Meghan's MLIS Blog

When I read through the prompt for this week’s post on the future of social media, I was immediately conflicted as to what I should discuss. Independent of libraries, there is a great deal that can be said on where social media is going. My conflict arises with how this future social media may work within libraries. I still feel that many libraries are struggling to incorporate social media as it exists today. Attempting to contemplate not only the future of social media but how that future will work within library systems is staggering. I will attempt to articulate my thoughts one point at a time, and hopefully I will be able to come to a conclusion by the end.

Where is Social Media Going …

Looking at the trends in social media right now (both good and bad), I feel that we are drifting towards an extremely personalized social media experience. Over the course of any given day, I may use Nike+ to track my running distance and pace, GasBuddy to tell me where the cheapest gas is around my apartment, and Facebook to see what some of my friends are doing that day. These are all Web 2.0 applications that can be tailored for individual users and can instantly provide facts that are pertinent to that specific user. I think we will be seeing more and more devices and applications geared towards creating a personalized experience for individual users.

As discussed in Jamie Hinks’ piece “Six Things You Should Know About the Internet of Things”, we will also likely see a rise in connected technology. Data will move seamlessly from device to device, application to application. Instead of steadfastly competing against each other, I think we will see a rise in partnerships. This means that it will become more and more necessary to incorporate Web 2.0 tools into your life. Citizens will want to get the door lock that can interact with a sprinkler timer system and light timer programmed to your typical wake and sleep cycle. It all sounds remarkably convenient.

Because of this, though, I think we may also see a rise in privacy concerns. It is highly doubtful that the personal information held by these networked devices will stay private. If that is the case, then who else gets to see this information? Who can use this information? Web 2.0 tools have been created faster than many of us imagined possible. I think government officials, businessmen, and individuals will all have to seriously consider what it means to allow these tools to play such a large part in our lives and our world. I think regulations will be absolutely necessary.

Me, Future Social Media, and the Library Makes Three

So where do libraries fit in to this Web 2.0 future? I’m still not all together sure about this. I think it is becoming clear that our current society doesn’t just enjoy social media, it has become an integral and irreplaceable part of their lives. They don’t simply expect others to have a high understanding of Web 2.0 tools, they demand it. Because of this, libraries must absolutely adapt to using social media tools for both outreach and extended library services. It will be integral to keeping libraries relevant in the eyes of our users. We must approach this future with caution, though. Libraries have traditionally stood in solidarity with those who support intellectual freedom and privacy. Without a thorough understanding of privacy laws in relation to Web 2.0 tools, we could inadvertently open our patrons’ endeavors. Is this something we want to allow? The face of the library could potentially change with the adoption of Web 2.0 tools. It will require a great deal of planning, waiting, and understanding before any of us can be sure.  

Over the course of this summer session, we have been asked to look in to a wide range of social media applications and how different libraries use them. I discovered that putting a social media platform into affect for a library system requires far more thought than ‘what platform do want to use and who is going to post for us?’

How we manage our personal social media accounts does not always make for a successful library social media account. After a summer of course readings and my own investigation, here are some of the things I have found that make for successful (and unsuccessful) social media accounts.

The Good

1. Responsive: Library social media accounts should be able to act as another service point. This means that when users post to our social media accounts, be it in the form of a comment or a question, library staff should respond in a prompt manner. We want our users to know that their thoughts are being heard and that we care about what they are saying!

2. Connect to the Community: Find accounts for other libraries, other businesses in your community, even local government accounts! This will benefit your account in a few ways. Firstly, doing this can help to provide you with ideas on how to maintain and manage your own social media account. Secondly, this will show that you have ties to the community and care about more than just your library. Thirdly, this can provide a networking opportunity for your library. You can forge connections with other businesses and possibly link with them for promotional opportunities. 

3. Posts Reach Beyond the Library (with a touch of humor): You will want to create library posts that are not solely based on library announcements and library events. While it is great to use your account as an informative tool, these posts typically are flat and our users do not connect with them. It is important to also create posts that our users want to view. Humorous posts make us look friendly and relatable. Another strategy to keep users engaged is by creating ...

4. Interactive Posts: Interactive posts are a great way to see that users are engaging with your content. It also shows that you value the opinions of your patrons and users. Rather than just forcing your opinion at your users, you are looking for feedback and a collaboration of ideas. I would also suggest creating raffle posts for prizes as a way to “reward” users for engaging with your content.

