 |
| Web 2.0 Cloud |
Web 2.0 has been described by Zimmer (2013) as the World Wide Web shifting from a collection of static webpages to a more dynamic arena of users, producers and consumers all participating in the creation and organization of information on the web. According to Zimmer (2013), Web 2.0 can empower its users as individuals and also use the forces of collaboration through various platforms such us social media. By creatively using the tools and features of the online community and blending them with services provided by libraries, Zimmer has recommended the role of the library can remain at the forefront as an information resource. Zimmer (2013) has referred to this blending of services as “Library 2.0” (p. 30).
The challenge which lies ahead for information professionals is providing this blend of services which protects both the users' privacy and fulfills their information needs. In an age where the Internet allows for a rich exchange of ideas and knowledge, librarians, and other information specialists, must organize this information and help locate the best possible sources for patrons while being aware of the paradoxical nature of Library 2.0 services. While Library 2.0 can work with the patron online and offer a convenience of library services, it may compromise that user’s privacy. As Helgen and Lutzeit (2011) pointed out, there has been an increase in social media use, especially Facebook, in the library setting. Many libraries have been reaching out to their users by adopting this new form of interaction. Farkas (2011) questioned whether we live in an age of too much information and if social media can blur the limits between private and public existence. However, Farkas (2011) felt people have a variety of expectations regarding personal privacy and what they may be willing to share online.
Libraries should be aware of the potential consequences as they continue to offer more online reference services and allow users to interact through a library’s Facebook page, blog or wiki. Farkas (2011) believed libraries can serve the role as educators in teaching users how to protect their privacy. If a library can establish privacy guidelines to protect staff and patrons, there is no reason why using Web 2.0 in library settings must interfere with services, according to Kooy and Steiner (2010). Finding ways to protect patrons’ privacy without creating barriers to information is the challenge faced by information specialists in the digital age when employing new interactive technology, according to Kooy and Steiner (2010). However, Coombs (2007) has found libraries must be mindful when examining their privacy policy. Users may be more comfortable with sharing personal information and would like a certain amount of control about what they choose to share. According to Coombs (2007), if libraries are to be a part of providing Web 2.0 services, they must understand what personalized services patrons have come to expect from using other online vendors such as Amazon or Netflix. In this digital age, libraries and information specialists must face the dilemma of creating more individualized services while employing the rigors of professional information ethics.
References
"Code of Ethics of the American Library Association". (2006). American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/proethics/codeofethics/codeethics (Accessed October 31, 2014) Document ID: 615b49c6-2ba0-1f64-f914-6bfb9b240357
These ethical principals were established by the American Library Association to guide librarians and other information professionals providing library services. The ALA states that as members of a profession committed to intellectual freedom and freedom of access to information, they have a special obligation to maintain the highest possible integrity to the free flow of knoweledge.
These ethical principals were established by the American Library Association to guide librarians and other information professionals providing library services. The ALA states that as members of a profession committed to intellectual freedom and freedom of access to information, they have a special obligation to maintain the highest possible integrity to the free flow of knoweledge.
Coombs, K. (2007). Privacy vs. personalization. Library Journal, 13228. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=24816632&site=ehost-live
As libraries continue to struggle in providing individualized services, which patrons have come to expect from using other web venues, such as Netflix and Amazon, Coombs considers the notion of allowing personalization to supersede privacy in an effort to grow library 2.0 services. Coombs feels libraries make the assumption that all users are uncomfortable with sharing personal information, but could, in fact, use this sharing of information to redefine their relationships and provide better services.
As libraries continue to struggle in providing individualized services, which patrons have come to expect from using other web venues, such as Netflix and Amazon, Coombs considers the notion of allowing personalization to supersede privacy in an effort to grow library 2.0 services. Coombs feels libraries make the assumption that all users are uncomfortable with sharing personal information, but could, in fact, use this sharing of information to redefine their relationships and provide better services.
Farkas, M. (2011). Too much information?. American Libraries, 42(5/6), 36. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rzh&AN=2011164003&site=ehost-live
Farkas believes social media impacts the way people share information and distorts the boundaries between people’s public and personal lives. Libraries are often sharing pictures of events, asking patrons to comment on library blogs and using Facebook all in an effort to keep pace with the way technology is used in the everyday world. Farkas feels that libraries have a responsibility to educate the public in protecting their online privacy.
