Futures of Learning

Teen websites are separate (cyber)spaces within the library environment (or places as Anne Balsamo cited Michel deCerteau’s distinction between the two). Contrasted to the offline, “brick and mortar” libraries typified by quiet and decorum, these websites represent spaces only for teens, and appropriated by teens. Just as libraries are now embracing mobile technologies, evidenced in Cara’s last post, so too are they embracing Web 2.0 technologies. As long as libraries have had websites, they have had pages dedicated to kids and teens (as well as other patron groups like teachers and adults). This recent iteration of teen websites represents a marked progression from merely providing information to opportunities for participation, creation, and social connection. We are calling these web sites and not web pages because of the extent to which they go beyond the one-way transmission of information and utilize new digital technologies, offering numerous links that truly contribute to a “networked distributed learning environment.”

The Pew Internet and American Life Project study cited by Maura Klosterman in a previous post (Estabrook et al, 2007) found that “more people turned to the Internet than any other source of information and support, including experts, family members, government agencies, or libraries” (p. v). Libraries have websites for the same reasons they embrace mobile technologies. Cara stated the following reasons; 1) to expand the range of content available, 2) to offer a fuller menu of services, and 3) as a new mode of public outreach. Teen websites, however, are targeted to a more specific group defined solely by its age, but possessing features such as informal, sociable, with a propensity for play and experimentation. Teens are more eager for participatory experiences, more receptive to visual and aural stimuli, and more comfortable using new technologies. This is also a group marked by personal struggles and peer pressures as teens pass through this transformative life stage. As community libraries, these modern institutions surpass their historic charge to preserve their collections by providing a public service and fostering a sense of community (in the all-embracing modern sense of a public, not the Habermasian elite public). It is this social responsibility – directed partly, but significantly to youth – that drives libraries to provide greater access to their collections online, to have strong educational programs and offer opportunities to participate, share, and contribute, both onsite and online. Teenagers are future library patrons, writers, and even funders and public officials, and libraries are keen to cultivate their interest, involvement, and loyalty from an early age, much like the corporate sector that fosters early habits of consumption with their brand communities.

New Efforts
First let us look at a few noteworthy library teen websites in the US, and then we can discuss what is meant by these online communities, as well as some of their benefits and repercussions.

In Colorado, the Denver Public Library named their teen website eVolver, because evolving minds want to know… The sidebar has the following sections: Homework Help, Ask a Librarian, Look it Up, Find a Good Book, Get Involved, Entertainment/Media, and Life. The site features staff and teen picks for books, teens’ top ten nominees, a tag cloud for their new catalog, sign up for e-newsletters, my library card (personal account), teen events and classes, and a link to their MySpace page with a teen blog. eVolver also has an account on Flickr for teens to post their photography and art, and on Twitter. Teens can post original writings in the Writer’s Realm and write book reviews, there is help on how to start a blog, links to an external teen chat forum, and podcasts created by teens during the Teen Tech Week podcast workshop. An online scavenger hunt encourage teens to get a book from the library and read it to win prizes, and there is live chat 24/7 with a librarian, as well as contact email and telephone information. There are numerous external links for writers’ resources, online games, comics/anime, online magazines, and information related to many personal topics in the Life section (money, sexuality, spirituality, safety, body, future, world, relationships, etc.). The Get Involved section also provides information and links regarding activism and volunteering.

The New York Public Library’s teen website is called Teenlink. Much like Denver, there is Homework Help, Events @ the Library, Library Services, and lists of recommended books by the library. Wordsmiths is “a Web anthology of writings by teenagers” including poems and short stories that can be submitted online. Link-o-Rama has links to authors, books and ‘zines, and NYC Teen info; also Weird & Wacky has other fun links, and a link to eNYPL provides free video/audio/eBook downloads. Teenlink’s account on Facebook currently has 6,539 fans, and they present MP3s created by teens at the library called Turn it Up! @ the Library (NYC Teens Talk out LOUD). Also like Denver, there is a section called Teen Life with information and external links on issues including consumer education, spirituality, family, health and well-being, relationships and sexuality, activism, and links to jobs and hotlines.