The Bad

1. Posts are Not Interactive:  When you post nothing but posts about library events and messages, it suits your needs but not necessarily your patrons. You want posts to engage with them and cater to them to a certain degree. Users are looking for posts where they can express their opinions and feel valued by their library.

2. Posts are Rushed:  While it is important to post frequently enough that you stay relevant with your users, those posts need to be well thought out. It is obvious when posts are rushed. They lack a central idea and can look sloppy. They need to stay in line with your library’s values. I would suggest using slow times in your library to discuss ideas for posts and come up with rough ideas. Have a plan and take your time!

3. No One Responds to Questions (or responds poorly): If your social media account is supposed to act as another service point, it is crucial that someone respond to online queries. More importantly, though, they need to respond appropriately. While it is acceptable to use a more relaxed tone, staff members must keep in mind that they are representing the library. Responses must be grammatically correct and have a tone of professionalism. This will help ensure that you remain an authoritative source of information. 

4. Single Person Managing Account:  Your social media account should have a unified message; however, you still need more than one person trained on managing your social media account. This will allow for a collaboration of ideas for your account and will also ensure there is always someone able to manage your account. If your main staff member is sick or on vacation, there will be a team behind them trained on how to handle your social media account.

‘Best Practices’

Ultimately, your library should have a manual of social media best practices for staff members to follow. This document will ensure that your library has a unified message and goal as they approach social media. This document, though, will be fluid and subject to change. You will likely change your goals, change your approach, and possibly change technologies. This document will give you the groundwork for your work. 

With all of this in mind, go forward and help your library create a successful social media presence! 

Costill, Albert. (2014). Social Media 101: 30 Things You Should Avoid Doing on Social Media. Search Engine Journal. Retrieved from http://www.searchenginejournal.com/social-media-101-30-things-avoid-social-media/109392/

Library management will want to see solid numbers to support creating and maintaining social media accounts. By solid numbers, we mean a breakdown of costs to maintain the social media accounts, your goals for these accounts, and the productivity and reach of these accounts. Some of the metrics you can use to justify your library’s social media tools are: activity, audience, engagement, referral, and ROI (return on investment) (King, p. 29). Activity metrics track the number of posts created by staff members; they look at how staff are spending their time. Audience metrics track the number of new followers each month. By subtracting the previous month’s followers from the current month’s followers, libraries can see how many new followers have been gained each month. Engagement metrics track the number of likes, sharing, commenting, and link clicking occurs on your social media page. Referral metrics track the number of times users follow links from one of your social media posts to the desired page. Lastly, ROI metrics track how these social media accounts actual help the library achieve their goals. This can be done in many ways such as measuring the number of visits to the online site per social media post or by measuring the number of interactions with users per post.

As an example, I will look at Instagram and how a library can measure their success using this tool. We would first need to decide what the library is looking to accomplish in establishing and maintaining an Instagram account. Our goals for Instagram would be to (1) make the library look cool and relevant and (2) encourage viewers to visit and use the library.

Within the app itself, there are not any metrics available (p. 29). While libraries can track the number of likes and comments on each individual post, this must be done by hand and does not look at the number of shares or other more complicated statistics. There are some free online applications such as Iconosquare and Klear that can be used to track metrics for Instagram. While there are options for additional fee-based metrics, these applications would be a great way to reduce the overall cost of your social media maintenance. 

Iconosquare can record the number of likes received, your top “liked” photos, and your average number of likes and comments per photo. It can create charts to look at your content posted, your engagement growth over months, and analyze your community based on likes and shares. 

Klear can identify influencers within Instagram, add them to a private list, and track all of the different times that they mention your organization. It can create charts to track your account’s activity, popularity, and how many people respond to your posts. 

These are just a few examples of what can be done with a very specific social media tool. Other platforms, such as Facebook and Pinterest, are compatible with other analytic tools. Each library will have different goals and thus look to track different metrics. It may take trial and error to find the tool to help you meet your library’s goals, but metrics are the way to make those goals a reality.

For those of you who have read my previous posts, you already know that I think social tools are absolutely essential in keeping libraries relevant to our users. It is no longer a question of “if” libraries should use social media tools, but rather “how” should libraries use social media tools. These tools can help libraries connect and provide support to their users quickly and efficiently. Despite the benefits, these tools will be ineffective if they are not properly marketed to users. 

