If I had to choose a gaming console setup for a standard public library, I'd start by asking the library patrons about the kinds of games they enjoy playing or are interested in. I'd make an effort to reach a wide spectrum of users. I'd also look at what similar libraries are doing with their gaming programs; it would be helpful to find other libraries with gaming programs in my local area, because we might be able to work out some kind of consortium-type arrangement (or at least be likely to be dealing with some similar situations). It would also be very useful to hear about others' experience with gaming in other libraries.
I'd also research on gaming review sites and tech sites like CNET in order to find out more general types of information such as what games are available on console gaming setups and whether there are any usability quirks; the sorts of things that wouldn't be library-specific but would be good to know.
Personally, I would be inclined to go with Wii because it gives physical exercise along with the mental challenge of gaming. It also seems to appeal to a wide range of demographic groups.
Showing posts with label library. Show all posts
Showing posts with label library. Show all posts
Monday, December 8, 2008
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Another question (no answers here, alas)
Rather than doing another "librarians and The Long Tail" kind of post, I decided to look at it from a somewhat different perspective. I decided to wonder about "authority."
My dad once said to me, when we were talking about opera, "If you're not obsessed, you're not paying attention." Or words to that effect. Opera is a niche that leaves many people cold, but many other people are totally enthused about it and, yes, obsessive about their interest (when I say obsessive here, I mean eagerly seeking out new information about an interest, not stalker-type bad behavior or OCD compulsiveness).
Having such a wonderful role model (and I do mean that sincerely), I grew up to be an obsessive about my own array of passionate interests (some of which I share with dad, others not so much). He introduced to the joy of stores filled with obscure and intriguing possibilities, mostly in the literary and musical realms. He also introduced me to the idea that if you were interested in something, it was always worth digging deeper and learning as much as possible about it. You didn't need a degree or a formal program of study: you just needed to go out and learn.
When the web came along, it was a godsend to obsessives of this model. It became relatively easy to set up a webpage or, later, blog about your very own passionate interests. Better yet, you could find others who cared as much as you. No matter how fringe your interest, your community was just waiting to find you (and each other) on the web.
So, how does a librarian deal with this?
When I was researching genealogists for a project in Human Information Behavior last semester, I came across a number of comments that could be reduced to the title of a paper in Oregon Library Association Quarterly by Anne Billeter, Ph.D., "Why Don't Librarians Like Genealogists?" Genealogists are very demanding library users, and for a librarian with no particular genealogical expertise, dealing with them can be daunting at best.
The social software trend puts more authority and power in the hands of users. For librarians who are seeking to create the next generation of libraries, this can be a mixed blessing. In a nutshell, is there a place in libraries of the future for the passionate amateur, and if so, where? Would there ever be a library where an obscure musical query got sent to the local musical maven with no library degree, rather than sent to a reference desk librarian?
I got to wondering about this after a historic house tour, when I asked a question of the guide, got an answer and then went home and researched it further. It turned out the guide's answer wasn't completely accurate. On one hand, erroneous information was being given out. On the other hand, it was an obscure topic. Is there a way to bring the amateur knowledge of the obsessive together with the professional knowledge of the librarian? Should there be?
It seems to me that both librarians and passionate amateurs/obsessives care about accurate knowledge on a wide range of topics. It would seem that there should be a way to bring them together, but given the fraught history of professional-amateur relations in many fields, that may not be possible. Still, librarians engaged in creating systems that give their users more of a voice in the library community may want to consider these concerns.
My dad once said to me, when we were talking about opera, "If you're not obsessed, you're not paying attention." Or words to that effect. Opera is a niche that leaves many people cold, but many other people are totally enthused about it and, yes, obsessive about their interest (when I say obsessive here, I mean eagerly seeking out new information about an interest, not stalker-type bad behavior or OCD compulsiveness).
Having such a wonderful role model (and I do mean that sincerely), I grew up to be an obsessive about my own array of passionate interests (some of which I share with dad, others not so much). He introduced to the joy of stores filled with obscure and intriguing possibilities, mostly in the literary and musical realms. He also introduced me to the idea that if you were interested in something, it was always worth digging deeper and learning as much as possible about it. You didn't need a degree or a formal program of study: you just needed to go out and learn.
When the web came along, it was a godsend to obsessives of this model. It became relatively easy to set up a webpage or, later, blog about your very own passionate interests. Better yet, you could find others who cared as much as you. No matter how fringe your interest, your community was just waiting to find you (and each other) on the web.
So, how does a librarian deal with this?
When I was researching genealogists for a project in Human Information Behavior last semester, I came across a number of comments that could be reduced to the title of a paper in Oregon Library Association Quarterly by Anne Billeter, Ph.D., "Why Don't Librarians Like Genealogists?" Genealogists are very demanding library users, and for a librarian with no particular genealogical expertise, dealing with them can be daunting at best.
