Netflix will soon offer “Watch Instantly” streaming only subscription plans. Smart. This is a way for them to not only increase revenue but also it is also a way for them to transition people though the death of physical formats. Netflix seems to have their stuff together. They’re friendly. Their website is easy to use. And with this move they’re trying to ensure that they can deliver content to consumers in the future.

Libraries are having trouble transitioning to this content anywhere/anytime future. You’ve heard the chestnut about publishers not allowing for the creation of libraries if they weren’t already in existence. This is exactly what is happening with purely 1s & 0s content. Libraries are getting squeezed out of the picture because of DRM legislation coming from the content industry. Libraries are left with only some good and popular digital content and we’re left to provide it in less convenient ways.

Meanwhile, other content providers are making their stuff easier to get at. Netflix has partnered with the New York Times and Rotten Tomatoes to include Netflix widgets on movie review pages. Without leaving the NYT website it’s possible to add a movie to your queue or even start watching. This is nothing revolutionary but it does add another level of convenience.

Netflix isn’t the only company making content delivery and purchasing easier. Other data-these-days-is-sure-portable news is the release of the Amazon Kindle application for the iPhone, enabling people to buy and read any Kindle book on Apple’s device. The app is free and books transfers back and forth just like on a Kindle.

Have you taken the time recently to think about your access to content? Holy smokes, the situation is absolutely incredible. The iTunes Music Store is the world’s largest music retailer, newspapers are shuttering and magazines are going web only. I can download 80% of music and movies I want for free? Are you kidding? No? Awesome! I can download Elsevier’s complete Referex Engineering Collection? Don’t mind if I do.

It is Going to be Okay

All of this isn’t to say I’m pessimistic about the future of libraries. It really doesn’t matter if we stop providing content in the same way. It might be the best thing to happen to public libraries. Yes, there will be some access equality issues that need sorting, but if we don’t have to concern ourselves with making sure people have access to content we’ll have more time to create excellent programs and experiences based around content and conversation.

For this reason I’m really pleased with the direction that integrating games into libraries has taken. Some libraries are circulating games and that’s great, but the real emphasis has been on providing shared experiences by gathering people together at hosted events. Connecting people in this way has more of a positive impact than simply sending someone home with a disc. It adds value to th content too. So while I’m pleased that public libraries are enjoying increased use because of the current economic situation I hope that we use the attention wisely by talking about more than book and movie circ stats or even computer use.

If anything, we should consider books, movies, music and computers loss leaders and show people what we can really do for them once we’re lucky enough to have them in our buildings.

It is really neat how much of a role the library is playing in the City of Birmingham’s revitalization plan.

The Library of Birmingham, opening in 2013, will occupy a prime site on Centenary Square, the city’s largest public square, acting as the flagship for the regeneration of Birmingham, and celebrating the ‘Global City with a Local Heart’.

Sited between the 1970s Birmingham Repertory Theatre and the 1930s Baskerville House, the new Library of Birmingham will “bring the spoken and written word together to inspire creativity and discovery.” [via]

See libraryofbirmingham.com for more.

The comments are worth a read. The post did breeze over (as Eli put it) the real issue of what we’ve been calling innovation for the past few years. A more fair title for the post would have been ‘The Case Against “Innovation” in Libraries.’

In large part we’ve been “meeting users in their space” by using social software stuff. Which is necessary and great, don’t get me wrong. I’m all for it (when it solves a problem). I’m just not sure that it is all that innovative. Meanwhile, other organizations have been doing research and meeting people’s information needs.

This is what I’m trying to say:

Libraries are a bit top heavy with somewhat aimless experimentation. Learning/experimenting/playing is great. And necessary. Etc. Speaking broadly we’ve done a good job developing those skills. However, learning/experimenting/playing shouldn’t be the end goal. Meeting the needs of our users is the end goal. Collectively we now have nice tools at our disposal. A missing piece though is how we figure out how and when to apply the tools.

Forthcoming: How libraries can transform into something more stable and meaningful:

Eli’s Twitter account will probably have updates.

