Thing 18 - SurveyMonkey

This was a fairly simple Thing. The first thing I did was to take a look at the features of the four survey programs listed. Of the four, SurveyMonkey seemed like the easiest and most robust--at least when you're only looking at the options for the free version. However, if I had the money to afford a premium plan, I'd probably go with QuestionPro, which has the most robust reports and offers the most options when it comes to question creation.

Creating a survey was easy, too. I ended up creating a survey related to the television show LOST. Creating it was easy, and I've have fun checking out the responses. The one frustrating aspect of it was creating questions where I allowed for multiple answers but for which I only wanted three responses. "Why was that frustrating, Phil?". Well, I'll tell you. It's because you can't set up such questions so that a respondee can only choose three options. Once you open up the survey to multiple responses, there's no way to limit that number--at least in the free version.

Regarding surveys in general, I think the main challenge is in wording the questions. I've taken so many questions with leading questions, or which failed to offer an option to leave comments, that I'm usually quite put off by the majority of the surveys that I encounter. I mean, honestly, if you want my opinion, then don't frame questions so you get the answers you want. It's disingenuous.

Looking forward, I only have five more Things left. I'll be sad when this is over. It's been a lot of fun.

Update! The survey results are in:

• Favorite Season - 2nd season (31.5% of vote)


• Favorite Character - Hurley (56.3% of vote)


• Least Favorite Charater - Michael (31.3% of vote)


• 62.5% want all of the mysteries resolved


• The mystery most want to see resolved is the nature of the Jacob/MIB conflict


• Just over half have a healthy obsession that entails watching LOST and talking about it with friends, but nothing more


• Only 25% of respondees own all five seasons on DVD


• But 43.8% have watch some of the DVD extras


• When LOST ends, most will be sad but plan to go on living--though one person plans to slip into a catatonic state

I think my enjoyment of SurveyMonkey is directly related to the content of the survey. This one was a lot of fun.

Thing 17 - Other Social Networks

I tell you what: one of the best things about having set up 23 Things and then waiting close to two years to actually tackle the endeavor myself is the perspective on many of these tools that I've been granted. When I put this whole 23-part exercise together, I remember thinking, "Golly, some of these tools are pretty cool. I could use this for that, and that one for this, and this other one for this specific task". Now, in hindsight, I'm like, "You know what, I don't have the time to track umpteen different social networking tools. I think I'll pick a couple and stick with them".

And that's where I'm at with this Thing. Allow me to elucidate.

Back in the day, I actually set up a Ning to share news about my musical endeavors with friends. I gathered a handful of fans and posted updates about recording sessions, upcoming gigs, rehearsals, and the like. I had a lot of fun with it for a while, but then I decided that I was spending way too much time switching between and tracking conversations via my Facebook account, my Ning account, my Flickr account, and my blog--not to mention other blogs and such that I was following. It was time, I said, to reign things in a bit and re-establish a life away from the computer.

My Ning was the first to go. I had delved deeper into Facebook groups and fan pages, and ended up setting up a Facebook fan page as a replacement for my Ning network. Then I made a resolution to step back from all of this and spend less time in front of the computer. Over the past few months, temptation has gotten the best of me, and, once again, I'm using Facebook and Flickr (and have temporary latched onto the Reddit group devoted to LOST). But that's it. And honestly, that's enough (in fact, it's probably still too much).

Still, I had fun working through this Thing and revisiting some of these other social networks. One thing that struck me as I did so was how niche-based many of these other social networks are. Whether users are delving into Ning or Gather or something similar, they are doing so in an effort to set up a community devoted to a very specific topic (like teaching librarians, etc). I also took a close look at WebJunction (something, admittedly, I should be much more familiar with), but was, once again, struck by how much their courses cost.

The other issue to address is the use of these social networks in the library. Again, as I mentioned in my thoughts on Thing 16, I think it's important to reach out to patrons where they spend their time. Thus, Facebook seems like the obvious avenue. Yes, there are some Ning's out there devoted to librarianship (and there's some discussion on WebJunction as well), but the relevance of these communities is hampered by how many people participate (i.e. a paltry sum). Another issue that hampers participation is time. In this age of budget cuts, the pressure is on to use one's time as efficiently as possible and to prioritize core services. And one of the things that many in the field have less time for is networking with other professionals and taking the time to explore and create--especially when positions are eliminated and responsibilities are parceled out to those who remain.

Strange days, indeed.

