I got to show off all the stuff I’ve been working on the last few months to the local Chamber of Commerce members. I wrote NY State Senator James Seward and Assemblyman Clifford Crouch a letter of invitation a few weeks ago and they came! It was a successful event.
Below is a picture of Senator Seward, the Library Director, and I talking about the library. It was especially nice to have him attend as he is an advocate of libraries and serves on the Senate Select Committee on Libraries. From the local paper last year:
“In our rural areas, libraries are truly community centers, serving as the hub for countless activities,” Seward said in a media release. “Along with traditional book lending and research opportunities, our libraries help job seekers who come to use the Internet to search for employment or refresh their resumes.” LINK
Now we just need to get him to support equal marriage rights….
More pictures HERE.
I am becoming increasingly convinced that M. John Harrison’s Ambiente Hotel is the best blog around right now. It is full of succinct, poignant, lyrical writings of both fiction and reflection, the weird and the mundane. He eschews the current curated fashion of Tumblr/Twitter (not a bad fashion, but sometimes tiring) for something with a much different feel and writing style than exists on most blogs. You can’t skim the Ambiente Hotel; it takes time to read and digest. Though not necessarily strung together there is a distinct cumulative effect when given daily careful reading over weeks/months.
And the tools you develop operate only at the scale for which you develop them–though they have just enough sensitivity to alert you, as you push towards each outside edge, to the possiblility of the need for another, yet more subtle, toolset. -m. john harrison
I’ve already decided: when Google Reader shuts down, I won’t be finding an alternative for my 500 or so feeds. I’ll create some bookmarks of my favorite places on the Internet but so much of the stuff I filled Reader with over the last 5 or 6 years will not come back around. Google has given me an involuntary reboot of my Internet media consumption, a reboot that I needed but have been reluctant to implement.
This year is looking to be the most wide-open, blue-skied year of my life. Everything is new. I need that in my information consumption too.
I spend a lot of my time teaching basic technology workshops at my library. Many of the participants in these workshops have never had the opportunity to learn about computers or technology. For some, sitting down at one of our laptops may be the first time they have even touched a computer.
In my first workshop I always warn them away from frustration. Think of it, I say, like you’re learning a new language, which in many ways they are. This usually puts them at ease. When learning a new language there is never an expectation that the student start out at a certain level or with a basic understanding. If someone takes a beginning French class, no one is going to judge them for not knowing the meaning of merci. This starts to erase the stigma around technological illiteracy and relaxes the classroom. Things can progress (slowly!) from here.
However, there inevitably reaches a point where we get to the more abstract terms. Everyone has heard of the “cloud” but how can I explain it to someone with a very basic understanding of technology or the Internet? More importantly, how can I explain it without making them feel stupid? How can I explain it well?
My answer to those questions are as simple as they are obvious: First, with patience. Then, with repetition.
But sometimes it’s more complex than that. Here is where language comes back. Many of our terms – our metaphors – are so abstract that they are difficult to understand. Like the “cloud”. It’s a catchy term but it misses a lot and confuses our understanding. Emails are not floating around our atmosphere.
But confusing our understanding isn’t the most insidious thing that some of our metaphors do. Frank Chimero reminded me of this the other day. He says:
I think there’s a strong likelihood that metaphors like “The Cloud” and sayings like “It Just Works™” reduce a user’s appreciation of the software/hardware they are using. “Magic” is a great word for selling product, but it also can cheapen all the sweat it takes to get there. If the seams have been covered, you can’t admire how things connect.
Justin wrote a great blog post today musing on the future of Teen Services in libraries. He sees a model of good Teen Librarianship being teams of awesome people collaborating together. It can’t be a one-man show. How can libraries do this? He writes:
Investing: To me, that’s key. Surround yourself with the people you want to work with
Yes! This reminds me of something that Austin Kleon writes in the introduction to his book Steal Like An Artist (h/t Brainpickings). It is a concept that I have been thinking about over the course of last year – especially as I move around in my profession and have the chance to meet new and cool people. The concept is this:
There’s an economic theory out there that if you take the incomes of your five closest friends and average them, the resulting number will be pretty close to your own income.
I think the same thing is true of idea incomes. You’re only going to be as good as the stuff you surround yourself with.
Remember, this is true both online and off.
John Palfrey recently gave a short TEDx talk about his work with the DPLA. It’s a good introduction to the project and why it is needed.
More info at DPLA
I’ve been participating in Daniel Russell’s (previously mentioned HERE) free Power Searching with Google course. It is a lot of fun. I’ve refreshed stuff I already knew and learned a few new tricks I didn’t. The third class and mid-term assessment went live this morning.
I just posted this on Facebook but thought I’d share it here too.
I found myself returning to this article over and over during the last two days. It’s a rather chilling yet perspicacious examination of the increasing bifurcation of our society into a rich upperclass and underprivileged lower class (or, as put in the article, “Perfect world travelers versus people who don’t have passports. The drone owners versus the drone targets. And, strangely, those who can move freely in physical space and those who can’t.”) and the extent in which tech can play a role.
