Part A – Evaluative Statement
My reflection on “how social media creates a new life for information,” posted on Thursday, July 26, highlights the importance of the theme of ‘engagement’ which travels throughout the INF506 modules. Information output is no longer seen as a one dimensional path. It justifies how social media using freely accessible participatory mediums such as blogs and micro-blogging, alert and initiate users to new experiences and are “in return rewarded with personal feedback” (Hastie, 2011). Brookover (2007) confirms that reaching out to and having conversations with users through a medium they already know and enjoy, sends the message that they are aware of and are participating in trends that matter to them.
Youtube is a social media method of how people can produce, publish and broadcast any content and be rewarded by the number of views and the quantity of responses and comments. The social networking environment has provided opportunities for people to connect to a more extensive group providing a diverse range of information.
However as Twitter can broadcast opinions from the passionate or the qualified commentator, it can also be a very crowded place on the Web. How to screen content is a major issue as even good sources can become diluted with trivial information. Inspiring me with social networking information and resources for this subject and allowing me to engage with other online communities I subscribed to Jeff Bullas tweets, RSS feeds from Mashable, and the subject’s Delicious bookmarking application, giving me a steady mix of news on digital innovation.
My post on Wednesday, September 5, establishes how libraries use social media to support and offer information services to their users. Like the label Web 2.0, libraries too have been given a new technological model to enhance their library service; termed as Library 2.0. Casey & Savastinuk (2006) explain that Library 2.0 is a “user-centred change” and a “combination of users participating in the creation of the virtual services they want” (pp. 3). Rather than a one dimensional approach to accessing information, users are invited to participate, evaluate, create and choose social networking technologies to assist them in their education or curiosity.
The advent of Web 2.0 social networking and social media tools has allowed libraries to combine them into what is called a ‘Mashup’. It is evident here in my post where the State Library of Queensland’s Web page presents a combination or ‘Mashup’ of blogs, podcasts, video blogs, Flickr, Twitter and Facebook in one location for easy viewing, ultimately creating an enhanced service for their users.
Another collaborative Library 2.0 application that is promoted from a library’s collection is the union of Flickr and the National Library of Australia, allowing users to upload, download, curate and edit historical images from their websites. Otherwise known as “Creative Commons (CC)” it does not harbour any copyright restrictions in the digital environment, allowing the public to input informative text to these once inaccessible archives. Social networking tools like Flickr and Historypin allow the library’s collection to grow in information value because of encouraged user participation.
The emergence of these active participants and their sense of ownership to data could also be described as a ‘folksonomy’. Hart (2010) describes a folksonomy as users who provide information and categorise that information into a flexible searchable method.
My post on Thursday, September 13 outlined the importance of organisations formulating a social media policy. From studying the subject INF506 it has become evident that the social networking platform is an integral part of an organisations customer relationship and communication plan. Just as an organisation will analyse the effectiveness of their current and potential social media tools to facilitate communication with users, their social media policy must also be constantly evolving. Flint (2012) states that until expectations of how to use it become commonly understood employers should very regularly review their policy.
As libraries are interacting more into people’s lives, policies regarding computer usage are required. Two main points that I would emphasise for organisations and users engaging in social networking applications are:
1. Acceptable use of online behaviour and information
2. Copyright, privacy and the disclosure of personal information
Outlining and promoting to users a ‘do as we do’ benchmark can assist in protecting both the organisation and participant in what is acceptable or unacceptable (Fleet, 2009). Fleet (2009) confirms that “this empowers both the organisation and the client, promoting authenticity and assisting with information to the members of that community” (Powerpoint slide 3).
Berners-Lee (2012) the inventor of the Web offers sage advice for user data and ownership on Web 2.0 technologies, explaining that "whatever social site, wherever you put your data, you should make sure that you can get it back and get it back in a standard form, regularly” (pp.11).
Berners-Lee, T. (2012). Tim Berners-Lee: demand your data from Google and Facebook. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/18/tim-berners-lee-google-facebook
The only limits on what your blog covers are those imposed by your blogger’s imaginations. Library Journal. Retrieved from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6497263.html
Casey, M., & Savastinuk, L. (2006). Library 2.0: Service for the Next Generation Library. Library Journal. Retrieved October 2, 2012 from http://www.libraryjournal.com/article/CA6365200.html
Fleet, D. (2009). Social Media Policies E-book. Available http://www.slideshare.net/davefleet/social-media-policies-ebook
Flickr. National Library of Australia commons’ photostream. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.flickr.com/photos/national_library_of_australia_commons/
Flint. E. (2012). Social media: Help and hindrance. HCA magazine. Retrieved from http://www.hcamag.com/news/latest-news/social-media-hrs-role-in-monitoring-the-reputational-risks/142800
Hart, L. (2010). Meeting the challenge. In D. Parkes & G. Walton (Eds.), Web 2.0 and Libraries: Impacts, technologies and trends (pp.171-182). Oxford, UK: Chandos Publishing.
Hastie, C. (2011). Midwives and Social Media. Midwifery News, (2011, autumn). Retrieved from http://scu-au.academia.edu/CarolynHastie/Papers/1000482/Midwives_and_Social_Media
Mashable. (2012). Social media. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/
State Library of Queensland. (2012). Social media. Retrieved from http://www.slq.qld.gov.au/about-us/social-media
Twitter. (2012). About. Retrieved from https://twitter.com/about
Youtube.(n.d). About Youtube. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/t/about_youtube