The end of an era…or not

In our class readings this week, Erick Schonfeld ("Jump into the Stream"), Nova Spivack

("Welcome to the Stream: The Next Phase of the Web"), and Ken Fromm ("The Real-Time Web: A Primer, Part 1") herald the beginning of a new era, in which information flows past us in a constant stream of small pieces instead of being archived and displayed on extensive web pages updated at much less frequent intervals.  They argue that our attention spans are shortening to match the speed and size of this new conversational flow.  They certainly address some critical differences between the real-time Web and destination websites.  Note, however, that all three do so in lengthy blog posts on dedicated web pages.  If the end of the destination web era means that there is no longer a need for destination web pages, then there should be no need to explain this on such web pages.  The conversation would have already taken place on Twitter, flowed through everyone paying attention, and submerged the remaining islands of fixed web pages in the rising stream.

In fact, though, just as chatty interaction and keeping on top of breaking news appeals to basic human desires, so does more lengthy analysis and discussion.  Humans make sense of the world by putting pieces together to form meaningful patterns.  Dipping into the ongoing stream of information and ideas is not enough—we all need the opportunity to put those pieces together, to respond to what we learn, and to expand our thoughts beyond an immediate response.  That’s why we write blog posts, articles, and books in addition to tweets.  That’s why so many tweets refer to blog posts, articles, videos, webinars, and books.

Furthermore, in "The Destination Web is Morphing: Pay Attention",  David Lee King reminds us that many of our patrons are not participating in this new information flow, and that even those who do still need the destination website and the library building.  People still listen to radio in spite of the introduction of television.  The relative strengths of different technologies vary, and we can use them to accomplish different things—no need to declare one approach dead just because something new has arisen.

RSS Evangelism

Librarians who want their patrons to understand and use RSS could follow medical librarian David Rothman’s example.   After consultation with the head of surgery of his hospital, Rothman set up a customized Google Reader account and sent an email to the surgeon explaining how to use it.  The surgeon was able to start using and seeing the benefits of RSS immediately.  Rothman then approached the Vice President of Medical Affairs to help him set up an account, which was received enthusiastically.  Judging entirely by their job titles, it seems likely that these two patrons were influential leaders in the hospital culture, and likely to spread the word about the great new service the library was providing—good choices for this handpicking approach to promoting RSS.

Librarians in other settings such as large public libraries are likely to be unable to spend an hour consulting with a single individual as Rothman did.  But many public libraries offer computer training for patrons, and could certainly offer a class on using RSS feeds, including those provided by the library for new materials or database searches.  Librarians doing any sort of outreach to community groups such as a local historical society, senior center, or high school could include demonstrations of RSS tailored to fit the interests of the group.  For any of us, seeing something that looks just like what we’d like to have (or a near-miss that inspires us to think of new possibilities) is a much better motivator for trying something new than a dry description.

Finally, libraries with a blog presence could certainly include posts about RSS--new feeds the library has set up, feeds the library is subscribing to from other sources, and stories about how one patron or another has begun using RSS and enjoying the benefits.

Learning by blogging

 Blogging for this class gives us all the opportunity to learn by doing, in a more in-depth manner than just trying something out.  The assigned exercises get us trying out various social media tools and considering their application to library services, but we’re just dipping our toes in those waters.  Maintaining a blog for a semester gives us more time to swim toward the deep end (or splash about in the shallows).

Speaking of the deep end, when I read Skellie’s post on 101 essential blogging skills, my first reaction was “Wow—this is great!  Clearly blogging is like any other craft—you can spend a long time improving your work and still have lots to learn.”  My second reaction was “Now I’m overwhelmed.  I’m still struggling to get started.  Thinking about how many things I could do better is discouraging.” 

This reminded me of the split in bloggers’ responses to Darren Rowse’s prompt “What I wish I knew when I first started blogging”  Some people said “I wish I had just jumped in instead of thinking about it for so long” and some said “I wish I had prepared more instead of just jumping in”.  By blogging for this class, we get the best of both worlds.  We’re jumping in to try things out in a personal (but required) blog.  No excuses for postponing it, and need to fuss about doing it “just right”.  We’re also reading and thinking about how to do it better, to prepare for blogging in a library setting.

Because each student’s contributions to the class discussion are in his or her own blog instead of dispersed throughout various discussion boards in a learning management system, they form a more coherent picture of that student’s thoughts and growth throughout the semester.  This may encourage each of us to loop back to earlier posts and tie our thoughts together with new reflections.  I wonder, though—because the conversation about any particular topic is dispersed throughout student blogs instead of grouped together on one discussion board, is that conversation less coherent or less thorough than it might be?  Are we learning more about our own thoughts by blogging, and less about each others?