Thing 16 - Facebook & MySpace

If ever there were a web 2.0 Pandora's box, Facebook would be it. As a counter to the positives (which I'll hit on momentarily) there's a plethora of issues that individuals and organizations should give serious thought to when diving into software of this sort. Privacy is the big one (especially for individuals). It's not that Facebook is trying to be invasive per se (though they are getting to be that way), but that people seem to give little thought to how much info they're putting out there on the Internet and how difficult it is to reign in (and/or delete) that information once it's archived on the Facebook servers. There's also the related issue of blogs and the like being cached by Google and the Wayback machine.

Another issue to consider at the organizational level is the amount of time staff spend on Facebook during work hours [link and link]. I have a friend at the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago. Their IT staff collected data on staff computer use and found that over half of it was Facebook-related. What about our library? Does such behavior occur here? Should we block Facebook on MCPL staff computers? I don't know. I suppose the issue becomes complicated when an organization decides to have a Facebook presence (or makes it part of a training exercise like 23 Things). In addition, we have a Facebook page for teen services and are currently working on a Facebook presence for the library in general. That said, the Shedd Aquarium has a Facebook presence while still blocking the site on staff computers. Perhaps MCPL should consider a similar policy. Hmmm...

I, myself, have a love-hate relationship with Facebook. I vacillate between "What a colossal waste of time" and "Good golly, I sure don't want to miss out on all the fascinating updates on my pal's pet peeves of the day, the crazy things they saw on the way to work, the things they ate for breakfast, and how much they drank last night...oh, and here's 45 pictures documenting it, etc). No, seriously, I'm not trying to be cynical; I simply am cynical. But perhaps I'm getting a way from the spirit of 23 Things in this post. Thing is, I can't help myself. Of all the "things" I've looked at so far, this is the one about which I have the strongest opinion.

Here's the thing: the masses love Facebook. It's a form commodified socialization that allows us to do yet one more thing on our computer/PDA/iPhone without having to actually interact with another human being. It allows us to find an echo chamber of like-minded individuals within which to bounce our opinions about without fear of hearing a disparate point-of-view--and, better still, the expectation is that we do it in 20 or so words, so there's none of that formulating well-reasoned arguments for our convictions that we're to justify with something resembling empirical evidence and logic. And don't forget videos of cats in boxes and drunks falling down. Gotta post links to those viral videos.

Okay, I'm doing it again. I'm ranting and being cynical.

Now, where was I? Oh yes, the masses love Facebook. As such, Facebook provides a means for organizations (like libraries) to reach out to people (like patrons) and actually connect with them somewhere where they actually spend time. In that sense, yes, Facebook has positive potential. Perhaps I lapse into cynicism because so much of what passes for content on Facebook is--in my humble opinion--noise. But if that noise leads to meaningful discussion, then I suppose it's a good thing. In that vein, organizations (like the library) could promote talks and programs and the like on Facebook. The interest generated could then lead to increased turnout at library functions, and perhaps disparate points-of-view would be shared, listened to, responded to calmly and rationally, and we might actually help to evolve some ideas. If the end-product of a Facebook post is something like that, then I'm all for it. But if Facebook is simply an ends in and of itself, then I'm not such a big fan.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to update my cat's page.

Thing 15 - Explore Podcasts

You know, the whole je ne sais quoi of podcasting, now that I've delved a little deeper into it, reminds of those guys you see in the movies. You know the ones I mean: living in natty one-bedroom apartments full of old TVs, stacks of magazines and newspapers and clippings pinned here and there, beyond dusting, eating microwave dinners, living in their bathrobes, scratching dry scalps, talking hurriedly (usually to themselves), and lost in their own strange world. Yes, those guys. I think of podcasts, and I think of some guy like that who is constantly listening to the weirdest radio broadcasts imaginable. Radio broadcasts that make you go, "There's no way that's a real radio show. That's just some drivel that they cooked up to flesh out the character in this bogus movie". But the thing is, now, thanks to podcasts, such radio shows are real, and there are hundreds, if not thousands, of them out there. One need only poke around for a while, and they will indeed find some of the strangest, off-the-wall broadcasts imaginable. I mean, there are podcasts out there posting by people who make Art Bell seem normal (actually, said podcasts are likely created by the oddest of the oddballs who regularly call into shows like Art Bell's).