My first thought when thinking of my library’s social media accounts was that I would want to organize a team to manage the accounts and almost immediately jump into planning what we would like to post. D. L. King details a a slightly different timeline for marketing a successful social media tool. King argues that you should: create your social media account(s), set goals for your social media endeavors, listen to your users to determine what they want, create a team to manage the accounts, start adding content to your accounts, and lastly analyze the effectiveness of your results (2015, p. 33). While I wish I could disagree with King’s order of events, they make perfect sense. There is no point in assembling a team *before* you know what you need to post for your users. In the same way, there is no point in maintaining a social media account it does not meet any of your users’ needs.

I think another important marketing tool would be to provide non-library information as well. For social media tools such as Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram lend themselves well to humorous and engaging posts. Nancy Dowd argues that social media tools created by libraries are not being viewed. One of the ways we can increase our chances of drawing in viewers, though, is by adding posts that our users want to see (2013). Humorous posts, trivia posts that allow for engagement, and reposts from other pages have all received high user ratings.

While this will work for some libraries, though, it may not work for all. Social media is evolving at an amazingly accelerated rate. Libraries will need to be continuously analyzing the effectiveness of their social media and marketing strategies in order to ensure they continue to suit the needs of their users. The more resources libraries can commit to working with their social media, the better!

Dowd, Nancy. (2013). Social Media: Libraries Are Posting, but Is Anyone Listening? Library Journal. Retrieved from http://lj.libraryjournal.com/2013/05/marketing/social-media-libraries-are-posting-but-is-anyone-listening/#_

I was having a conversation with my mother, a children’s librarian, about quandaries we each face in regards to “service animals” in the library (I swear this tangent will have a purpose). We have faced patrons attempting to bring in service parrots, service rats, even a service snake! My mother’s library adhere’s to the National Service Animal Registry’s definition of service animals, so they only accept service dogs or miniature horses. When I asked when they would ever expect to see a service miniature horse in the library, and she responded “better safe than sorry!”. This is the mentality libraries need to have in regards to patron privacy and how/when to protect that privacy. It is better to have the policy and not have to use it than to be caught with no policy at all. 

To a certain degree, collecting data in a library is inevitable. Within the building, patrons are using library-owned technology and library-owned materials. Once they enter the building, those patrons are tied to the library. We need to track what sites were visited, for how long, and what searches were done. Even when patrons are not in the physical building, if they are using the library’s catalog and are viewing online materials, we keep basic data on what was viewed, when, and how many times. It is also important to collect extra data from our users about what their interests are and what services they would like to see. This data keeps libraries relevant and in touch with their users. As Michael Zimmer describes in his article “Assessing the Treatment of Patron Privacy in Library 2.0 Literature”, libraries have a plethora of tools they are able to offer their patrons now including chat with a librarian instant messaging, personalized reading shelves that patrons can create online, patron-crafted reviews of library materials, and staff-patron connections through social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram (p.30).

The problem that we as librarians face in this modern age is that each of these tools to enhance user experience requires data gathering. Libraries from the Golden Years had ways to ensure that the information they gathered on patrons was short-term and was cleared after a certain amount of time. Web 2.0 tools requires information gathering that goes beyond what libraries have had to deal with before. The question libraries face is no longer “will we choose to incorporate Web 2.0 tools” but rather “how will we choose to incorporate Web 2.0 tools”. This means that we need to develop new policies for these tools and prepare for a future with Web 2.0. 

I think what librarians first need to do is draw a clear distinction between library tools that gather information for the library (library catalog, self hold system, feedback form) and web tools used within the library that gather information for second parties (Facebook, Instagram, Goodreads). We can help protect the privacy of our patrons on all fronts, but we want to be particularly careful with library tools. Trina J. Magi has some excellent ideas on how to protect patron privacy as they relate to library tools. Both within the building and online, libraries should advertise their adherence to ALA ethics and privacy policies, do not place patron holds out on public shelves for others to see, and be cautious of law enforcement within the building (p. 39). Data that is gathered for the library is our personal responsibility to protect. We want to be very clear about what we are doing with it, how long we will keep it, and how we will dispose of it. For outside tools, we cannot control who stores that information or for how long. Michael Gressel still thinks that there are things that we can do as librarians to assist our patrons. He states, “The library could provide guides on how to stay private online, or create individual “Frequently Asked Question” pamphlets about privacy on individual websites” (p.140). We could also link with outside groups that support information privacy to think up new tools to provide for our patrons to support their right to information privacy. 