Blog appeal -- LIBR246 Exercise 2

Of the five blogs we studied this week, three can be categorized as library tech blogs.  David Lee King offers brief advice on specific tech topics (e.g., preparing presentations, using Facebook or Twitter) on his blog.  Canadian librarian Paul Pival offers links, book reviews, and technical tips in ‘The Distant Librarian’.  In ‘Librarian by Day’, Bobbi Newman compiles interesting links, adding commentary and advocating for library involvement with web 2.0 projects.  She also sponsors and promotes the ‘Library day in the life’ project, building community among librarians.

The other two blogs have a broader focus.  In ‘The Librarian’s Commute’, Olivia Nellums writes personal reflections about her experiences working in an academic library.  ‘In the Library with the Lead Pipe’ is a team blog.  The posts are peer-reviewed articles on a variety of topics, and include citations of academic papers as well as photos and links. 

In all five blogs, the posts I found most interesting to read were those that included a personal element—why the writer was excited about the event, tool, experience, or research s/he was sharing.  I found it easier to interact with the informational or intellectual content of a blog post if it included an emotional connection as well.  On a list of 101 essential blogging skills, Skellie urges bloggers to ‘write dirty’, meaning to “write with humanity”.  As Skellie notes in the ‘write dirty’ post, “Your readers can’t build a relationship with information.  They can build a relationship with you.”

I selected blogs from three different types of libraries to consider.  Chad Boenninger’s business blog for the Ohio University libraries offers “tips, tricks, and tools for the business researcher”.  His video and text instructions are thorough and specific.  MADreads offers book news and reviews from the Madison Public Library.  This group blog lists 48 people who write book reviews.  A side-bar of ‘recent comments’ highlights patron discussion of the books.

Gargoyles loose in the library is written by Frances Jacobsen Harris of the University Laboratory High School in Urbana, IL.  Francey’s lively writing style is welcoming and friendly; her enthusiasm and sense of humor are evident in her posts.  She shares info on student events, research tips for students, and tidbits from ALA Library News Direct and Twitter for students’ entertainment and enlightenment.  Comments are not enabled for her blog, but she posts photos of students and their work, such as a student doodle from a class session on content farms.

  

I consider each of the three blogs to be a successful example of a library blog, though they are quite different.  The basic characteristics contributing to their success (in varying degrees) are that they are attractive and easy to read, with easy access to archived posts, and convenient search capabilities.  They are frequently updated, with posts appropriate for their clearly defined audiences.  They each also have a blog personality, allowing the reader to build a relationship with the blog writer.  The level of blog personality varies with the purpose of the blog and the type of library.  The business blog, as appropriate for an academic library and a business reference librarian, is the most formal of the three.  The Gargoyles blog is the most personal and idiosyncratic—although comments are not enabled for this blog, I bet the librarian gets plenty of responses from her high school students in person.

You've found negative comments online about your organization. What do you do?

The first response to finding negative things written about one’s organization online is to take a deep breath and to remember to not take the negative comments personally.  The second step is to consider the positive aspects of the comments: 

1) Your organization is important enough in the writer’s life that s/he is motivated to write about you.  Maybe you worried that no one was paying attention to you or that no one cared about your service—worry no longer.

2) The writer has just provided you with useful information about how your organization is perceived by at least one user.  You didn’t even have to design and distribute a survey to elicit this information—take it, use it—it may be valuable.

3) I can’t remember where I read this, so can’t give credit to the author, but…people form their impressions of the quality of an organization’s customer service not just from the initial interaction, but even more strongly from watching how an organization responds to a complaint.  You now have a golden opportunity to serve and perhaps even impress not just one disgruntled customer, but also everyone who is watching the interaction online.  It is therefore important to consider your response to the negative comments from a broad viewpoint.  What do you want to tell your customers/users/patrons about your organization’s values and attitudes?  How you approach the situation will tell them far more than just the words you use.

It’s also important to carefully examine the comment itself.  Does it include factual errors?  Provide accurate information.  Does it seem to be based on faulty assumptions about what your organization does?  Explain how your organization works.  Does it point out a problem that you can fix with more information, a replacement item, or another response on the spot?  Make the offer to fix it.  If the comment doesn’t provide enough information for you to determine how to respond, ask for more feedback from the user and begin a conversation.

Finally, you need to consider how to distribute your response.  Using the same medium as the initial comment makes sense; whether it was Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube, those who saw the initial complaint are more likely to see your response if you reply in the same place and with the same level of commitment to the conversation.  In other words, if someone posts a funny video on YouTube complaining about your customer service, posting a written comment below their video is not an adequate response.  You need to create your own video, demonstrating what you can do to solve the problem they have pointed out, and post it on YouTube, where people who viewed the first video can find yours too.