That said, not all podcasts are of the conspiratorial, New Age, nutjob variety. In fact, I have to admit to actually enjoying a couple of the weirder ones I took the time to explore--namely Yog Radio, a podcast devoted to all things H.P. Lovecraft. But, moving on from the fringe stuff, one podcast that I did find intriguing was a talk hosted on the IU Podcast portal by Joel Garreau entitled Radical Evolution that discussed the rapidity of scientific advancement and the way that, more and more, scientific research is focusing on the exploration and modification of self and less on the physical world around us. However, it's an 86-minute talk, so I'll have to finish it on my own time some other day. Regardless, stuff like that and perhaps some of the news outlets posting podcasts that cater to the left-of-the-left folk like me were much more to my liking. And, if I were ever to become the person I described above, these are the types of podcasts that I'd stream in my one-bedroom apartment. Who knows? Mayhaps that'll happen someday.

I did find that the Podcast.com portal was the easiest of the directories to use; however, there are so many podcasts out there that searches of Podcast.com for general topics returned an overwhelming number of results. But when I searched for the keyword "lovecraft", I received a very manageable number of results and quickly found a podcast that was to my liking. Still, with enough time and patience, one could probably track down a handful of worthwhile podcasts--even when receiving an abundance of search results.

My last thought on podcasts has to do with types of people. Obviously, we're all different. Amongst the myraid quirks that make me who I am, one attribute that I possess is a profound dislike of earphones. If I did (and if I also enjoyed talk radio and such), I might just become a huge fan of podcasts. A co-worker of mine likes to listen to LOST podcasts, but I am simply not interested in walking around with earbuds stuck in my head. In addition, when I do sit in front of my computer at home, I prefer silence. Like I said, there are different types of people. Perhaps someday I'll change and become a bigger fan of earbuds and podcasts. For now, I'll stick to silence, conversation, and Stereolab tunes that emanate from car stereo speakers.

Thing 14 - YouTube & Online Video

A person could "waste" hours and hours on this Thing. I remember in high school thinking that Pink Floyd was the greatest band ever (I still love a couple of their official releases and enjoy listening to bootlegs of the early stuff a lot). Anyway, finding video of Pink Floyd back in the day was very difficult. Learning of the existence of and watching Pompeii for the first time was a real treat. But other than that, the unofficial video for "Echoes" at the end of Crystal Voyager (which didn't even feature footage of the band), and Alan Parker's The Wall, there wasn't really anything else out there.

In the age of YouTube there's so much Floyd out there that it actually becomes a chore to wade through it all. In a sense and given the ease with which we're able to access information and entertainment via resources like YouTube, we've become incredibly spoiled. As mentioned, it used to be very difficult to track down video of Pink Floyd performing. Now I can actually find archived television appearances from the Syd Barrett era or grainy footage from the Animals tour. Yet I now find myself frustrated with the poor quality of much of the footage, though, truth be told, I'd rather have access to grainy VHS transfers than nothing at all.

Below I've embedded a video from a Neil Young concert. This song has never been officially released on CD or LP, so this is the only way to experience it--and, good golly, I'm thankful for that because it's one of the better songs he's recorded in the past 10 or so years:



I have used Hulu.com, too. However, Hulu seems geared much more toward television programs than fan videos. In that sense, it's more like a outlet for "official" releases. And, again, I'm thankful. Back in the day, if you missed a TV show or heard about a great skit on SNL after the fact, you were out of luck. Now I can watch a whole library of television shows and catch up on episodes I've missed. A real life example: I've been watch LOST on Hulu with friends as a way of reviewing episodes in the run-up to the series finale. Good times.

In the library, I would think there'd be a lot of applications for these types of Web 2.0 tools. In YouTube, you can create channels where videos you've uploaded are hosted. CATS could easily set up a channel and begin archiving video from past programs on YouTube--especially performances by local musicians and artists in the library auditorium. Another obvious use for these types of tools is as a supplement to our own collection of audio-visual material. Historical recordings, speeches, and more are all excellent adjuncts to the printed word.

A major downside to these tools--especially in a library with multiple internet users--is the amount of bandwidth they use. But as internet service providers switch from phone lines to dedicated fiber optic cable, these types of obstacles should go the way of the dodo and the passenger pigeon. Time will tell.

Thing 13 - LibraryThing

I tell you what: the more Things I do, the more I think about privacy. And I think that's a very important "thing" to consider before diving into social networking tools and/or posting all manner of personal information on the web--information that--once cached by Google or the Wayback Machine--is next to impossible to remove.