But like I said before, libraries might not provide content in the future & it’s okay. So come on everybody. Create some meaning for your library beyond shuffling books around.

Let’s get to it.

We’re going to do a few site visits, including some Web enabled all-terrain buses that travel around Mexico providing access. Does that sound as cool to anyone else as it does to me?

Here I am in full turista mode at Zempoala, where Cortés headed after arriving in Mexico.

[via]

…

Some people passionately disagreed with me in the comments on last week’s “libraries might not provide content in the future & it’s okay.” I remain unconvinced that it won’t be okay. An ideal future? Maybe not. The way we’d like to envision our future? No way. We’d love to be delivering content to people in convenient ways. A nevertheless viable and perhaps more meaningful future? Could be.

Of the comments questioning a future without digital library content there was only one real articulation of why such a future wouldn’t work.

Why would I want to go to a library to exchange thoughts and ideas about materials that I have found and (using the examples you have cited in the first six paragraphs) paid for outside of the library?

… I don’t need a library to do this this kind of thing.

It simply does not make sense to think that people who use the web for materials provision will then travel to the library to “share their experiences about those materials.”

My experiences with the hundreds of people I’ve hosted film discussion groups, book discussions, gaming events and tech training classes for tell a different story. Hearing about playing miniature golf and ninja tag in their library tells a different story. The restaurant on the top of OBA tells a different story.

While it is certainly true that people don’t *need* a library to do the above things, they still chose the library. So it makes perfect sense to me that people will congregate at the library even if there isn’t an eBook to check out. Even increasingly so if libraries concentrate on becoming excellent public spaces that help people navigate their personal content consumption and create stories. (And let’s be a bit real here. Like Nate Hill said in his comment, this isn’t likely going to be an all or nothing situation.)

There’s another take on why people might increasingly use public spaces instead of private ones. They might not have a choice. In a Kunstler-esque future everyone will be forced to go back to using local public spaces because there won’t be a Starbucks on the corner in which to gather. Libraries are sustainable in this sense.

One more thing. In a comment Tony Tallent wrote:

Libraries–in all formats including electronic, can be a place where we ‘do’ not simply talk about what we did from home.

I agree and if it’s okay with him I think one of my new mottos will be: Libraries are places of doing.

Netflix will soon offer “Watch Instantly” streaming only subscription plans. Smart. This is a way for them to not only increase revenue but also it is also a way for them to transition people though the death of physical formats. Netflix seems to have their stuff together. They’re friendly. Their website is easy to use. And with this move they’re trying to ensure that they can deliver content to consumers in the future.

Libraries are having trouble transitioning to this content anywhere/anytime future. You’ve heard the chestnut about publishers not allowing for the creation of libraries if they weren’t already in existence. This is exactly what is happening with purely 1s & 0s content. Libraries are getting squeezed out of the picture because of DRM legislation coming from the content industry. Libraries are left with only some good and popular digital content and we’re left to provide it in less convenient ways.

Meanwhile, other content providers are making their stuff easier to get at. Netflix has partnered with the New York Times and Rotten Tomatoes to include Netflix widgets on movie review pages. Without leaving the NYT website it’s possible to add a movie to your queue or even start watching. This is nothing revolutionary but it does add another level of convenience.

Netflix isn’t the only company making content delivery and purchasing easier. Other data-these-days-is-sure-portable news is the release of the Amazon Kindle application for the iPhone, enabling people to buy and read any Kindle book on Apple’s device. The app is free and books transfers back and forth just like on a Kindle.

Have you taken the time recently to think about your access to content? Holy smokes, the situation is absolutely incredible. The iTunes Music Store is the world’s largest music retailer, newspapers are shuttering and magazines are going web only. I can download 80% of music and movies I want for free? Are you kidding? No? Awesome! I can download Elsevier’s complete Referex Engineering Collection? Don’t mind if I do.