The Chicago Public Library’s website is called For Teens (Teen Volume), and includes Library Programs and Partnerships, Popular Topics, How to…, Book Reviews by teens, Homework Help, Teen Volume Reads (author interviews by library staff), and Internet Safety. There is also an online events calendar for teens, Ask a Librarian (by telephone, email, or physical visit), and a section called Brain Candy listing books related to personal topics such as money, dating, sex, teen rights, parents splitting, and getting fit.

It is important to note that public libraries in smaller communities are just as successfully incorporating digital technologies on their websites. The teen website of the Jacksonville Public Library in Florida (JPL for teens!) contains a chart on its homepage labeled library 2.0 with links to its pages on Flickr, MySpace (featuring a teen drawing contest), YouTube, their teen department blog (institutional), feeds, and teen book review podcasts. The Sonoma County Library in California is called teenspace, and has a blog with book reviews by teens, a list of teen events, tags, RSS feed, sign-up for email subscription and Next Reads (monthly book recommendations by email).

Online Communities
A community is comprised of individuals connected to other individuals, which are then connected to a larger entity that brings these individuals and groups together through a common bond based on shared interests, goals, or activities. An online community, much like any physical community, requires that individuals feel they belong to a group and understand the norms or rules of that group, that they share not only interests, but also goals, traditions and activities, that there is direct interaction and communication between individuals within the community, and that individuals contribute to the community. This last aspect is especially critical to knowledge-sharing communities of practice such as businesses, academia, open-source software, online publishing, as well as the modern community library.

Robert Putnam (2000) urges us to think about social capital as a public good that can be nurtured and used for the greater benefit of society, but today he cites a decline in civic involvement and a “breakdown of community.” By using their websites to facilitate social interaction, bonding already existing relationships and bridging new relationships, libraries can play their part in fostering a greater sense of community with their online patrons. Social capital can be accrued through social interaction and networking, both offline and online, based on reciprocity and trust, mutual obligations, and norms of conduct. While individual networking and communication is important, the larger social network is more important to provide the infrastructure for strong connections (links) within society. The well-connected library provides for well-connected individuals to achieve social capital that can then be used to benefit the community.

Communal action and a sense of community (to both the library institution and the general public) provide teens with valuable skills needed for a deliberative democracy. Robert Asen (2004) talks about how citizenship engagement is necessary for democratic societies, formed through the acts of “generativity, risk, commitment, creativity, and sociability” (1). Pluralism is prized within a democracy, and respect for pluralist ideas, opinions, and backgrounds is generated by these websites that present diverse examples of writing and artwork, and also diverse opinions and reactions by teens. By empowering teens with some decisions about the website design, book reviews, author interviews and podcasts, teens are learning to become more active and involved in public acts, thereby helping to produce a more engaged citizenry with strong leadership skills. The US Institute of Museum and Library Services’ (IMLS) final report of their youth programs from 1998 to 2003 (Koke & Dierking, 2007), as well as their companion publication, Nine to Nineteen: Youth in Museums and Libraries, discuss how to best include youth in the design and implementation of programs and provide valuable suggestions for practitioners (57). 

In his recent MacArthur Foundation white paper (2007), Henry Jenkins presents a list of what he considers to be the literacies that youth need for the 21st century (play, performance, simulation, appropriation, multitasking, distributed cognition, judgment, networking, negotiation, transmedia navigation, collective intelligence). Jenkins describes these literacies as “cultural competencies and social skills” for a participatory culture where the focus has shifted to community involvement, collaboration, and networking. Furthermore, he calls for “policy and pedagogical interventions” in order to foster these literacies, specifically mentioning schools, afterschool programs, and parents. We can add libraries to this list as a place of informal learning, and one already engaging youth in a comprehensive manner. Jenkins states, “Everyone involved in preparing young people to go out into the world has contributions to make in helping students acquire the skills they need to become full participants in our society.”

