What do you want? Information!

Many people (both technophobe staff and members of the public) still seem to disparage the internet and its resources, and often blame it for a detrimental change in libraries, who uses them, and how they are used.


A perfect example might be Wikipedia, which many people will tell you is full of errors, bias, hidden agendas and downright false information, as though you would be so much safer in the secure portal of (say) Encyclopedia Britannica. Well, yes, sort of... Encyclopedias do get edited and researched, vetted and assessed, revised again, and all that. So the information they contain seems pretty accurate (if dull). They also respond to change very slowly, have very limited information on obscure subjects (even assuming they offer a listing at all) and they certainly have agendas of their own (EB seems to have quite a US bias, for instance).


Wikipedia, however, in spite of the turf wars on certain 'hot topics' has far more detail on subjects of minority interest, written (for the most part) by enthusiasts, who are experts of a different kind.

They are both useful resources, even if, as Robert Anton Wilson explains:

"When I was working on my historical novels, my wife used to collect old encyclopedias. Every time she was at a bookstore they had an old set of encyclopedias and she’d buy it. And so we had about eight different sets of encyclopedias in the house. So every time I wanted to look up a historical detail, I’d look it up in three or four of the encyclopedias and always—it didn’t take as much as three—usually only two I’d find a disagreement.

If I went through all eight encyclopedias, I’d find eight different answers. Like how old was Mozart when he wrote his first symphony? – he was either 7 or 8 depending on which encyclopedia you’re looking in. This is what provoked me to what I call “Wilson’s 22nd Law: Certitude belongs exclusively to those who only own one encyclopedia. If you own more than one you’d be thoroughly encountering a certain amount of doubt and a certainty about things in general.” There is no one reliable source; there are a dozen different sources all claiming to be reliable. You got to use your own ingenious mind, and your own talent for analysis and skepticism to try and figure out “Which one of these guys really sounds like he might know what he’s talking about?” or “Which one should I bet on?”

Every act of perception should be regarded as a gamble. From the experiments I’ve done and the experiments I’ve led and in my workshops and seminars, that has become overwhelmingly obvious and true to me. Every perception is a gamble.The major problem with the US is that about fifty percent of the population who at least thinks The Bible has all the answers. And then there are libertarians who think Ludwig van Mises has all the answers—except for all the ones who thinks Ayn Rand has all the answers. If you think there’s one book that has the answers, you’re never really going to discover anything and you’re never going to think an original thought. If you find out there’s twelve books with different answers you’re almost forced to start thinking. So I feel the internet is forcing more and more people to do something they have never done in their lives before and just try to make an independent judgment and how to judge between alternatives.

Not sure if I got that quote verbatim, but IMHO - RAW got this right... libraries promote thinking, they don't simply offer answers...we'll miss them if we get rid of them...

Social Networking ambiguity

This pseudonymous author had taken a break in the hills, got snowed in, but has now returned refreshed.

I felt pleased to see that Socitm decided to encourage the use of 'social networking' in businesses and organisations, rather than block staff from using these tools, and learning how to work them.

As an early-uptaker, it seems to me that blocking staff access to modern tools seems like refusing to let them use a phone, because they might spend time gossiping, or arranging their evening drinks... Apart from the patronising attitude (and lack of trust) to make phones completely unavailable as a 'solution to the problem' would render most library work virtually impossible.

So, the council now trendily uses Twitter to contact its customers, but prevents us workers from using it at all; the public can use Facebook, but staff are discouraged from using it during work time, etc.

I know we only have to patiently wait for the inevitable, but I have an impatient temperament.

Look at Manchester Libraries, with their Facebook Page, their Twitter connection and a blog - The Manchester Lit List.

Hey ho.

Blogging for Librarians

I have just returned from a brief but informative workshop with Karl Drinkwater - Resource Discovery Officer at Aberystwyth University (and E-learning Adviser for Learning Resources at JISC RSC Wales).

In "Blogging Awareness" he took us through

• the possible uses of blogs (for individual or departmental announcements of services or news, for instance, or simply for internal collaboration and communication)
• the available sites that offer the service of hosting free blogs
• the pros and cons (conflicts of interest between ICT security issues and access, for instance, or corporate branding and 'the friendly face' of the staff...etc).
  
  Although I run several blogs (for my different 'hats') I learned some new things, and really should get to grips with RSS, for instance.
  
  He manages this website for Aberystwyth University, but here's an example of one of his blogs, Subject Support
  
  Unfortunately, this blog will not be accessible from Cardiff Libraries, as ICT recently blocked all blogs hosted at Blogger in response to a request from schools, after children were (presumably) found accessing inappropriate material.
  
  It's just my personal opinion - as I know children need to be protected - but that seems like banning all newspapers in libraries just because The Sun has Page Three girls. Surely you just stop offering The Sun in the libraries - you don't ban The Guardian, the FT, The Independent, etc? IMHO
  
  One by one I am getting harmless blogs unblocked, on request, but I have no idea how many useful, interesting and informative blogs get hosted on Blogger. Thousands? Tens of thousands? Millions?
  
  I would prefer that individual sites which were found to be offensive got blocked, rather than these big sweeping moves. Contentious stuff, of course, but at least we had a chance to air and discuss some of these problems.
  
  A very enjoyable course! Thanks Karl!

Non-judgemental libraries

I am not a qualified librarian, nor a lifelong information worker - I have only been in the business for ten years - so I suspect that some debates which still engage me seem like old hat to others.

As a lifelong user of libraries, however, I always assumed that they were information neutral, in other words, had no role in censoring or filtering the material I had access to. I realise that is an image of an ideal library, and that in 'real life' the constraints of budgets, the complaints of users, etc. - no doubt influence the content of the shelves. And I guess we have to distinguish between censorship (no access) and filtering (limited access).

Now that libraries offer access to Internet, the same issues of censorship and filtering apply - magnified by public hysteria, but also by very real threats to children and vulnerable adults. So Councils err on the side of caution, of course, but then get feedback from many users that a heavily filtered service that blocks too many internet options is worse than useless. One solution is to have some PCs made Adult Only, some Children Only, but most of ours are set to Access to All.

Bowing to pressure from users, a large number (not all) of our branch and Central Library PCs now have access to Facebook, MySpace and YouTube - presumably as the 'more respectable' of the social networking sites (i.e. ones that have their own virus checkers or moderators or whatever).

I assume this trend will continue, but as a continuous back-and-forth between outraged citizens of both types - outraged at being cut off from resources, and outraged that others should have access to everything...


LibrarySpot special on filtering in libraries (US)

"The use of software to filter Internet content in public libraries has been declared unconstitutional in the United States, and the new Human Rights Act opens the way for a similar process to happen here."
...above quote from this site, discussing the European situation - article apparently dated 1998!

'Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.'

CIPPIC discussion of the issue (Canada)


Huffington Post on self-elected internet censors

Committee of Concerned Journalists on circumventing government censorship.

Australian blog discussing filtering, and moral panic - Somebody Think of the Children