With Web 2.0 comes Library 2.0. Our online services continue to grow, and, with this growth, come all the privacy complications associated with the digital age. It is a fine line to walk between providing helpful services and turning into a data gathering corporation. I think there will be many misses before libraries can find the right balance. It will be an uphill battle. When it comes down to it, though, our patrons expect us to provide them with Web 2.0 services. Going forward with this given, it is our responsibility to maintain our standards of privacy protection as we work with these tools.

Gressel, M. (2014). Are Libraries Doing Enough to Safeguard Their Patrons’ Digital Privacy?. Serials Librarian, 67(2), 137-142.

Magi, T. J. (2013). A Fresh Look at Privacy-Why Does It Matter, Who Cares, and What Should Librarians Do about It?. Indiana Libraries, 32(1), 37-41.

I was lucky enough to attend the annual ALA conference in San Francisco this last weekend. Among the many presentations I attended was one hosted by the group called #critlib. They discussed many fictions that currently exist within library systems. One that struck me (and one that I feel is applicable to this week’s discussion), is the fact that there is a heavy focus on practice and experiences. There is no longer a heavy focus on theory, the knowledge behind the work that we do. While they spoke about this in the context of library staffing, I feel the concept is also applicable to learners in a Web 2.0 environment.

There are many benefits to social media learning. One of these is that learners have access to a world of information. They are no longer limited by the physical boundaries of their position. Learners are able to gather information on hobbies, current events, literature, and more simply by accessing their home computer. This means that formal education is no longer required for learning to occur. Learning can occur at any time and in most any location. It no longer occurs in a straight line, information being passed from an instructor to a student. Learning in Web 2.0 looks like, well, a web. Information goes back and forth between learners; it is an exchange of information. The last benefit I will discuss is the fact that online learning can help to balance the scales of learning. While institutional education is still out of reach for some, many people have access to Web 2.0 tools and can work towards an education previously thought unattainable. 

Web 2.0 also poses challenges to users. This learner driven learning does not always mean that proper background information is taught. This concept is discussed in Sillipigni Conway and Randall’s article “Why the Internet is More Attractive than the Library”. As is stated in this article, “they [students] really are going through very quickly, and they are not looking at the authenticity of the information” (p. 44). Information literacy appears to be on the way out. Because any learner can search information online and find results, they are tempted to mark themselves as experts. This quick browsing of results looks for content only, though, rather than the quality and validity of that information. This easy access to open information has also lead to problems with copyright. With information being so easily accessible, it is hard to recall where certain pieces came from and who should be credited. This failure to give credit where it is due is not excused by a lack of knowledge, though. Copyright laws are also easily available on the web.

Back to the origin of this discussion, my #critlib meeting. They argue that librarians should not be hired on just for experience alone. Experience in library work will only get you so far. Theory, information on library practices, user services, etc., is the skeleton that holds all of that experience together. Our users need to know how to pick out primary resources, secondary sources, and tertiary sources in order to conduct the research they may need for assignments. They need to learn how to look for meaning in an entire piece rather than attempting to gather meaning from a brief snippet.

I think social media and Web 2.0 can be amazing tools to promote learning, but we as educators need to develop tools that can help our students with their learning. We need to create tools of our own that are as easy to navigate as Wikipedia and provide excellent summaries like Google Books. Web 2.0 can provide great tools, and I think it is time for libraries to embrace these tools and begin using them in education.

Kyung-Sun Kim1, k., Sei-Ching Joanna Sin2, j., & Eun Young Yoo-Lee3, e. (2014). Undergraduates' Use of Social Media as Information Sources. College & Research Libraries, 75(4), 442-457.

As someone who used to work at UC Santa Barbara’s Davidson Library, I find their use of and interaction with social media to be pretty fascinating. Their patron base is diverse, consisting of a range of students, faculty, and staff of varying ages and ethnicities. Their majors range from hard sciences to the arts. Because students are frequently on the go and do not commit much time to reading lengthy posts, the library focuses heavily on creating short, concise posts to disperse information.

The most obvious choice to do this is with Twitter. The library crafts posts that are 140 characters or less to let patrons know about library events, collections, and services.This page was created within the library by full-time staff members. The library controls all of the content on this page. While the posts are short, there is a standard for grammar. Sometimes library posts are favorited and replied to, but not frequently.