Analysis
Teen websites have the potential to actively engage teens for the purpose of encouraging reading, writing, and other creative and scholastic pursuits that are at the core of library goals. To accomplish this great feat, libraries must provide an online experience that is fun, relative to their lives, and allows for social interaction (both online and onsite). Teens must be given ample opportunities for discourse and self-expression (verbal, visual, and written), and also space for opposition to normative values that are often embodied by the very institution of libraries. In writing about online motivational factors for Wikipedia, Rafaeli and Ariel (2008) cite a study by Joyce and Kraut (2006) that determined “users who contribute more content to an online community were more likely to repeat their participation in that community” (249). Also a study by Ling et al. (2005) found that users contribute more “if they believe that their contributions are important to the group’s performance, if they believe that their contributions will be identifiable, and if they like the group they are working with” (250).

The following nine categories comprise a contextual framework for analyzing individual elements of teen websites to determine if they constitute online communities: 1) generates feeling of belonging to a group, 2) promotes shared activities, 3) promotes shared goals and interests, 4) dissemination of museum information, 5) provides an understanding of museum norms/goals, 6) provides for peer-to-peer connection, 7) community contributions, 8) connection to a physical community/museum group, and 9) provides for interaction/dialogue. It is important for teens to receive information about the overall library community, but it is equally important for them to be able to participate and share their opinions and creations with peers and the general public. Providing links to external organizations and institutions is also vital to creating a networked environment; the IMLS states that “many funding agencies consider partnerships an effective strategy for reaching audiences, leveraging resources, and building organizational capacity” (51, 2007).

Yet teen websites also might have unforeseen consequences to their success. In creating their own content, teens contribute to a displacement of hierarchical knowledge within the library as a pedagogical institution. Do libraries maintain their authority by controlling content from teen websites, and does this explain the marginalization of “teen” content that is labeled as such? Is the Internet an appropriate space for this struggle; is the library an appropriate place? Specific points for further study on the matter could focus on how online teen spaces differ from their physical programs (teen advisory councils), how the production value of these websites are incorporated back into the library, how much the websites are open to public participation, and what is the motivation to view and/or contribute. Also of interest is, if the segregation of the physical and online spaces is a factor of their success, what is the nature of such relationship, and how is success measured. The website participants may start as library visitors (and repeatedly return as members of library-based teen programs), but new visitors may have no knowledge of or even interest in the physical library. Does that even matter, and to whom?

Conclusion
Teens are now highly valued as representing the “pulse of contemporary culture.” Teens are studied extensively throughout the academic world, and they are the focus of market researchers and trend forecasters that depend on their constant search for the latest product, on their free spirit of experimentation, and on their strong social networks to spread information virally.

Feminist theorist Nancy Fraser states that public spheres are “arenas for the formation and enactment of social identities” (1992, 125). The teen websites are such a public sphere, critical for individual development because they reflect societal norms; they are spaces where public opinions are formed, and where participation and discourse are encouraged. Teens determine not only their individual proclivities through action, but also how they fit into society and negotiate their own identities. This is probably the best argument to maintain basic institutional control.

During times of change in our society, it is important to identify the spaces where change is taking place, where “public opinion” is being created, and where future leaders are being formed. Teen websites not only benefit teens with an alternative space for expression and sharing, but they also benefit the libraries that depend on teens as their future patrons and to fulfill their social obligation. The great challenge for museums will be to encourage the formation of individual teen creativity and identity within a larger communal (institutional) space that also has its own identity and history.

References
Asen, R. (2004). A discourse theory of citizenship. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 90, 189-211.

Estabrook, L., Witt, E., Rainie, L. (2007, December 30). Information searches that solve problems: How people use the internet, libraries, and government agencies when they need help. Pew Internet & American Life Project: Washington, DC. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/Pew_UI_LibrariesReport.pdf

Fraser, N. Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In Craig Calhoun, ed. Habermas and the public sphere (Studies in contemporary German social thought). Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1992.

