@PPL Exactly. The number of people willing to learn HTML is small. The number willing to learn cataloging fewer.

Bruce is so right about technical improvements need to come and why. But it’s easier to slap together a Facebook page than to actually understand how a catalog works.

There is the argument that most libraries have only a few hundred “friends” in social networks and thus the program is unsuccessful. However, how many library programs have attracted a few hundred patrons? I think most libraries would call that amount of participation a joyous success.

Along the same train of thought, nobody is “friending” the library. Would a library develop a storytime program and not promote it? Having a large number of “friends” takes a lot of work, just like having a lot of participants in a library program. You have to go get them. I don’t think any librarian decides to have a program and then neglects to tell people about it and hope people show up. I have found that when a onepointopian develops a facebook page, once its complete, they simply sit back and complain that they have no one friending them and then pat themselves on their back for having no participation in their program, thus proving them right. If I made the argument that nobody goes to storytime, then make a storytime program and then don’t tell anyone, would you argue that I’m right?

Outreach. You argue that the statistics about how many people are using social networks is irrelevant. However, libraries perform outreach to their communities at schools, churches, youth groups, and many other places with far fewer participants. In fact, some libraries employ someone fulltime to perform outreach to organizations that only have a couple of dozen participants in the crowd. But, why do libraries go to schools, churches, and other community groups? I would argue that they do this to raise awareness and support for the library in the form of social capital. The same holds true for utilizing 2.0 technology as a tool for outreach.

It’s an opportunity for dialog. Having a place on the web where patrons can ask questions and converse with the library in a dialog allow the library to receive feedback on programs, services, and needs.

There’s lots of good things here. For one, I’d wondered whether anybody actually cares whether the library is on FaceBook. Apparently not. And as a lover and user of libraries, I couldn’t give a rat’s ass, either. I’m not sure what the point is.

I’ve always felt that libraries should concern themselves more with the important stuff, like the things AL listed above that people come to use them for. DVDs and things are nice, but the focus should really be on services that are not easily found everywhere in strip malls or red boxes and McDonald’s. (I’m still upset that my local library reduced the reference section to make more room for DVDs.)

I’d done some reading on the Library of Congress, which was founded for the weighty purpose of keeping our lawmakers and officials informed of, well, anything they need to know. That’s important! And I just thought it should be true on a local level, too. Where does the mayor, the city council, or the county-level lawmakers go to learn about issues facing them and coming up for a vote? Well, in my own world with bunnies playing in sunlit meadows, I’d like to think they actually read SOMETHING and become informed before they make new laws for the rest of us. And that’s something that maybe local libraries could, and should, jump at and promote. Maybe even specifically going to the local rulers with offers of personalized research assistance.

I’ve picked up books from book displays that were on topics that I didn’t specifically come for, and was glad I saw them.

Bingo. If we want to get all Web 2.0…we should do it in spaces and places that library users actually frequent. The frequent the library catalog because they have to.

I think Facebook/Twitter/Etc in libraries is a misguided attempt by librarians who don’t understand how their public engages with them. These social media might work for private sector institutions (sales, tickets, etc) but I can’t imagine anyone but mothers following the library on Twitter to see the story times. And that info is easily published on the library’s homepage.

The one thing about Amazon is how it already has most fo the data collected and placed in the appropriate database – even if they are a little weak on putting all the book bibliography records together.

I have bought way too many books now from Libraries selling their withdrawn books through Amazon to count. So libraries are already using Amazon and using it well. The worst part about full integration would be librarinas selling the books rather than checking them out…We’ll see what passes.

Re Amazon – I can have better luck with catalog keyword than if I put in one wrong letter in Amazon. Re the user comments – that’s JUST what we want, a bunch of misspelling trolls.

Here’s what I don’t get about “2.0″. 20 years ago, we could have had the “Library Journal” group on Compuserve (and before that, we could have had a BBS, etc.) and anyone could have created a topic (equivalent to today’s blog). How are we making the Internet more participatory, when we now have gatekeepers (aka blog-writers) who can set the agenda and delete, not only trolling and obscenity, but any dissent? (Not refering to AL or LJ, but look at what happens on political blogs.)

Likewise, guestbooks were all the rage on those old “1.0″ static Web pages on Angelfire and Geocities in 1995. What makes a blog with comments so fundamentally different from an Angelfire page with a guestbook?

“What I don’t understand is how Library catalogs can be so far behind the Amazon Interface Model.”

I have the same issue. I can completely butcher a title in Amazon and get the right result, but if I miss a hyphen in Polaris, I get the “No results” screen. And even if I do successfully search for “A Book”, I get the “Did you mean Ah Bock?” message before my results.

All Amazon needs to do is add in a Library Application [call numbers, local holdings, locations, item records, etc] and I think they could effectivley kill OCLC in about a decade…if not less.

Though I do love each and every one of our 5,500+ FB fans, as has been observed elsewhere here, it is a drop in the bucket compared to our catalog users.