The sci-fi author M John Harrison recently blogged about how the traditional rhetoric of disaster (think The Road) is worn out – those issues are no longer the important issues – and that there is some other kind of disaster ready to be written. I tend to think that this is it – the ability of technology to either democratize everyone or fuel the machinations of the powerful elite. In which case, access to, knowledge of, and education about technology may need to be thought of differently, maybe even as a “human right.”
Imagine if a patron came into the library and asked the following question:
What’s the phone number of the office where this picture was snapped?
Maybe you think the answer is close to Impossible? But this is the exact question that Daniel Russell put to his audience of investigative journalists during a recent talk on Google Search Tips. Luckily, John Tedesco was in attendance and has written an interesting and helpful list of notes from the talk that should help with finding the answer.
A few of my favorites:
*Think about how somebody else would write about the topic.
Search is all about someone else’s language. Think about synonyms and use OR operators. Google’s “related search” feature on the search page also offers suggestions.
“Part of the skill here is being fascinated about language,” Russell said. “You’ve got to think about equivalent terms.”
*Force Google to include search terms.
Sometimes Google tries to be helpful and it uses the word it thinks you’re searching for — not the word you’re actually searching for. And sometimes a website in the search results does not include all your search terms.
How do you fix this?
Typing intext:[keyword] might be Google’s least-known search operations, but it’s one of Russell’s favorites. It forces the search term to be in the body of the website. So if you type:
intext:”San Antonio” intext:Alamo
It forces Google to show results with the phrase “San Antonio” and the word Alamo. You won’t get results that are missing either search term.
*Find relational search terms.
What if you’re curious about search terms that are near each other on a website?[keyword] AROUND(n) [keyword] is incredibly handy for finding related terms such as “Jerry Brown” near “Tea Party.” (“n” is the number of words near the search terms.) Typing “Jerry Brown” AROUND(3) “Tea Party” will show you all the websites where the phrase “Jerry Brown” was mentioned within three words of “Tea Party.”
*Think like a reporter.
When Russell teaches his students search skills, he tells them: “Think like a reporter.” What do you know, and how can that information help you find what you need to know?
A big part of a reporter’s job is knowing where to find information. Which state agency regulates the issue you’re interested in? How might that information be documented? Who would know more about the issue?
“You have to have a concept about what’s possible,” Russell said.
A common argument against libraries is the specious appeal to the fact that everything is a Google search away. The above would seem to support that claim. Of course, Google can’t perform a reference interview.
I had a patron come in this week with a simple request. He wanted to know the name of a woman featured in a segment on Good Morning America that aired over the weekend. The woman collects blankets and sends them overseas to countries in need. He had searched and searched and found nothing. Thinking the answer was just not available, he was ready to give up.
Even with the little information he gave me I thought this would be a simple answer to find. I pulled up Good Morning America’s website and hit a few of the keywords into their search bar. Nothing. I then broadened my search a bit. Nothing. Okay. Something is wrong.
“When exactly did you see the show?” I asked.
“9 am on Sunday morning.”
So, we hop on over to the local Channel 12 website and check their programming guide. From 9 to 10:30 am on Sunday morning they air CBS Morning News, not Good Morning America. Of course, it was easy to find the answer from there.
Who knows how long he searched before he asked me. Google does not say, “Wait a minute, something is not adding up.” But librarians do.
What are the common ways that people cite information online? How do you do it? Do you use a full bibliographic citation? Probably not. That is because writing for the web is different than writing an academic paper, a book chapter, an essay or something else that requires proper citation.
Online most people tend to be relaxed and informal about citations because web writing lends itself to a more conversational format. Only a real snoot* would want everything discussed in a blog post displayed in proper MLA Works Cited format. Usually a hyperlink, an @ or, my favorite, a h/t is common. I have been thinking a lot about this idea since a discussion came up in one of my classes, International Issues for Info Professionals, recently. The professor, Deborah Turner, requires that all students properly cite sources in Blackboard discussions. Since she is running this class as an e-seminar, she discussed having torn feelings about this. It has been my experience that most professors do not require full citations. Or, if they do, I have managed to maintain a GPA of 3.9 without ever once doing it.
The more I think about this issue, the more I realize just how relaxed I have become in regards to proper citation and giving credit online. It is probably a product of my many years of blogging and participating in online forums where informal citations are, to borrow Professor Turner’s words, “e-cultural norms.” Nevertheless, I am about to become an Information Professional. Or, at least, I am going to have an expensive piece of paper saying I am qualified to be one in some capacity. Should I not begin holding myself to a higher standard on this issue? How can I be serious about respecting ideas or protecting intellectual property if I myself do not practice it?
But here is the problem. Full bibliographic citations do not work on the web. I tried doing it in this blog post for everything that I hyperlinked and it looked silly and awkward. In Blackboard it is easier and makes sense due to the nature of the discussions there (btw, my newest project is to include sources from outside LIS and attempt to relate them to as many of the discussions as possible on Bb in order to make things more interesting. I’ll probably blog about this at some point).
Everyone deserves credit for their work. What is the best way to ensure this on the web? Does anyone have any references about this topic for me? Is there any literature about it? Any thoughts? Is this even something Information Professionals should worry about? I’m curious.
* For an explanation of “snoot” please see David Foster Wallace’s (2001) essay Tense Present: Democracy, English, and the Wars Over Usage.