LibraryThing is yet another tool with all kinds of possibilities, but then it's also another way to put an immense amount of personal information on the web. Yes, I could self-censor and only add "safe" books to my profile. But if I'm going to self-censor, then what's the point? On the other hand, what would a potential future employer or patron think if they saw that yours truly was a big fan social histories of the 60s counterculture, or the writings of neo-Marxist thinkers like Wilhelm Reich? What conclusions would they draw about me based on such titles, and would they be justified in doing so?

Regardless, I did create a LibraryThing profile. Actually, I created it back when I was putting the 23 Things together. Now, in retrospect, I find myself questioning that decision and sit here contemplating my compromised privacy. Should I delete my profile once I finish the 23 Things, or do I have an obligation to leave everything in place for the sake of staff members choosing to explore the 23 Things in the future? And does it even matter at this point? Tough questions.

With regard to the mention of incorporating LibraryThing into our online catalog, I would add the following update: the committee looking into this decided against purchasing the LibraryThing for Libraries enhancement. The main issue was cost. However, Adult and Teen Services staff have addressed this to a degree by creating the For the Love of Reading Blog. This does allow for reviews; however, there's no direct link from the PAC. Oh well.

When all is said and done, I'm not against LibraryThing. Yes, I'm reluctant to catalog my entire book collection. But what I find most useful is that LibraryThing can be used in the readers' advisory interview as a way of identifying similar books/authors--especially when used in concert with Amazon recommendations and NoveList Plus.

Thing 12 - Social Media Websites

This Thing provided me with a lot of food for thought. Up to this point, I hadn't paid much attention to these types of services. Yes, to be perfectly honest, I'd poked around on Reddit a bit, but only to check out their LOST page, which I've bookmarked and continue to check somewhat regularly (though I'll likely stop when the series wraps up).

Anyway, my approach to this Thing was to first explore the four social media sites mentioned in the Thing (i.e. Mixx, Digg, Newsvine, and Reddit). As a test, I searched for left-leaning political commentary and LOST news on each. In the case of the latter, I looked for something like a group or page dedicated solely to the topic. The results are as follows:

• Mixx - I looked at this tool first, but ended up liking it the least. While it does have a tagging feature, the tag 'lost' does not apply solely to the show. It is, however, possible to create a community, but there currently isn't one devoted to LOST, which didn't sit well with me. With regard to political opinion, there is a sub-category devoted to news opinion stories, but I just couldn't connect to the randomness of it. Actually, it's not the randomness per se (a certain degree of randomness is good and allows for disparate points of view). Rather, it's the lack of depth. It's blurby and sound bitey in nature, and I, personally, need more meat and less bone.


• Digg - This is one of the most popular social media sites, and it did offer a little more than Mixx. But that likely had a lot to do with the fact that there are a lot more Digg users than Mixx users. My issue with Digg was the lack of tags, i.e. you're basically stuck with Digg's categories, and, according to their FAQ, if you want to submit a story that doesn't fit within their categories, it's suggested that you don't. The interface is nice, but not nice enough to make up for Digg's shortcomings.


• Newsvine - At least Newsvine allows for tagging, but the interface is so ugly and busy that I was turned off before I even started to explore. Which brings me to...


• Reddit - Of the social media sites I explored, this is the one I liked best. Not just because there's a category devoted solely to LOST (as well as a plethora of other topics), not just because the interface is fairly clean and straightforward, not just because of the robust social community that makes reading the comments associated with each submission as much fun as trolling through the stories themselves, and it's not just the ease with which one can find stories of interest. No, it's not just these things. It's actually all them considered in concert. Just my opinion, of course, but I'm not likely to ever look at Mixx, Digg, or Newsvine again. Reddit, on the other hand, will continue to attract my attention.

But there is a dark side to all of this. I learned this by checking the four articles associated with each tool on the Thing instructions (i.e. the links labeled "one person's opinion of..."). Basically, there are two main problems. First, the development of potential echo chambers. For example, if you search for "chris hedges" on Reddit, you basically get links to articles written by Chris Hedges, but not a lot people who disagree with him. As such, you're not really get disparate points of view. But when you expand your focus, I think this issue is addressed to some degree. And, of course, a critical thinker would recognize this and actively seek out disparate points-of-view on their own. Sadly, critical thinking is no longer in the norm in this country, and, trust me, we'll all eventually pay the piper for such folly.

The second issue is that the stories that achieve the highest ranking on these sites are often placed in that position by a handful of contributors. Me? I don't really care about either criticism. I take everything I read with a grain of salt and do actively seek contradictory points-of-view. When it comes down to it, I just like being able to find information of interest easily, and Reddit is just one tool in a vast arsenal employed by yours truly.

