Web 2.0 and Library 2.0 as much of the buzz on the Internet will show, these are the memes, the new trends, what everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon about. What is all this about? Is it a new trend? Has it been around for awhile? Is it just a new name for an old thing? Is all the hype really worth it?
Yeah, well I guess the answer to all these questions is that it depends on who you are speaking with. There are a few critics that say anything from this is nothing new to web 2.0 is the death of modern culture (check out Andrew Keen’s new book, The Cult of the Amateur to get a perspective from this view).
Most in the technology circles, say that this is a way of explaining a variety of tools and philosophy that pushes for users having input. The idea of brining anyone in to have a say or to give one power to affect change on a website. Many of the most common tools include blogs, RSS feeds, social networking sites, open APIs, websites developed using AJAX and, of course, wikis. Actually to read through the literature about Web 2.0 you realize there are a number of core beliefs that run through it. Some of these beliefs include leveraging the resources of “the crowd” or essentially asking for the help of everyone, (crowd sourcing), platforms based off of web browsers rather than reliant on programs downloaded to one’s desktop, openness (such as open APIs, Google Maps being a good example, open source programs, such as Apache, and honesty, which is a big trend in corporate philosophy right now and has spawned a couple of movements, such as The Cluetrain Manifesto), the importance of the longtail, the importance and huge availibility of data and the whole idea of tools allowing all users to add value to it. Supposedly, the entrepreneur Tim O’Reilly is credited with first coining the term. In any case he wrote a great article explaining the ideas behind web 2.0 and why they differ from how the internet use to predominately function.
It would seem that Library 2.0 would simply be extending the ideas from web 2.0 to that of the library setting, but the article I read seemed to state otherwise and that there was no clear consensus of what Library 2.0 is. He also seemed to imply that too many librarians are latching on to the “library meme” and that this isn’t necesarrily a good idea. He makes a good point about libraries being about more than just places of information, but instead being places that provide a rich set of resources providing for the local community, such as Reading Programs, children’s centers, community rooms, art, music or lecture presentations; services that provide a richer community experience. Nevertheless, Library 2.0 if designed to follow some of the philosophy of web 2.0 could mean another way of adding value to the services offered to the library’s community. When you consider many libraries have to fight for funding, than offering a richer user experience and providing more ways in which the user can be a part of and benefit from the library doesn’t seem to be a bad idea.