Uses of Web 2.0 in Libraries

The Internet is pervasive in nearly all facets of society, and this of course has profound affects on libraries.  One of the clear advantages of various Web 2.0 technologies, such as Twitter, Facebook, blogs and wikis, is that it allows for the expansion for more active engagement between patrons and librarians.  The transformation of library services as a result of Web 2.0 is not limited to any one kind of library – you can see it is school libraries, public libraries, and university libraries, and large research libraries, like the Library of Congress.

One place the positive effects of 2.0 is apparent is in school libraries.  Here young researchers are able to develop new and better methods of researching and organizing their information.  As Fredrick notes, tools like Diigo, Notestar, Evernote, and Noodletools, “provide students with visual ways to store, access, and manipulate their collected information using notes, highlights, and other features” (Fredrick, 2012).  All of these programs, which allow for more organized researching and note taking also provide a means for more sustained engagement between educators and students.  Of course, like most technological advances, those students who don’t have access to computers outside of school, will be at a disadvantage.  And many of the tools can be prohibitively expensive, and the free ones are loaded with distracting advertisements.

Moving from the relatively small world of school libraries to the largest library in the United States, the Library of Congress has seen real benefits from the use of 2.0 Technology, such as Twitter, YouTube, iTunes U and Facebook.  As Raymond notes, these platforms can “increase awareness of Library collections and interest readers…develop new communication channels and new relationships…[and] reach new audiences” (Raymond, 2009).  The Library of Congress has used these tools to expand their reach to a larger audience.  This was apparent in an instructional video the Library created about Rosie the Riveter.  When it was hosted only on their website (loc.gov), the video received 20,000 views in a period of over 5 years.  However, when the video was posted to YouTube, it received 14,000 views in just 3 months (Raymond, 2009).  While clearly YouTube allows for much broader reach, one has to wonder how much this actually encourages more active engagement with the Library.  While the YouTube video indirectly increases patronage, does this encourage viewers to leave YouTube and good to loc.gov and use the Library itself?  And once there would these one-time YouTube viewers have any idea how to use this complicated library?

While these technologies are certainly spreading through many different types of libraries, there continues to be different rates of adoption, particularly between smaller, rural libraries and larger urban libraries.  As Lietzau notes, almost 60% of public libraries in the United States serve fewer than 10,000 people (Lietzau, 2009).  These libraries, because they have less financial resources than larger public libraries, are less likely to use 2.0 in any manner.  As Lietzau found in his study, only 73% of these libraries even had a website.  As many of these libraries presumably serve relatively isolated populations, they are precisely the libraries that need to adopt these new technologies.  So as more and more American citizens, and the libraries they use, are coming to depend on Web 2.0, these libraries and the populations they serve, run the risk of becoming completely disconnected.

References

Fredrick, K. (2012).  Using Web 2.0 Tools with Young Researchers. School Library Monthly, 28(6), 22-24.

Lietzau, Z. (2009, October).  U.S. Public Libraries and Web 2.0: What’s Really Happening?  Computers in Libraries, 7-10.

Raymond, M. (2009, July/August). Being Sociable: Library Wades Deeper Into Web 2.0 Waters. Library of Congress Information Bulletin, 68(7/8), 138-139.