-14 and up into someone's elder years. The third podcast had the clearest voices, but the tone was very exaggerated and condescending. It really did feel like they were trying to promote Google Scholar to academic students.

I feel that both the LA and Seattle's podcast choices are very important for libraries today, as they promote knowledge and information in new ways, entertain their audience, and keep libraries abreast of current technologies and help dismiss the idea that libraries are going the "way of the dinosaur" (I refuse to give the Google Scholar podcast any legitimacy as a real, informative podcast. I refuse, I say!). Podcasts can be used as a very effective and important ingredient of a "Web 2.0 pie" that a library can use to "feed" (educate) their patrons. If a library is looking for ways to keep their library updated with technology and want to promote things like local events at the library, podcasts would be an excellent tool to use. Using my remote, northern Aboriginal community theme I've discussed in the past, a library could be using their podcasts as a way to promote education or life skills events at the library, new Aboriginal-related books in the library, and events happening around the community like pow wows, gatherings of elders, or other instructional but culturally vital events to help educate the younger population on their traditions.

Overall I don't have much of an opinion on podcasts. This is mostly because, as I said above, I am somewhere between a visual and kinesthetic learner: I intake information much more readily by either seeing it being done and/or doing it myself. This makes trying to intake completely oral presentations difficult for me, as I have to really pay attention or I miss significant portions of the presentation. Tactics that help alleviate this are usually removing any distractions from my surrounding environment, and hoping to every god in the universe that the presenter can speak well. If these two needs aren’t met, listening to podcasts can become very difficult AND boring to try and pay attention to for me. I suspect these are also major issues for those who are non-auditory learners as well.

Despite my personal feelings on the matter, I think podcasts should be widely utilized in libraries, and would be forever sad to see them go. Outside of libraries I have on occasion used podcasts, as these have allowed people to get their voices heard without having to jump through hoops by major producers just to discuss topics, especially those which are contentious, like radical social justice, sexuality, and paganism. Much like these subjects, libraries are about free access to information and for the ability for people to educate themselves and others, which I think has become one the primary uses of podcasts: to educate others without having to censor or omit subject matter just because it doesn't fit a particular view. There is literally almost a podcast for everything, and probably several different versions on that particular subject to boot.

My recommendation to you, if you are reading this, is to check out if your library has podcasts, and see what they are like. Also check out podcasts in topics you are interested in, like pets, crafts, or religion. You would be surprised on how many podcasts are out there for people to enjoy. You'll never know what you'll discover. :)

That social media thing everyone keeps talking about

Social media: you've probably heard that term flown around at least once in the last five years, whether it was used correctly or incorrectly. Social media is probably one of the biggest things growing and changing within Web 2.0 technologies as we know it. Defined by Wikipedia as: "the use of web-based and mobile technologies to turn communication into an interactive dialogue", you can probably guess that social media is big. Like stupidly big. Because it depends on user interaction (the user can both read and generate the content!), social media website are as big as the people who want to use them.

Yes, I really mean "want". Any marketing or money put into a social media project means nothing if people don't want to use your product, and a social media website can sink or swim on public opinion, which changes just as easily as the tides (or a child's fancy over a toy). MySpace was probably the biggest thing when I was in high school (2005-2008), and yet today you'll not find a lot of people willing to be on MySpace. Most people nowadays are on Facebook, and it's rare to find someone not partaking of the multi-billion dollar social networking website. And yet people are progressing even further away from Facebook onto websites like Tumblr or Google's new Google+. Never mind the dozen and one social bookmarking and cataloguing websites that are now popping up, which are even more user-dependent.

So why is that? Is it because of marketing or design changes (which can certainly be said for MySpace)? Or is it because people have gotten bored of the new toy? Or maybe the website is now too "mainstream" and find it awkward to be on the same website as their Mom and Uncle. Really, the answer is all of the above, and then some. When your category is dependent upon the whims of the people who use it as well as generate the content, who knows how long your platform will last.

Social media is a pretty broad catagory, so let's break it down into three more manageable pieces.

Social Bookmarking

Social bookmarking is pretty self-explanatory: it's a sub-catagory of social media that allows users "to organize, store, manage and search for bookmarks of resources online".[1] It includes websites like Digg, Reddit, and del.icio.us. It's a relatively recent emergence in the Web 2.0 world, and is gaining speed among internet users. Websites like Digg report that they have over 20 million unique visitors world wide each month, with 1 million unique users visiting their website each day.[2]


Now, before a lab I had in my Multimedia class, I had never maintained a bookmarking list on a social bookmarking website before, although I had interest in them. I just considered it a bit too much effort for something I could do offline. Although I should state that I have used a social bookmarking website before that was maintained by someone else to keep track of things like fan-fiction.

