Evolution or Revolution?
This article has been especially helpful in terms of articles for my literature review!
Basically, this article summarizes a few different points of view that surround the concept of 2.0 tools:
- Revolutionary (what a brand new idea!)
- Evolutionary (we are expanding upon the basics, such as email is the same as letters and posts, just electronic)
- Miserable attempt at change (we fail to meet the users needs and expectations)
- Nothing unique about it - it is just another change, and has been met like any other changes in the past. Deal with it and move on!
I'd like to think it's somewhat evolutionary, with revolutionary ideas built in. I don't think it's a miserable attempt at change, but we do need to recognize what the users needs and expectations are and make sure we adapt to them! (The article also addresses some main principles of 2.0 tools, which are quite similar to the concept of a library in general; the library is everywhere, has no barriers, invites participation, and uses the best of a flexible breed of systems)
Pro's & Con's of Social Networking
I really appreciated how this article was set up, and loved the individual thoughts surrounding the issue. I agree the concept of social media is pretty "value neutral", so those using that particular media can express whatever views suit them (usually causes controversy, but that seems part of the point of their posts). I found it interesting that one of the quotes (and I apologize for lack of names, I forgot to jot them down when taking notes) suggested that young users can tell the fake posts, or scam, from the real ones, and the older generations probably take everything as truth. Sort of a "it's in print it must be true" ideal.
Lisa Barone did state that she does not think social media is just a fad, and I agree. I think it is here to stay, though the format and sites may change, the concept will be around forever (sort of an evolution of the newspaper!)
Old Media/New Media
This article addresses how blogs and social media relate and differ from traditional press. The statistics were pretty interesting, such as 50% of people rely on others they know for most of their news and information updates. I also found it amazing how all of the social media outlets utilize different types of news for their forums. Bloggers tend to be more emotional/social, Twitter has a lot of breaking news and stuff that does not get in the mainstream news (either at all or for at least a week), and YouTube is considered very serediptious(sp?) The attention spans are brief of those using social media and I even find myself switching between apps to stay updated and see what is going on. I have a horrible habit of checking Twitter at 2am when I wake up for a bathroom break (did I just admit that?)
Yes, my phone stays charging at my bedside throughout the night. It's the first thing I check in the morning and the last thing I check at night. And yes, if I'm up in the middle of the night, I check it then too! There may be important breaking news!
ReplyDeleteI always hear that students have a hard time determining solid information from the internet vs. fake information from the internet. My understanding is that many academic librarians use this idea to promote the library. The library is a place (either online or in the physical space) where you can receive valid information on whatever topic you are interested in.
DeleteColleen I also found the point about young users being able to tell apart real and fake/scam posts whereas older users have a harder time to be very interesting. And I have to agree that to some extent it is very true (I just picture some elderly person getting frazzled about trying to use the internet while inadvertently downloading some virus or sending money to a Nigerian prince in order to claim millions of dollars), however there are always the examples of the naive youth and the technology wiz grandparents.
ReplyDeleteColleen:
ReplyDeleteI liked the blog-like format of the "Pros and Cons" article also. Not only were the 1 paragraph comments easy to "digest", but it was interesting to read the differing opinions of the experts. I tried to get onto OurBlook.com to get some more information on the interview series, but it looks like that site is no longer available. I'm wondering if anyone else was able to access it successfully? I have to admit though that I could identify most closely with Matt Hinckley and his comment that "Too much information bouncing around at the speed of thought leads to too much information erroneously being 'reported' or accepted as 'fact'" as well as his concerns about "infotainment" diverting attention from the critical issues.