Adventures in Library 2.0

Brand Monitoring Report – Seattle Public Library

Since February 1, 2009, I have been monitoring images and conversations surrounding the Central Seattle Public Library in Seattle, Washington.  I decided to monitor the Central Seattle Public Library because I have heard so much about in my classes and from library colleagues that I wanted to explore a bit for myself.

In order to monitor the Seattle Public Library I ran seven searches in Flickr, Technorati, and Twitter, which displayed in my RSS aggregator.  Here are the search terms I used for each search.

Flickr – “seattle public library”

Twitter – “seattle central library”

Twitter – “seattle library”

Twitter – “seattle public library”

Technorati – “seattle central library”

Technorati – “seattle library”

Technorati – “seattle public library”

For the past month and a half, I have been getting new shots of the Central Seattle Public Library building via Flickr. I have viewed pictures of everything from the escalators and windows to story times and the library’s collections. The photo above is one of the most recent uploads and captures not only the library collection, but also the building’s unique architecture. What amazed me most about the images was the number of pictures individuals uploaded, some posting multiple pictures of the library, including families posting pictures from a trip to Seattle.  In some of my “google-ing” about SPL I came across a review of the library from Frommer’s (travel guide) online! In addition to providing basic information (library hours and location), Frommer’s also says “It isn’t often that the library is considered one of the coolest joints in town, but Seattle’s downtown library is such an architectural wonder that it is one of the city’s highlights.” Even a google image search for “Central Seattle Public Library” returns 698,000 results.

Additionally, many folks are “tweeting” about the Seattle Public Library, everything from their experiences inside the library, library programs, special events, or simply “tweeting” to let the world know where they are.  The comments made on Twitter were frequent, sometimes multiple “tweets” in one day.  The majority of the comments were positive, focusing on the unique architecture, using words like “cool,” “stunning,” and “inspiring.”

Some of my favorite tweets include:

-  thinks the downtown seattle public library is the best thing that ever happened to the state of washington.

by lenahuxley (lena)

- Did you know? The Seattle Public Library system has the highest percentage of library card-holders per capita in the country!  by CrownePlazaSEA (Crowne Plaza Seattle)

- Is there anything Seattle Central Library doesn’t do well? Don’t tell me, I want my illusions. by kxyst (Kurt Xyst)

- Has anyone been to the Seattle central library? It’s amazingly cool. I feel like I’m in a giant terrarium but with books instead of lizards.  by ashleywebster (Ashley Webster)

There were a few tweets that involve how services/programs could be improved. If SPL is monitoring this type of activity, they may find some patron suggestions helpful.

-  wish the seattle public library would put out an iPhone app for placing holds on books.

by boomps (Christopher Brown)

 - the seattle library opens at 12 on Sundays. not that good for early birds like me… by Luna_in_Seattle (Luna_in_Seattle)

Similar to the frequent “tweeting,” many people are blogging about SPL. When reading the posts I tired to focus on bloggers who mentioned an experience, service, or observation and weeded out the ones that just mentioned the library in passing. What I read were posts about the architecture of the library, the library’s increased circulation, and an open house to meet the new City Librarian. In addition, SPL maintains 2 blogs Shelf Talk and Push to Talk for teens. These blogs feature questions of the month, library events, and book reviews.

I liked this exercise because for a few reasons. First, it demonstrated the power of an RSS aggregator. Once I added my searches to the feed, the work was essentially done, all I had to do was and wait for the comments to roll in.  Second, the reviewing the comments and photos is a good way for librarians/library staff to get honest feedback at anytime.  If library staff follow “tweets” or comments made about their library they can get honest feedback and respond faster. Lastly, this exercise demonstrated that libraries are on people’s minds and they are discussing them in virtual communities.

The image above is taken from http://www.flickr.com/photos/mhwilbur/3369542218/. Click on the image to link to the creator’s other photos of SPL.

As a user of social networking tools, like Facebook and Twitter, I am always eager to take a new tool for a test drive.  For instance, for my Reader’s Advisory class this semester, we were encouraged to set up a GoodReads or Shelfari account as a way to share what we are reading, what we’ve read, and what we plan to read with classmates, friends, and other network members, which I will also discuss in this post. 