I found that over-all I preferred del.icio.us over the others, and am now signed up with them and maintaining my own bookmarking list. I am still trying to find a suitable button for Google Chrome that was similar to a video we watched in class, as it seems del.icio.us no longer offers it, but instead a link button with text. It seems there are a number of add-ons available in the Google Chrome store, so I'll be doing some testing to figure out which one is the most user friendly.

Social Cataloguing

Social Cataloguing is a lot like social bookmarking. The difference is that instead of links you are cataloguing your belongings; things like books, music, movies, clothing, make-up, and so much more.

Websites that are under this sub-cagtagory are sites like LibraryThing and GoodReads. Personally I really prefer GoodReads over LibraryThing. For LibraryThing you can up to 200 things catalogued before you have to pay a monthly fee. GoodReads is completely free and you can catalogue as much as you want under your name. Personally I don't have the spare change to pay for a service that really should be free. Also, I like sticking it to The Man. :)

(I'm also waiting on getting approved to be a GoodReads librarian so I can help maintain the website's catalogue, keep things up-to-date, and correct any errors. I am really excited and hope I get accepted!)

Social Networking

Ahhh, social networks, the beasts of the Web 2.0 world. It's pretty much impossible surfing on the internet without running into a website using some form of social networking. Swing a virtual stick and you'll probably hit about four of them.

Wikipedia defines social networking as "an online service, platform, or site that focuses on building and reflecting of social networks or social relations among people, who, for example, share interests and/or activities".[3] Maybe a bit too wordy for you? Check out this video made by Lee LeFever describing social networking in plain English. Literally, it's titled: "Social Networking in Plain English". :)

Social media is definitely to stay. It allows users unprecedented control over the content they view, and no one wants to give it up any time soon, despite pressure from big businesses to shut down the internet in certain countries (This week? The Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA) in the U.S., which is going before a judicial hearing today."). It gives us a way to control what we see, to stop putting power in the hands of those who want to spoon feed us information and false media to keep us complacent.

This I think directly ties in with working in a library, which strives to preserve knowledge and make that knowledge available to all. Although social media is contentious in libraries, along with pretty much every other Web 2.0 technology as everyone has their preferences, it is gaining ground in the library world and forcing library staff to re-think how they catalogue as well make information available.

Linking in with my other examples in my previous posts on Web 2.0 technology, I can definitely see, for example, social cataloguing being used for smaller, northern libraries where there is fewer staff. This allows those who have read these books, or maybe don't work for the library but still want to contribute in a positive way, to help maintain the catalogue as well as help out the library staff. For social networking, many libraries already use things like Facebook, Twitter, and the like to help reach out to more tech-savvy generations and keep them updated on what's going on in the library. This would be especially important for remote communities, as they can also serve as touch stones for community events, and help keep those who have moved out of the community -- whether due to work or school -- on what is going on.

Social bookmarking I think is going to be probably the second biggest thing in libraries. It allows libraries an easier way to create guides in helping people do research on certain topics like genealogy, gardening, or pets. All three of these topics can be sub-categorized as well: for example, pets can be split up into cats, dogs, birds, etc. This can be really useful, swinging back to my remote, northern library example, when trying to keep updated resources for community members on things like federal or band laws.

Overall, I really enjoy social media. It's allowed me to make friends with people I would have otherwise never known, find information that I probably would have never found, and realize that the internet is as good as the people who use it. And because I have realized this, I am going to fight to keep the internet free of businesses and politicians who would want to censor us because they disagree with things or don't want to be criticized. I think this is important now more than ever in our changing political climate, especially when it's come to light that big businesses and politicians do not have our best interests at heart.

I hope you enjoyed the blog entry on social media, and it taught you a couple of things you never knew before! Stay tuned for my next entry on podcasting.

Think twice about your Halloween costume this season

Because if you decide to dress up as an Indian, or a Mexican, or a terrorist, or a geisha... it's our culture, not a costume, and it's not okay.

All posters were done by Ohio University's Students Teaching About Racism in Society (STARS) group. Posters are available to purchase via a donation.

I really cannot shut up about wikis

No really, I can't, but I'll try and make this short.

Ever since I learned about the existence of wikis and dipped my toe into the proverbial pool, I have been hooked.