IT IS GOING TO BE OKAY

All of this isn’t to say I’m pessimistic about the future of libraries. It really doesn’t matter if we stop providing content in the same way. It might be the best thing to happen to public libraries. Yes, there will be some access equality issues that need sorting, but if we don’t have to concern ourselves with making sure people have access to content we’ll have more time to create excellent programs and experiences based around content and conversation.

For this reason I’m really pleased with the direction that integrating games into libraries has taken. Some libraries are circulating games and that’s great, but the real emphasis has been on providing shared experiences by gathering people together at hosted events. Connecting people in this way has more of a positive impact than sinmply sending someone home with a disc. It adds value to th content too. So while I’m pleased that public libraries are enjoying increased use because of the current economic situation I hope that we use the attention wisely by talking about more than book and movie circ stats or even computer use.

If anything, we should consider books, movies, music and computers loss leaders and show people what we can really do for them once we’re lucky enough to have them in our buildings.

The article isn’t clear if there’s an actual working prototype of Laura, but if there was it probably would have been mentioned. So does this mean that Microsoft is spending time envisioning what Apple was thinking about in 1987? It is really neat to see how Apple realized part of this vision. A video camera and iChat are built into all of Apple’s laptops and iMacs.

So, what’s the 20 year vision for your organization and what are you doing today to get there?

originally uploaded by goppenheim

P.S. I did some spy work on my own and noticed that the CIA’s holdings appear to not be in worldcat.org. Huh.

The system came with a copy of “Spider-man 3″ on Blu-ray that is hopefully going to find its way into the NPPL’s collection. Once we get this cataloged correctly I’ll likely buy a few more Blu-ray titles. Just enough so that we can advertise that we have a small collection. Not only will it serve as a good experiment to see if the discs are popular, it will also serve as good marketing for the NPPL. Even if swarms of people don’t have Blu-ray players (yet) it will showcase the library as a place with exciting new stuff that understands what’s happening in the larger information world. All that for $200? A bargain! It doesn’t always take much to try new things.

We’ll make our Blu-ray discs non-holdable for a month, just like our other new materials. Yes, this slightly diminishes the spirit of library sharing and maybe inconveniences some non-NPPL patrons. However, it drives some in house traffic to our relatively new beautiful library. While that sounds like a library-centered policy (bad!), it isn’t *fully* library-centered. The non-holdable period keeps new and popular titles around for people in North Plains to browse. This makes residents of North Plains happy and increases the library’s “placeness,” making it interesting and vital.

Where: A long range plan meeting.
Who: The library director.
Quote: (multiple times throughout the meeting): I hate computers, I hate computers, I hate computers.

Where: A library redesign furniture meeting.
Who: Adult Services staff.
Quote: (in response to the high table and stool combo being unusable for laptopping): We don’t want them to be too comfortable!

Where: An everyday conversation.
Who: IT staff.
Quote: (in response to installing Firefox on public computers) But then they would have a choice.

Where: Circ desk.
Who: Circ clerk.
Quote: (in response to a patron asked to place a reserve) Sorry, that’s not my job. [walks away]

I don’t think I need to comment on these quotes except to say that they’re so bad they’re caricatural.

Let’s not end the work week on a negative note. Michael Casey’s post It’s About Me, and You is about responding to disagreeable comments in meetings and it really resonated with me. Libraries won’t progress unless committed individuals stand up and respond to things that make them bristle. Now is the time for boldness.

Reading the staff picks is always fun and they do a good job keeping the content fresh. What I’d really like to see are the staff behind these staff picks. It is nice to know that these books are liked by a librarian, but it would be even nicer to know who exactly is doing the recommending. The choice to keep these selectors anonymous keeps the issue of the librarians’ privacy and level of exposure at bay. Devoting some effort to working this out could take their already very pretty site to the next level. I have no idea if they’ve had these discussions, but it might be as easy as asking people if their willing to put themselves out there. There isn’t much information about them, but I like seeing pictures of (what I assume to be) the librarians behind the Hennepin County librarians’ blog on some of their subject guides.

I wonder if we’ll see “Feels comfortable being a personality on the web” in a library job description anytime soon.