To complete this week’s module I created a profile and library with LibraryThing.  LibraryThing is “…an online service to help people catalog their books easily. You can access your catalog from anywhere—even on your mobile phone. Because everyone catalogs together, LibraryThing also connects people with the same books, comes up with suggestions for what to read next, and so forth.” (Taken from the LibraryThing About Page)  For this exercise, I cataloged 8 random titles from my personal book collection, giving them starred ratings and tagging them in ways unique to each item’s genre, content, and appeal.  

While I found this process to be helpful for cataloging and organizing my personal items and reading reviews, for me LibraryThing did not have the same social network “feel” as Facebook, Twitter, or Shelfari. Despite the great features, I didn’t quite feel like I was part of a “network,” like I did when I first started on Facebook. Granted, I do not have any “friends” on LibraryThing yet, but I feel like something like LibraryThing is more of a personal tool, rather than a social networking channel. When it comes to sharing my reading tastes and getting suggestions for further reading, I look for recommendations based on a variety of titles I’ve read, rather than  relying on the titles I currently own.  As an individual who barrows more books than I buy, LibraryThing seems limiting, in terms of social networking because once I’ve cataloged my collection, I wouldn’t revisit the site until I’ve made another purchase. With Shelfari, I find myself constantly adding titles of books I see or read reviews about, that I would like to read later, just as I am habitually updating my status on Facebook or Twitter.  Shelfari helps me catalog and check track of everything I want to read, not just what I have read. Although my network on Shelfari is not quite as developed as my Facebook or Twitter networks, I feel a stronger network connection, because I am sharing all my past, current, and soon-to-be reads.

Regardless of my preference for Shelfari, Smith’s Building Blocks of Social Sites can be applied to social book/reading sites like Shelfari and LibraryThing.

Identity—a way of uniquely identifying people in the system 

·      Individuals can create profiles that highlight reading interests, favorite authors, and titles.

Presence—a way of knowing who is online, available, or otherwise nearby 

·      Although friends cannot “chat” or “tweet” like you can when using Facebook or Twitter, individuals can seek out friends or develop new relationships based on shared interest.

Relationships—a way of describing how two users in the system are related  

·      Users can see who their friends are, search for friends, or invite others to join the group. In Shelfari, users can search for readers who are reading the same books as a way to make connections. In LibraryThing, users can connect based on similar personal collections.

Conversations—a way of talking to other people through the system 

·      Users can communicate through books reviews or posting questions to readers about a particular book.

Groups—a way of forming communities of interest 

·      Users can join groups based on a particular book, series, or author.

Reputation—a way of knowing the status of other people in the system (Who’s a good citizen? Who can be trusted?) 

·      Users can see how many books fellow users have read, reviewed, or own. 

        Sharing—a way of sharing things that are meaningful to participants 

o     Users can share reviews, ideas, or make further reading suggestions

 Find Me Online!

LibraryThing Profile

LibraryThing Library

Shelfari Profile

My first experience with virtual communities was in 1996-97 when my parents first made the Internet available to me in our home.  Like a lot of folks at the time we were using America Online to connect to the web. I can still hear the “You’ve Got Mail” message, after the screeching of our modem as it slowly connected to the World Wide Web. Shortly thereafter I began to use the AOL Instant Message feature to chat with friends and family, but never in a chat room or any type of “open” forum.  Since the days of AOL Instant Messaging, I have used and still use Facebook, BlackBoard, and a staff Wiki at the library where I currently work.  As I was writing this post I realized that all my participation in Virtual Communities has been (and still is) limited to those communities that are “closed” organizations.  In other words, communities that are password protected or with members with whom I choose to have an “interaction.”  With the exception of Facebook, the extent of my membership in virtual communities has been defined by either my coursework or job.  In these types of communities the behavior expressed by members are related to a specific task, whether it be work or school, and not really a medium for expressing personal interests or hobbies.  

Although I contribute heavily within these communities (Facebook, Blackboard, Staff Wiki), my participation in “open” forums has been minimal.  For instance, I enjoy reading people’s comments to stories at The Chicago Tribune online, but when it comes to posting my own comment I am, according to The Art of Building Virtual Communities article, a “lurker,” I “pay attention to the activity of the group,” but rarely make any contribution of my own. Despite my many hobbies and interests, I have never had the desire to find others like me (or find my Tribe) on the web.  One of the reasons I decided to take Library 2.0 was learn ways that I could increase my personal presence on the web. According to Derek Wenmoth’s phases as discussed in The Art of Building Virtual Communities article, I would classify myself as a consumer of virtual communities, insofar as “I read and explore the posts of others…[and] can be [a] very active participant in an online community – just not yet visible to others.”