"Wiki" comes from the Hawaiian word "wikiwiki" meaning fast or quick and I think it lives up to its name. Wikis have allowed people to access large amounts of information in a short amount of time by simply using small search terms like "Africa", "Métis", or "lightsaber", and you immediately can get almost everything there is to know on these subjects on your computer screen. More importantly than that, however, is that anyone can contribute to a wiki[1]. Developed in late 1994 and early 1995, wikis remained relatively underground until Wikipedia made them in vogue to use in 2001. This was also around the time that Web 2.0 technology was being created and finally hitting "mainstream" (as the kids call it these days). What had been exclusive to small groups or companies before was now becoming the world's larger user-contributed webspace, and it hasn't slowed down since.

Now one can see wikis being used by pretty much anyone anywhere: larger companies can use it as collaborative software between employees and for inter-company referencing, schools use them to help children learn and develop their internet skills, and libraries… well, wikis are well-beloved by library staff, or equally hated. I don’t think there is a middle ground when it comes to libraries and wikis.

Many libraries maintain their own wikis, usually used in conjunction with the blog(s) for the library as well as the catalogue. (There is even a wiki on how wikis are used in libraries.) These serve as reference points for patrons to be able to do research, although I don’t think that they should replace the help of actual library staff. But then again, I can really see it helping them out because if a patron can do a quick search through their wiki on something simple that interests them, that can free up time on the librarian’s side to do other work.

It should also be mentioned that there are wikis out there that are collaborations between staff AND patrons, which makes the pool of reference even larger. I can really see this becoming the future of library wikis as the two groups collaborate on getting information out there, especially on specialized things like race, culture, gender, and specific entertainment media and it’s hardware (think TV, movies, or video game hardware). Libraries can also really use this software in collecting information on community events or in even smaller communities (like towns) actually help organize and get that information out there to be used. What can also be included here are libraries who create guides or wikis on specific issues (Aboriginal, queer/gender theory, etc.) either for patron use or for the community at large to contribute to for reference later.

The only complication I can see with this however is if the patron does not know how to use wikis, or is generally unfamiliar with Web 2.0 technology. So libraries must keep in mind to not rely heavily on Web 2.0 technology to get all their information out: information should be just as accessible physically as well.

But let’s get back to me now. J I really love wikis. Like the title says, I really can’t shut up about them. I was a member of Wikipedia for about a year before I stopped editing, and I am a current member of GuildWiki as well as Guild Wars Wiki (the former is older but unofficial, the latter is newer-ish but officially sanctioned by ArenaNet, the company that produces Guild Wars). I almost always have an open tab or three to some sort of wiki, and I spent at least an hour a day, usually spaced out over the course of the day, editing articles and getting to know the coding used. Because, and this should also be mentioned, different wikis use different coding. I mean most of the simple stuff -- like linking or making words bold or italics or making headings -- remain the same across the board. But depending what software you use, some things may be a bit different.

For example, our lab on wikis had us review three different types of wiki software or hubs: Wikia, PBwiki, and Wetpaint.

WIKIA

Wikia, I believe, is one of the most highly used wiki hubs after Wikipedia when it comes to multimedia and entertainment. Most of the wikis created on this server deal with entertainment in a variety of forms from television shows to video games to webcomics. Despite there being so many wikis located here all one needs is a single account to edit, interact, and discuss with. This streamlines the experience and gets rid of confusion for editors and patrons who would otherwise have to set up multiple accounts if they wanted to participate in multiple wikis. So this is one thing I really loved about Wikia, beyond the fact that it includes SO many entertainment wikis, and many of these are accessible when one simply does a Google search on something like “True Blood” or “Game of Thrones”.

The only thing I don’t like about Wikia is that I think it’s a bit graphic heavy: many of the buttons and features – like logging in, looking through wiki content, etc. – feature a fair amount of graphic design and interaction that may slow down older or weaker computers who are trying to handle the data PLUS the graphics.

PBWIKI

PBwiki is definitely a business-orientated wiki. Its primary target is companies or other business owners who want to integrate wiki into their company for things like collaborating on work projects, educating employees[2], advertising campaigns, and helping to reduce workload. It is even targeted towards specific industries like law, medical and non-profit organizations.

PBwiki, unlike Wikia or Wetpaint, doesn’t allow for access to the different wikis that use their software. While I was a bit disappointed because I wanted to compare PBwiki’s software to the others, it is understandable because probably many of their users are working with private wikis that could possibly contain sensitive information, and not just company-related. If I had personal information on the wiki I would not want random people on the web being able to look at it.

WETPAINT

Wetpaint Central (hereafter referred to as Wetpaint) is similar to Wikia in that it is a hub for different wikis, allows the wikis to use their software, and hosts them as well. I found this one to be the most confusing of all three because I could not figure out how to search for wikis hosted by Wetpaint on their website. While I could find wikis via the search option, that was only because people had linked to them on their Discussion forums. So if anyone reading this knows how, please let me know!