Bob's Red Mill -- Use of Social Media Tools -- Exercise 1

Bob’s Red Mill is discussed in blogs, bookmarked on delicious, reviewed on Yelp, and described in a Wikipedia entry.  Mentions of Bob’s are generally positive; for example, there are 64 reviews of Bob’s Red Mill Whole Grain Store (and diner) on Yelp, with an average rating of 4.5 stars out of 5.  Bob’s products are frequently mentioned on the blogs of hobbyist bakers and gluten-free cooks, who tend to be fans of Bob’s.  The founders of Bob’s Red Mill, Bob and Charlee Moore, recently donated $1.35 million to the National College of Natural Medicine and $5 million to Oregon State University to establish the Moore Family Center for Whole Grain Foods, Nutrition and Preventive Health.  These announcements are currently dominating the mentions of Bob’s on news outlets and food industry blogs.  Members of a peanut-allergy forum have posted their conversations with Bob’s Red Mill representatives regarding the presence of traces of peanuts in other products.  It sounds as though the members of the forum were not totally satisfied with the responses they received from Bob’s, though the customer service rep from Bob’s was careful to invite further questions and give a phone number.

Bob’s Red Mill has a company blog, written by several employees, with frequent articles about baking and cooking with whole grains.  The company holds various contests (for example, haiku written in honor of National Oatmeal Month) to involve customers.  The blog site also includes information about Bob’s support of the National Autism Society, their sponsorship of a world cyclocross racing team and a ‘Train with grain’ cyclocross support program, and their participation in the World Porridge Making Championship in Scotland.  The company seems to be effective in engaging customers online.  Customers comment on the blog and participate in polls and contests, and respond to Bob’s active Twitter posts, view their YouTube videos, and engage in conversation on their Facebook page.

For example, the Facebook page is a personal page, and fans of the company sign on as ‘friends’.  Apparently, Bob’s was recently targeted by someone who posted disturbingly violent photos on Facebook and tagged the photos ‘Bob’s Red Mill’.  Bob’s responded by changing their security settings so no one can tag them in photos, and apologizing to their friends.  They also offered to help their friends share photos in other ways, and posted “some extra sweet puppy photos to make up for the sick photos”.  The resulting conversation among Bob’s friends was supportive of the company, offered advice on the pros and cons of Bob’s setting up a business fan page instead of a personal page, and led to a discussion of another member’s site, the Gluten Free Spouse.  The feel of the conversation was of a friendly community that had rallied around the company when it was attacked by the anonymous photo tagger.

Bob’s Red mill is very proactive in establishing good online relationships with customers, and they appear to be responsive to customer questions and complaints.  Augie Ray suggests on Social Media Today that the future of customer relations lies in active monitoring of and response to online customer discussions that are not directed at the company.  Although I found no evidence to suggest that Bob’s is currently using this approach, I would not be surprised to find them doing so now or in the future, given their current level of social media savvy.

Note:  Among the reputation monitoring tools suggested for this exercise, I found Yelp, Google Blog Search, and Social Mention most useful.  The 'mentions' categorized as negative by Social Mention included words like 'hate', 'terrible', and 'sucks', but not all of them actually referred to Bob's (some were about the writer's mood, for example).  Keotag returned useful results for tags on delicious and YouTube, but gave no results or an error message for many other sites.  How Sociable was irritating to use...perhaps I need more practice.

How have social software tools had an effect on your life or work? Part 2

After writing my last post I went upstairs to make cinnamon rolls for my son’s birthday.  As I mixed melted butter, yeast, sugar, and flour together I realized that I had misrepresented my relationship with social software.  I actually use more than Facebook—I bookmark useful sites on delicious, use RSS feeds for keeping up with a few blogs, news feeds, and notices of LIS webinars, visit the library community WebJunction occasionally, and use Google Docs for class projects.  Maybe I didn’t report them in my last post because I take them for granted now.  Or maybe I’m not only underreporting but also undervaluing my use of social sites—I’m an observer/reader/lurker who makes occasional contributions, rather than an active participant, and I thought that didn’t count for much. 

I have two thoughts on my role as a lurker. 

1) I’ve been reading Clay Shirky’s Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations (fascinating book!).  Shirky says that the occasional contributors, those who form the long part of the tail, are an essential part of the social community.  In fact, he says, “…the imbalance [in user contributions] drives large social systems rather than damaging them…large social systems cannot be understood as a simple aggregation of the behavior of some nonexistent ‘average’ user” (Shirky, 2009, p. 125).  So my minimal participation is part of the social network. 

2) In one of the papers in this week’s reading list, Steve Hargadon says “the answer to content overload…is to produce more content. Because it is in the act of our becoming a creator that our relationship with content changes, and we become more engaged and more capable at the same time” (Hargadon, 2008, Trend #2).  This argues for my becoming more active for my own sake (and this may benefit the community as a whole as well—at least I hope so!).  Hargadon’s comment fits well with my response to overload in conversation, in busy stores or museum, or in the online environment—I want to go out for a walk, to garden, or to try out a new recipe.  Physical activity and/or a creative act serve as antidote for the overwhelmed observer.  I’ll add writing a blog post to that list and see how it works.

Hargadon, S. (2008). "Web 2.0 is the Future of Education." Steve Hargadon.

Shirky, C. (2009). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. New York, NY: Penguin.