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robinson, A. J. & Weigel, M. (2007). Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Chicago, The MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.newmedialiteracies.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf

Koke, J. & Dierking, L. Museums and libraries engaging America’s youth: Final report of a study of IMLS youth programs, 1998-2003. Washington, DC: Institute of Museum and Library Services, 2007. Retrieved from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3c/18/f2.pdf

Putnam, Robert D. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Rafaeli, S., & Ariel, Y. (2008). Online motivational factors: Incentives for participation and contribution in Wikipedia. In A. Barak (Ed.), Psychological aspects of cyberspace: Theory, research, applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 243-267.

Author’s Bio
Susana Smith Bautista is a Ph.D. student and Provost Fellow at the Annenberg School of Communication, University of Southern California, where she also received her Masters degree in Art History/ Museum Studies. Her Bachelors degree is in Government from Pomona College. Susana has many years of experience in the art world in Los Angeles, New York, and Greece working with museums, commercial galleries and non-profit art spaces, curating exhibitions, lecturing, and writing art criticism. She was Executive Director of the Mexican Cultural Institute of Los Angeles, Editorial Director of http://www.LatinArt.com, and Associate with the Daniel Saxon Gallery. Susana also served the city of Pasadena, California, as Arts and Culture Commissioner for six years. At USC, Susana is researching the role of museums in the digital age, how new technologies are affecting traditional museum practices, and the global network of museums, arts institutions, and governmental bodies.

Over time we have seen how public libraries have expanded their services to provide a wider range of informational and entertainment media, such as music cds, videos and dvds, and books-on-tape.  With the widescale distribution of books and multimedia available via the Web, community libraries are once again reconsidering not only the range of services they provide, but also their mode of outreach and incorporation of new digital technologies.  This post reviews noteworthy efforts by community libraries to adapt to and make use of new mobile media. 

Mobile phone use in the U.S. has shown tremendous growth in recent years. As of 2008, there were over 260 million mobile phone subscribers, representing about 85 percent of the population (Singh, 2008). 88 percent of college students own mobile phones and 27 percent have a Blackberry or PDA (Rainie, 2008). According to a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control, 20 percent of U.S. households had only mobile phones (i.e. no landline) as of the end of 2008, and about one third of those aged 18 – 24 and one fourth of those aged 25 – 29 live in mobile phone-only households (Fram, 2009). While young people are more likely to have no landline, about one third of people who live in poverty also only have mobile phones. According to a report by comScore, as of January 2009 some 22.4 million mobile phone users were accessing the mobile web on a daily basis, and this usage had doubled since one year prior (Burns, 2009).

This shifting landscape of mobile communication use intersects with the evolving role of the library discussed in the previous post. There are three main reasons that libraries have embraced the use of mobile technologies:  (1) to expand the range of content available to patrons, (2) to offer a fuller menu of services, and (3) as a new mode of public outreach. In terms of content, the question posed is, how do wireless devices such as mobile phones and PDAs allow libraries either to distribute content in different forms or to expand the field of information about a library item?  For services and outreach, how do mobile devices enhance customer service and expand the patron base?  And yet, to argue that the use of mobile media is a NEW manifestation of the desire to expand outreach efforts (or provide a wider range of information and services) would be to ignore an important element of the history of community library efforts.

Consider the humble bookmobile. Yes, the bookmobile, the traveling RV bibliothéque that many of us remember (with delight in my case) gracing our elementary schools once a month with its glorious presence. At the bookmobile one could conveniently have access (service) to books (content) unavailable at one’s own school library, and even the kids with the most lackadaisical attitude toward reading were drawn to the bookmobile because its monthly appearance in and of itself made it special and because it was a chance to be dismissed from class for 30 minutes to go and look at books with groovy titles and fun images (outreach). Of course, the mission of many bookmobiles today aligns more closely with the vision set forth by Mary Titcomb when she came up with the idea of the traveling wagon full of books in 1905 – to provide books to those without any access to a library in their local community (http://www.whilbr.org/bookmobile/index.aspx). Bookmobiles also make available books and services to seniors and others with limited physical mobility. More recently, with his Internet Bookmobile (http://www.archive.org/texts/bookmobile.php), Brewster Kahle, director of the Internet Archive, traveled around the U.S. printing and binding books in the public domain (such as Alice in Wonderland), raising awareness of the Internet as a free digital library for all, and challenging copyright extension legislation that continues to be passed in Congress (Cisler, 2002; Koman, 2002).