The thing I did like about Wetpaint is that it does have a very helpful community for people to set up wikis, how to get more traffic (one post I found linked to a guide for getting your wiki to show up on Google searches more), amongst other things. PBwiki seemed to be lacking this (although I am not surprised, given the business-like nature of it), and while Wikia has some of this, much of the discussion I find it separated into the different wikis.

So there you have it: my tour around the web for wikis and specifically three (well, four if you count Wikipedia) wiki hubs and looking at the similarities and differences between them. Overall I found that wikis are being more widely used than ever, and I can’t see this slowing down any time soon. I also can’t see wikis being replaced by anything any time soon either. Wikis are literally the adaptation and expansion of encyclopedias, and are unconstrained (usually) by the dominant group in our cultures (usually cis-male, white, Christian, and able-bodied) and their agenda to re-write information and history in their own visions. One can run indigenous wikis or queer wikis or disability wikis and have that information just as equally searchable. I think this is one of the greatest inventions of Web 2.0 and I hope it never goes away.

[1] The only exception to this is if the wiki is restricted to registered users. The owner of the wiki can change this setting to anything they want, including asking for information if for example it is a business wiki and they want to make sure only employees are accessing and editing information on it.

[2] I did not include education of students in this list only because PBwiki doesn't highly advertise that they offer this to educational institutions as well, although that information is available on their webpages the more you search. PBwiki seems very business-orientated, or rather they target the INSTITUTION’s needs, rather than the STUDENT’S. You can also view under Case Studies then Education for the different institutions which have provided feedback on their use of PBwiki’s software.

The RSS feeds and I

RSS feeds are one of the few things in Web 2.0 that I have never bothered with, but I am not sure whether I should regret that or not.

RSS feeds originally came about in 1999, although it wasn't until the early 2000's that it became more widely used by the general public like most Web 2.0 technology. Feeds are a type of data format, that is a program that converts data into readable information, which allow someone to “subscribe” so they can be alerted to updates such as web page changes or news alerts. It has changed hands and forms in a variety of ways since then, resulting in almost every imaginable way possibly to collect feeds and display them in any way you want. This is where I believe my confusion comes in: large variety in software tends to throw me off. There are so many things to choose from and I find it confusing to try and pick one to stick with. That and I don't have a lot of patience for trial and error. :)

So I'll tend to pick the easiest option, even if it isn't the most customizable. I chose Google Reader to hold my RSS feeds because I already use Google Chrome as a browser. It took me a while to be able to figure out how to use it, however. I found out that unless I had a browser add-on (almost every browser out there has the ability to install company-made or user-made add-ons) I would have to manually copy and paste the .xml url to my reader, and then go to my reader every time I wanted to see if there were updates. "Too much work," I said! So instead I installed two add-ons, both created by Google, that would 1) give me a notice every time a feed updated and 2) allow me to subscribe to a feed with just a couple of clicks. This is one of the things that I hope will be integrated more thoroughly into all browsers as time goes on so this sort of thing can be made easier for the general public.

That being said, regardless of how easy or difficult I find it to be, it does seem to be a very popular media used on the internet. It's used by a variety of people ranging from regular internet users, to businesses, to news companies, and even to libraries. The library I chose was Vancouver Island University's library, specifically their First Nations Studies section and the RSS feeds they have compiled there, although much of the news is local to British Columbia. I think that feeds like these being used in libraries is a great way for libraries to compile information and then be able to put it up somewhere on their websites -- as well as advertise within the library itself -- for patrons to use.

I think RSS feeds have begun replacing online newsletters (the kind that get sent to your inbox) in a way because it allows for someone to choose whether or not they want to see content. Although at this point in time I can't see it replacing it entirely because many companies use newsletters to send exclusive information including exclusive deals that are members-only. I think the same thing can be said for libraries as well, especially because of older members who may not be able to do more complex things with browsers, but are able to check their e-mail. Thus, using a simple "Enter your e-mail address to sign up for our online newsletter!" would be much more beneficial, plus that could also be done in-person. However I can also see RSS feeds really helping out special libraries or university libraries, who can gather news reports from several sources and make it access able to patrons who would want access to news like that instead of having to search (and possibly having little to no luck) to find it.