Another page created by the library is their Facebook page. These posts are a little bit longer. On the Facebook page, patrons can also find information about events occurring in the community or around campus that the library supports and wants to encourage participation for. There are many photos used and there is still the standard for grammar and images used. Again, these posts are open for responses and “likes”, but the feedback does not necessarily reflect the views of the patrons who use the library frequently. 

This is where UC Santa Barbara library staff starts to drift. The students, ever fans of social media, have created their own pages that relate to the library. This example “Spotted: UCSB Library” is a page sponsored and maintained by mystery students. The posts often describe things that are irritating people about the building, the staff, other students, and to make connections between students. In case you could not guess from the cover photo, standards for grammar and submissions are lax. While this page is not sponsored by the library, though, library staff members are willing to use it to gain insight into patron library satisfaction. While students are not always honest in or responsive to formal surveys sent out by the library, they are honest (almost brutally so) in their online posts. These posts have led to discoveries of power outages in certain areas, disruptive patrons, and ways to improve customer service. This page provides a glimpse into what our patrons think. This observance occurred within a single department, though, and was not checked on a larger scale.

The UCSB Library has found a great way to connect with their patrons locally, but I feel the next step would be to find ways to connect with a wider base of “patrons”. Many libraries have created Instagram accounts to post photos of their collection, building, and community. The New York Public Library’s account (shown above) has just such an account. Even though I have never been to their library and probably won’t in the near future, I am amazingly intrigued by their photos and what they tell me of their community. As a potential patron and as a fellow librarian, I love to look at these photographs that encapsulate a community and what the library means to that community.

The first thing I thought of when prompted for a tool I use as a professional is Google. Google has a bank of “Google Apps” that allow individuals to collaborate with a large number of people. These apps include Google+, Google Docs, Google Hangout, Google Calendar, and Google Photos. After you add someone to your circle, it is amazingly easy to share a wide array of information with them. I think Google’s Apps definitely meet the 7 descriptors that Tim O’Reilly says define Web 2.0 and set it apart from Web 1.0 in his article “What is Web 2.0”.

Google Apps have proven to be an invaluable tool that we use at Stanford’s Green Library. Google is used to share documents, spreadsheets, and questionnaires. It also sponsors a blog for our department. We can control who has access to these things and whether or not they can make changes. Typically the documents we share are for training purposes, so only 1 person is allowed to make changes while the others are allowed to view.

In thinking about this, though, I also realized that I use Google extensively for academics and my personal life as well. For school, I can share group documents with others so that we can easily collaborate from different points across the country. We can set up a “Hangout” session in order to collaborate synchronously and open shared documents to collaborate further on. In my personal life, Google is a tool I use for instant messaging, to sync family calendars, and to easily share photos. We provide comments back and forth within Google. This saves us money on our phone plans and allows us to communicate across the state. I’ve included an amazing photo of my sister and I using Google Hangouts. It was a LOT of fun playing with the accessories.

Using this Google example, I can see that my professional use of social media is geared largely towards sharing documents and spreadsheets with large groups of people. Part of why I use Google to spread this information is the ease with which I can send the same message to a large number of people. Within the Google Tools world, I use Google Drive and Google Docs to send them as alerts; I’m not necessarily looking for feedback or responses through social media. These exchanges of information include formal language and extremely structured documents. I will only use my work computer to access social media tools for work.

For my personal use, though, social media is largely used to share multi-media such as calendars and photos. They are more personal documents spread to a small group of people. For personal social media, I value the ability to exchange responses as they relate to a single image. I largely use Google Plus, Google Hangouts, and Google Photos for my personal use. My language is much more informal. To use these tools for personal use, I not only use my home computer, but I will access them on-the-go using my tablet and smart phone.

Google’s apps are the only tool that I use both at work and at home. Despite this lengthy explanation of the different ways I use Google Apps, I’m sure there are many more tools within Google that I still don’t know about! Maybe one day I will have time to look in to them all. At the rate that Google is releasing new tools, though, I’ll try not to hold my breath.

Hello, everyone! My name is Meghan, and I currently live in Fremont, CA (Bay Area). The fuzzy friend you can see in my avatar is my dog Nik, named for Nikola Tesla. He was born blind and deaf, so he plays fetch using nothing but his nose. Watching him play fetch is much more exciting when you know he can’t see the ball. This summer I will be taking classes and am hoping to make a quick trip to Disneyland with my boyfriend! It will be a day filled with food and riding Splash Mountain.