Taking the bookmobile as a starting point, in what ways are community libraries engaging with mobile communication technologies to enhance content, services, and outreach for the purposes of learning? How is mobility a part of both the physical and the virtual library? It should be noted that the following discussion is by no means exhaustive and is meant to point to interesting applications and projects that are in the works. For additional links to important “mobiles and libraries” interfaces, applications, and resources (not limited to public libraries) see “M-Libraries – Library Success: A Best Practices Wiki” (http://libsuccess.org/index.php?title=M-Libraries).

Content
Mobile technologies clearly allow libraries to expand the range of forms for distributing content. For decades, libraries have offered books on tape and CD in order to provide content for those unable to read a physical book, such as the sight impaired, and for people who desire content that they could enjoy on the go (driving, walking, etc.). More recently many libraries have begun offering e-books and digital audio books for download. For example, since 2005 cardholders of the New York Public Library have been able to download audio books from the Internet any time of the day or night simply by going to the library’s website and entering their card number and a PIN (http://www.gizmag.com/go/4157/). They can check out as many as ten audio books at a time for up to three weeks and play them on their computer, CD player, portable digital music player, or cell phone. The New York Public Library and thousands of others use OverDrive’s technology, and OverDrive’s website allows users to search for libraries offering free digital downloads (http://www.overdrive.com/). Libraries have also begun offering not only digital content, but also the means by which to use it. As Ellyssa Kroski (2008) discusses in her recent report, On the Move with the Mobile Web, institutions such as the Thomas Ford Memorial Library in Western Springs, Illinois (http://www.fordlibrary.org/) allow patrons to check out iPod Nanos with audio books loaded on them.

In addition to storing digital books, mobile devices are also being used to expand the field of information around books. One way is through the use of QR (quick response) codes, which are a type of two-dimensional barcode that can store a lot of information that can then be downloaded via a mobile phone. They are already quite popular in Japan and parts of Europe where they are used mostly for promotional/marketing reasons. However, QR codes could have multiple uses in libraries. As librarian Lex Rigby explains, currently in libraries while conventional barcodes are used to link an item to its catalog record, the information is limited and it can only be accessed by scanning the barcode at the check-out desk. On the other hand, QR codes could be used to store descriptions, images, useful links, etc. for all types of library materials. A library patron could use their mobile phone to scan the QR code to access this information (http://www.lexrigby.com/2009/03/26/qr-codes-in-libraries-and-higher-education/). The library at the University of Bath is at the forefront of using QR codes to link to their catalog (http://blogs.bath.ac.uk/qrcode/2009/03/23/uni-of-bath-library-including-qr-codes-in-catalogue/). This expanded range of information available at the click of a (camera phone) button is obviously time-saving and efficient. Thus far, however, the use of QR codes in public libraries in the U.S. does not seem to be widespread although such two dimensional barcodes have been generated for the web spaces of each branch of the Brooklyn Public Library (http://natehill.wordpress.com/2008/07/27/the-physical-internet-10-at-not-your-library/).

Services
In addition to providing a new mode of content provision, mobile devices are also being used to enhance library services. In this regard, text messaging (or SMS – short message service) is an obvious means of inexpensive and efficient communication, and several public libraries have implemented message options for their cardholders. Orlando, Florida’s Orange County Library System (http://www.ocls.info) allows patrons the choice of receiving text message reminders about upcoming due dates for materials and start dates for courses (Kroski, 2008). The Skokie Public Library in Skokie, Illinois offers such alerts as well as updates on holds placed and the option of renewing items via SMS (http://www.skokie.lib.il.us/s_about/mobile_services.asp). For similar purposes, some libraries are also using Twitter (http://twitter.com/about#about), a micro-blogging service that allows users to send updates (tweets) to their “followers” and receive tweets from those they signed up to follow. Posts can be viewed on a computer or an Internet-enabled mobile phone.