Overall I am not entirely sure if I like RSS feeds or not. Like I said above I found it a bit difficult to use right away, because I wasn't sure which reader to use, how to subscribe to a feed, or really even do anything with them at first. Now after getting my feet wet and finding it easier to use I definitely think they are useful and provide a more streamlined way of viewing news and updates from multiple sources at once, but I think it may still be difficult to use if the person using it is not very familiar with the internet and its different components. I hope that with time RSS feeds become easier to use (see my example above with integrating reader add-ons into browsers, for example) or else it may fall by the wayside due to lack of use.

Web 2.0, Libraries, and Blogs -- oh my!

Blogs have been around for quite a while in the Web 2.0 world, whether they are edited by one person for personal use, or a community blog edited by several people. It's a place on the web where one can post their thoughts in near-anonymity, and what you type can remain on the internet for a long time. Your audience can be carefully selected like a well-planned private party, or an open door into your virtual home for anyone to see. And either of those options, and anything in-between, are well liked by the online community, so it's not surprising that as time goes on and internet access becomes more accessible by the general public of all races and class-types that blogs are one of the highest used information resources on the internet. In fact according to BlogPulse, there is over 176 million blogs in existence on the internet.

Anyone can create a blog. The process has become so simplified that it no longer requires knowing complex code, or even much thought beyond a WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) page creator where one has to simply click, drag, and drop certain elements or highlight a piece of text and make it bold or add in a link. While nowadays there are easier methods to sharing personal information with friends, family, and the world, like Twitter, Facebook and other siimilar social networking websites, blogs remain a central facet to Web 2.0 because of it's staying power and ease of access: it's much harder to search back through 40,000 tweets than it is to look for a post that was tagged properly when it was created, even if hashtags are now being used more frequently.

I've really loved blogs for a long time now. I began blogging (or perhaps the more proper term is journalling, since it was on LiveJournal) regularly back in 2005 when Web 2.0 technology became increasingly more popular and accessible to those who were already using the internet.My blog covered a variety of topics, but most of the posts were based on my personal life, because it was a way for me to vent out my thoughts and emotions as I was increasingly bullied at school, my home life, as well as in my personal relationships. While many of those posts make me cringe now to read them, because I was dreadfully melodramatic, without Web 2.0 technology like blogging, I could have never really gotten my thoughts out there for people to see and be able to help talk me through things. It's why I am such a firm believer that the internet is useful and to call everything on here as fake or "not real life" as some put it diminishes its capability to help those who are trapped in terrible life situations, such as being a teenager living in an abusive home, or those with disabilities who can't leave the house very often.

I think that in most cases all libraries can benefit from having an online presence through the use of blogs. It allows access in so many different ways to so many different people, including those who are disabled and may have difficulties going to a real library to talk to people. I think it can also help change the view of libraries that some think the library is dying to a resource of vast information and knowledge that is accessible to pretty much everyone, and that libraries and librarians are dedicated to helping advance technology and knowledge for themselves and everyone else. The only requirement, I think, is to have people who are familiar with the platform to keep things updated and orderly. I really can't stress enough that if your blog is very messy and hard to navigate or unsightly looking it can really distract the blog visitor from possibly valuable information because they either can't find it or are turned away from the presentation. Studies have shown that most people are drawn to things that have aesthetic appeal to them, so I don't find this surprising. So either keeping a library techincian on staff or other librarians who are familiar with blogging software is a must.

Blogs can be used in a variety of ways for libraries, ranging from new content in the library, workshops and lectures being shown, events and activities being held, as well as getting to know the library staff themselves. Information on contests like in-library or online catalogue or blog treasure hunts can be arranged, whether for fun or for internet 101-like workshops. Blogs can also be used as a focal social point, for example, for remote Northern communities to help arrange events for the entire community, not just those centred in the library. It can also do something called "bumping the signal" for programs or communities that may address problems in certain communities (e.g. poverty and alcoholism on First Nations reservations), as public libraries are accessible by anyone and thus the outreach for these programs can be much greater.

For the foreseeable future, I don't think blogs will fall to other social networks like Twitter or Tumblr. While I think it's a good idea for individual libraries to be in several different types of social media, blogs are one of the few heavyweights that can display and save large amounts of information while still being easily accessible to those of varying amount of internet experience. I think this is a valuable resource for libraries and to dismiss it just because of its age or the idea that it is an obsolete format in the Web 2.0 is a huge mistake. It is an excellent way for a patron to connect with the library, and to see that libraries are just as committed as the "real world" in keeping pace with the ever expanding technologies that humanity keeps developing, especially if they can make information accessible and free to more and more patrons.

This, I think, is the main purpose of a library: freedom of information - and blogs are just another (very useful) tool to do that.

Obligatory Introduction Post

Just a place holder for now. :)