I think that as information professionals, we need to reflect on encouraging the public to think in terms of what is authoritative and relevant information. We can do this by staying abreast of the news that is Hot & then by increasing access to authoritative print & online materials that are relevant to what is going on. Maybe we should be interfacing with them in social networking applications to help them as they are making those decisions for themselves.

In today’s world, everyone is the press and the public — both for the good and for the bad. Now we can have Herstory instead of just History. Groups which may not have had the same coverage in the traditional press now can get their say. However, that makes these online accounts more like oral histories — and oral histories are only as truthful as people tell that truth to themselves.

We as a society will eventually have to redefine — What is the truth? How do we determine what is the truth? WHO gets to determine what is the truth.

Our profession will have to ask itself — With so many voices out there, how can we provide the proper amount of materials so that people can decide the truth for themselves? Who really is an authority, and who are we to say that?

But we need quality assurance of sorts to make sure that the people who are speaking the loudest are telling the truth — especially when everyone starts going by it.

I know it’s a very philosophical discussion. But the philosophy drives policy and policy determines tangible action.

An organization may have clients, patrons, customers–and that organization is not going to be judged by them unless they have a tendency to attract “the wrong crowd”. A Library is intended to be open to all, so the people who visit there are not seen as reflecting on the library.

But, what happens when the Library goes on public record as saying, “This person is our friend?” You don’t really mean that this person is a confidant, your best buddy, someone with whom you share values and a beer down at the pub! But that is the term that Social Media chose–starting with Livejournal, I believe, or if not starting with them, certainly they helped set the standard.

You are saying “This person has an interest in what we do as a library.” That’s not friendship as we usually define it. But that word “friend” is so emotionally laden in Real Life, and means so many things in Social Media, that some people (like yours truly!) are wary of whom they “friend” online.

I think the administration overreacted very badly and made fools of themselves–but I understand WHY they did so. A pity.

It’s amazing the different looks people achieve with the exact same html only by applying different css.

I saw a recent tweet from the NECCC conference where some expressed discontent at how old traditions are using new innovations as a kind of “wrapping” to disguise what they really are.

Others expressed concern at how to keep up with techno revolutions. Eventually we will all realize that keeping up is not a challenge because we are on a collision course.

Thanks again and cheers!