…not sure why it should be a *library* venture if the purpose is to provide coffee, free wifi, and non-circulating magazines.

The more I think about it the more I’m convinced that the concept of a cafe branch is a great idea. Libraries are doing the reverse and putting coffee shops in libraries, why not go all the way and put a library in a coffee shop? The idea doesn’t seem that radical to me. Here are some characteristics of my hypothetical cafe library branch:

→ provides access to information
→ has some computers available
→ provides help finding things (if asked)
→ provides access to content (magazines, newspapers, some books strewn about)
→ is a community gathering place
→ holds some special events
→ has reservable group study space

Pretty traditional stuff, right? People might bristle at this idea not because of the traditional services it would provide, but what it would lack. In particular, a collection of books.

Now before anyone gets bent out of shape, let me be clear. I’m not saying that all libraries should be like this, just that this model is an option. Libraries can certainly be much more than what I’m describing here, and they should be. However, libraries don’t always have to strive to be their full incarnation 100% of the time. Just like a small neighborhood branch probably doesn’t have an extensive collection of periodical back issues, so my hypothetical cafe library could shed some library baggage to free it to explore new territory. The geographical language is appropriate. Without large collections to house, the relatively small cafe library can fit into spaces that other branches couldn’t. (Wouldn’t it be great to have space for picking up and returning holds though?) This might allow it to be located in vital and busy areas with tons of foot traffic.

I know you didn’t get a Masters degree to serve coffee. No big deal, it wouldn’t be part of your job. The “shift supervisor” could be a “for real librarian,” managing staff and doing other librarian work like monitoring the library’s IM reference service.

I’m not convinced this idea would work in every context or community, but sitting here in Little Beirut where many people are fueled by their neighborhood coffee shops, I can think of a number of cities where this would work.

This library cafe branch would not just be a means to the end of getting people to use other library resources. It would be legitimate on its own, but wouldn’t it do a good job marketing the larger library too? Among the locally made art on display there would be adverts for relevant library events. Each time someone logs into the wifi network they’d be greeted with list of library resources and be authenticated into library databases. Oh, and how about this? People don’t need a library card to access the wifi, but customers get a 50% discount on coffee and food when they sign up for one. And a 10% discount on each transaction when they present the card.

In a certain sense, a cafe branch would be for a niche market. This is a good thing because we know that niche markets can become obsessively enthusiastic about their interests. Because they’re often concerned with trying to be many things to different people, libraries often miss out on capturing this passion. Last time I checked, we want people passionate and excited about libraries. Having a narrower focus might be one way to cultivate more use and zeal for the library.

Is Facebook Really The Point? by Casey Bisson

It is essential that we build social features into our libraries. Comments, easy linkability (short, sensical URLs), and findability in search engines are must haves in our systems. But that isn’t enough. We also need outstanding librarians to breath life into them.

Library 2.0 Debased by John Blyberg

Of course, that means we have to have a working framework to begin with that compliments and adheres to our tradition of solid, proven librarianship. In other words, when we use technology, it should be transparent, intuitive, and a natural extension of the patron experience. If it can’t be transparent, then it should be so overwhelmingly beneficial to the user that it is canonized not by the techies, but the users themselves.

One thing I’d like to highlight is that both posts seem to be begging libraries to provide authentic online social experiences for patrons. I don’t think John’s idea of offering technology that is a “natural extension of the patron experience” can occur without the use of technology being a natural extension of Casey’s “outstanding librarian.” The outstanding librarian can’t just understand the importance of the read/write web on a theoretical level. The outstanding librarian must be a participant.

“This stuff can’t be faked” is another way to state this. Faking it, like dabbling with a social networking site (”simply thrusting a MySpace page in their face”), doesn’t recognize the deep and disruptive nature of social technology that John mentions in the beginning of his piece. He doesn’t explicitly mention this disruptive nature again, but make the implication when he raises the issue of “thorough recalibration of process, policy, physical spaces, staffing…”

Like a wise man once said, “Let’s get serious!”

http://www.flickr.com/photos/d_vdm/509996632/