Thing 11 - Tagging & Delicious

I've been using Delicious regularly since July 2007, so a lot of the material in this Thing was old hat. As of this posting I've bookmarked 746 web pages. Obviously, I'm a fan of the service. It is a fantastic way to organize content and discover new websites (I'm a big fan of the list of current popular pages). In addition, I love being able to type in a keyword or browse my list of tags to find an article I stumbled upon a couple weeks ago that I now want to share with someone else. And it's also a great alternative to Google. Though, truth be told, I don't use that way often; however, if I'm looking for something technology-related, I always make sure to check Delicious. Why? Because most Delicious users seem to be techies, and the stuck being bookmarked is often of interest to techies--not that that's reigned in my inclination to bookmark everything from YouTube videos, to political commentary, to the odd reference site.

Tagging in general is something that I embraced slowly. When I first started using Flickr in December 2005, I was like, "Tags? Bah! That stuff is for kids". But as I began to upload more and more photos (eventually upgrading to a Pro account), I was like, "Well, golly, these tags are the bee's knees!". I even spent the goodly portion of one afternoon going back through a lot of old photos and updating the tags. Another tag issue that garnered my attention was proper names. At first, I just tagged photos with the first names of the people in pictures. But as I started to tag more and more photos containing more and more people with the same first name, I was like, "Well, shucks, looks like I should've been a-taggin' people with both first and last names". So, again, I spent another afternoon re-tagging all of my friends. That said, I have not embraced labels in this here blog--and I probably never will.

With regard to some of the sites linked to in the Thing 11 instructions, I have to admit to being disappointed. It seems that all of the libraries that were using Delicious when this Thing was first created are no longer using Delicious. And that really is a shame. "Why would you say that, Phil?", you say. Well, it's because I think Delicious is a much better approach to bookmarking reference websites and such than the current method. That's my opinion, of course. But I'm convinced. So there.

Thing 10 - Setting Up a Wiki

It's been quite interesting to see how people have used the wiki platform in various contexts since the software started to garner serious attention around the turn of the millennium. I've seen contexts in which wikis worked really well and contexts in which they've failed miserably.

First, let's consider the tasks required by this Thing. The readings and examples of wikis in action were interesting, but what struck me most was the optimism with which some libraries embraced wikis prior to the advent of content management systems (CMS). Prior to CMS like Drupal and Joomla, wikis actually provided a straight-forward, relatively user-friendly way to create web content. Some libraries embraced this with gusto (like the St. Joseph County Public Library subject guides mentioned in the Thing 10 instructions). In an MCPL context, this sort of approach could result in our librarians creating subject guides, book maps, and pathfinders on a broad range of topics, and the plus is that it's all be possible without the need for additional Dreamweaver licenses and training in HTML, etc.

With regard to the MCPL wiki, which we were asked to edit, I found the actual process of working with and editing a wiki to be quite simple--that is it's fairly easy once you find the help page that explains the commands. It's also fun to see how creative my co-workers are. The tale of Bilbo Dreamweaver is awesome, and I liked hearing about my co-workers cats. And using the page history to see who added what and/or made revisions is a great example of the real potential of wikis.

Which brings me to my main point: wikis, when you get down to the nitty-gritty, seem suited to a very specific purpose. Yes, they've been used in all sorts of ways, but the online encyclopedia entry seems to be the best application. This is attested to by the popularity of the Wikipedia and other topic-specific online encyclopedias, like the Lostpedia. At one point, MCPL gave wiki software a shot, but it never caught on. Two thoughts there: 1) I really think that given our in-house access to the Office suite and networked drives, the potential for commenting and tracking changes within programs like Word is a much more viable alternative, and 2) our switch from a static web-editing platform to the Drupal CMS allows us to take advantage of certain wiki-like features (like a revision history). I also think staff were turned off to the MCPL wiki because they were asked to use it for tasks and discussions for which it was never really intended. This--coupled with the learning curve involved in mastering the editing commands--led to the development of staff resistance to the wiki use (at least, that's my take on it).

All of which makes me ponder again the goal of 23 Things: to familiarize staff with different technologies and interfaces so that everyone has a better understanding of which online tools are best suited to which jobs. I think one potential application of the wiki at the community level has already been addressed by the Bloomingpedia. Of course, I may be wrong. Time will tell.