The social software trend puts more authority and power in the hands of users. For librarians who are seeking to create the next generation of libraries, this can be a mixed blessing. In a nutshell, is there a place in libraries of the future for the passionate amateur, and if so, where? Would there ever be a library where an obscure musical query got sent to the local musical maven with no library degree, rather than sent to a reference desk librarian?
I got to wondering about this after a historic house tour, when I asked a question of the guide, got an answer and then went home and researched it further. It turned out the guide's answer wasn't completely accurate. On one hand, erroneous information was being given out. On the other hand, it was an obscure topic. Is there a way to bring the amateur knowledge of the obsessive together with the professional knowledge of the librarian? Should there be?
It seems to me that both librarians and passionate amateurs/obsessives care about accurate knowledge on a wide range of topics. It would seem that there should be a way to bring them together, but given the fraught history of professional-amateur relations in many fields, that may not be possible. Still, librarians engaged in creating systems that give their users more of a voice in the library community may want to consider these concerns.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Librarians and the long tail
The most obvious place for librarians and libraries in the long tail would seem to be as New Tastemakers. Tastemaking, after all, has always been a big part of the job. However, librarians have typically done this from a position of authority relative to the patron (if an advanced degree isn't a marker of authority, I don't know what is). New Tastemakers don't generally have the benefit of a degree: they tend to be hobbyists and enthusiasts who has studied a subject in depth for the love of it. For librarians to succeed in this new world, they will have to lean less on the assumption that they know more by virtue of their training and education. Instead, they will have to play up their own specialized interests (but let's face it, librarians tend to be people with interesting hobbies!).
Being New Producers seems straightforward enough. With the technological tools now available, it's easy for libraries and librarians to put up blogs, wikis, podcasts, Flickr streams...the whole nine yards. With the push toward open source software, libraries can even roll their own OPACs and other computer infrastructure without being limited to expensive proprietary software.
In terms of New Markets, I think one has to think of library systems as a large group, not as individual institutions. Inter-library loan is already a way in which this happens. What may ultimately happen is that libraries may build their collections as part of a whole that is held by a consortium. This could be a good way to build a more complete collection in a way that uses limited funds more effectively. Of course, some books will need more copies because they're more popular, but this might be an effective way of stocking a larger number of books with a smaller demand.
Being New Producers seems straightforward enough. With the technological tools now available, it's easy for libraries and librarians to put up blogs, wikis, podcasts, Flickr streams...the whole nine yards. With the push toward open source software, libraries can even roll their own OPACs and other computer infrastructure without being limited to expensive proprietary software.
In terms of New Markets, I think one has to think of library systems as a large group, not as individual institutions. Inter-library loan is already a way in which this happens. What may ultimately happen is that libraries may build their collections as part of a whole that is held by a consortium. This could be a good way to build a more complete collection in a way that uses limited funds more effectively. Of course, some books will need more copies because they're more popular, but this might be an effective way of stocking a larger number of books with a smaller demand.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Libraries and the long tail
I think the idea of the long tail has a lot to offer libraries, but I also think not all libraries will benefit from it. The libraries that will get the most out of it are likely to be special and academic libraries. These libraries need deep collections in topics that may be esoteric; even topics that are relatively mainstream get more obscure the deeper you dig. These libraries also serve patrons who need more than just the usual information, and are frequently extremely knowledgeable (and demanding) about specialized subjects and sources.
Archives also have the potential to benefit from the long tail, though many archival materials are so unique that they are beyond the scope of the long tail. If an archive has collections that provide context to the archive’s unique materials, however, the long tail may come into play. Since archival reference sources may be even more specialized than those found in special libraries, this is an obvious long tail situation.
A standard public library may not need the long tail, however. A public library needs to have a wide range of resources to cover a wide variety of needs, but may not have the need (or resources) to specialize. In a way, inter-library loan may be the best way for public libraries to use the long tail: if a patron needs more specialized information than what the public library can offer from its own holdings, inter-library loan is the next obvious path to take.
Archives also have the potential to benefit from the long tail, though many archival materials are so unique that they are beyond the scope of the long tail. If an archive has collections that provide context to the archive’s unique materials, however, the long tail may come into play. Since archival reference sources may be even more specialized than those found in special libraries, this is an obvious long tail situation.
A standard public library may not need the long tail, however. A public library needs to have a wide range of resources to cover a wide variety of needs, but may not have the need (or resources) to specialize. In a way, inter-library loan may be the best way for public libraries to use the long tail: if a patron needs more specialized information than what the public library can offer from its own holdings, inter-library loan is the next obvious path to take.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
