Combating stigmas and enhancing accessibility
Policies are absolutely necessary in order to successfully implement social software in libraries. Meredith made a great point on someone else's blog that the level of policies should reflect the ability of users to edit the content. So totally open wikis will need stricter policies, while blogs without commenting capabilities may may only need light restrictions. Specifically, I'd like to address two areas where I think policies are most needed. Librarians need to create policies regarding their stance on social software, and libraries need to figure out how to enhance accessibility from library computers to social software resources with high technological needs.
First, there is still a stigma attached to social software. Many people view it as a recreational activity—something to do in your spare time. As soon-to-be librarians we know differently, but the majority of the population could not make a valid argument supporting the uses of these tools in the business, knowledge, or technology industries. In fact, a large portion of the US (and international) population does not even know what social software means.
Speaking for myself (even as an educated 2.0-ist!), if I hear “MySpace” my initial image is gossipy teens in a race for the most friends. If I hear online gaming my initial image is techno-geeks whose entire socialization takes place in Second Life. This is not to say that I think those types of people are the only people using these resources—I’ve learned better in this class. However, imagery is a strong tool and I have to admit I still associate these stereotypes with social software. Though many people may not share these exact same images with me, these ideas are prevalent enough to cause concern among library staff, teachers and parents who would rather their children and teens be studying or doing something “productive.” In other words, many people still don’t connect social software with academia.
Here is a challenge for us as soon-to-be librarians: educate library users, teachers, parents, and others of the practical (and academic) uses of social software. In the end, policies are necessary to be clear about our (librarians’) stance on social software as a valid, educational way for people to be spending their time (and library internet time).
Second, when it comes to using social software on library computers, policies should be made to address technology accessibility--mainly network and compatibility issues. The internet computers at my library have many restrictions: customers can’t download to the desktop, they can’t access any control settings—they can’t even right click! This makes it difficult to download pod or vodcasts (you need a portable drive) or change the visual/audio settings to enable social media online. Furthermore, it is doubtful that our simple (and slow) network could handle a lot of patrons playing high-memory games like Second Life.
Library administrators may want to consider adding “cast” workstations in branches that have pod and vodcasts pre-loaded so customers don’t need to access the internet to use them. Or maybe patrons could pay for an upgrade to enable download functions (although that goes against the “free” library, and may widen the digital divide). Whether it’s these policies or others, it is crucial that we meet the innovative online technologies we have studied this semester with innovative solutions so that we can physically provide them to our users.