Farkas believes social media impacts the way people share information and distorts the boundaries between people’s public and personal lives. Libraries are often sharing pictures of events, asking patrons to comment on library blogs and using Facebook all in an effort to keep pace with the way technology is used in the everyday world. Farkas feels that libraries have a responsibility to educate the public in protecting their online privacy.
Helgren, J. E., & Lietzau, Z. (2011). U.S. public libraries and web technologies: what's happening now?. Computers in Libraries, (7). 12. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgbe&AN=edsgcl.267033718&site=eds-live&scope=site
In this report, the authors of the study looked at data comparing both larger and smaller libraries that maintain a Facebook page. Libraries understand that many of their patrons might both use and enjoy this type of interaction with their library and this report considers the benefits and drawbacks of a library Facebook page. The authors feel libraries have considered the appeal of using Web 2.0 as part of library services, and recognize the usefulness of communicating to their patrons through a familiar setting of social media, such as Facebook.
In this report, the authors of the study looked at data comparing both larger and smaller libraries that maintain a Facebook page. Libraries understand that many of their patrons might both use and enjoy this type of interaction with their library and this report considers the benefits and drawbacks of a library Facebook page. The authors feel libraries have considered the appeal of using Web 2.0 as part of library services, and recognize the usefulness of communicating to their patrons through a familiar setting of social media, such as Facebook.
Kooy, B. K., & Steiner, S. K. (2010). Protection, not barriers using social software policies to guide and safeguard students and employees. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 50(1), 59-71. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,cpid&custid=morley&db=tfh&AN=53897402&site=ehost-live
The authors’ of this article had the experience of creating a social software policy for Georgia State University. Their guidelines ensured that services provided by librarians through social networking sites, such as Facebook, did not violate First Amendment rights nor hamper professionalism. They also addressed problems which may arise from patrons’ comment postings and issues of appropriateness. Although their guidelines were written for an academic library setting, the authors’ feel that the guidelines could be adapted to other institutions who wish to offer this type of services as well.
The authors’ of this article had the experience of creating a social software policy for Georgia State University. Their guidelines ensured that services provided by librarians through social networking sites, such as Facebook, did not violate First Amendment rights nor hamper professionalism. They also addressed problems which may arise from patrons’ comment postings and issues of appropriateness. Although their guidelines were written for an academic library setting, the authors’ feel that the guidelines could be adapted to other institutions who wish to offer this type of services as well.
"Library Bill of Rights". (2006). American Library Association. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/librarybill (Accessed October 28, 2014) Document ID: 669fd6a3-8939-3e54-7577-996a0a3f8952
The ALA states that libraries are forums for information and ideas in their communities. These Bill of Rights are intented to guide library services provided to patrons. The ALA firmly believes that no one should be excluded from theses services, ensuring access to information for all people.
The ALA states that libraries are forums for information and ideas in their communities. These Bill of Rights are intented to guide library services provided to patrons. The ALA firmly believes that no one should be excluded from theses services, ensuring access to information for all people.
Zimmer, M. (2013). Assessing the treatment of patron privacy in library 2.0 literature. Information Technology & Libraries, 32(2), 29-41. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=cookie,ip,url,cpid&custid=morley&db=tfh&AN=89856860&site=ehost-live
In this article, Zimmer addresses the concerns of Web 2.0 technology used in the library setting. This blend of traditional library services with more interactive technology has been labeled as Library 2.0. Because Web 2.0 promotes the open sharing of information, which can oftentimes be personal, using Library 2.0 may threaten the standard held beliefs of professional information ethics and upholding patron privacy. Zimmer argues that if libraries are to remain competitive alongside Google, Amazon, and Wikipedia, they must adapt by incorporating more online features in the library services.
In this article, Zimmer addresses the concerns of Web 2.0 technology used in the library setting. This blend of traditional library services with more interactive technology has been labeled as Library 2.0. Because Web 2.0 promotes the open sharing of information, which can oftentimes be personal, using Library 2.0 may threaten the standard held beliefs of professional information ethics and upholding patron privacy. Zimmer argues that if libraries are to remain competitive alongside Google, Amazon, and Wikipedia, they must adapt by incorporating more online features in the library services.
Selection of Resources
The selection process of these resources was based on their effectiveness in conveying the current and future trends of information ethics impacted by the most pressing influences today, such as technology. It is also intended that these resources serve as a guide to other professionals with a desire to learn more about research and ideas surrounding Library 2.0. The articles are all from scholarly publications or written by knowledgeable professionals in the field of library and information science.
No comments:
Post a Comment