In addition to using mobile-enabled messaging, many libraries are designing their websites to be mobile friendly, which involves making the information concise, limiting the number of links, using descriptive icons, and including “home” and “parent-link” icons (West, Hafner, & Faust, 2006). At the current moment, however, there are still issues with display quality across different devices (Liston, 2009). Again, among community libraries the Skokie Public Library emerges as an exemplar as the library has designed a version of its website specifically for viewing on the small screen of a mobile device. The library catalog can also be browsed using a phone or PDA (with AirPAC, a mobile version of OPAC). In a recent presentation, Megan Fox (2009) has outlined numerous types of library friendly applications designed for the iPhone and other smartphones. Such applications enable users to find public libraries, organize notes, and conduct mobile searches. For example, the Washington D.C. Public Library has an iPhone application specifically designed to navigate its services. Some libraries also provide audio tours via mobile phones (http://www.folger.edu/template.cfm?cid=2383). A final mobile service deserving mention is the WorldCat Mobile pilot project (http://www.worldcat.org/mobile/default.jsp), which enables users to search for library materials as well as libraries, maps, and directions.

Outreach
In 2008, 62 percent of those aged 18 – 30 years old visited a public library for a range of purposes, including checking out books, using computers, seeking reference materials and the like (Rainie, 2008). Despite this figure, public libraries feel it is imperative to continue to reach new users and to maintain the users they have. The mobile content and services mentioned above are offered as opt-in choices for patrons. However, outreach generally means reaching out to those not already enjoying the library. Mobile phones may not be the most ideal devices for this purpose because of their extremely personal nature and people’s profound disdain for mobile spam (due to cost and irritation factors). However, some libraries are finding success using Twitter via mobile phones to make more connections in their communities and to promote their services and programs
(http://lis5313.ci.fsu.edu/wiki/index.php/Twittering_Libraries#Libraries_Using_Twitter). Such tweets might concern everything from pointers to the library website, to information on upcoming events, to research about the library’s role in society (Milstein, 2009).

Many libraries have also created Facebook and MySpace pages, such as the West Palm Beach Florida Public Library (http://www.facebook.com/pages/West-Palm-Beach-FL/West-Palm-Beach-Public-Library/27487304991). While many users view such pages on desktop or laptop computers, accessing social networking sites via mobile phones is becoming a popular activity and one that is growing rapidly (Burns, 2009). For this reason, Rainie (2009) recommends that libraries try to become “a news node for information and interaction” in the lives of young people. As Rainie adds, “The internet is ‘personified’ in some people’s lives and [libraries] can provide information and social support in the same ways that social networks can.” Since people often build their social networks via social networking sites such as Facebook through “friending” their friends’ friends, libraries could tap into this networking function as a form of outreach. Dempsey (2009), however, questions whether users will be motivated to participate in such networks.

Conclusion
There are clearly several interesting projects and applications joining together libraries and mobiles at this current moment. As library professionals participate in Google groups (http://groups.google.com/group/mobilelibraries), blogs (Gerry McKiernan’s http://mobile-libraries.blogspot.com/), and conferences (http://m-libraries2009.ubc.ca/) dedicated to exploring mobile libraries, the future promises to bring more ways that mobile phones and PDAs can be used to serve the library’s mission in terms of expanding content, services, and outreach. However, one word of caution should be added in this conclusion. Aside from text messaging services, most of the initiatives highlighted above necessitate a mobile phone with Internet access. Considering that most data plans are only compatible on more high-end phones and cost upwards of an additional $20 per month, clearly not everyone can participate in such mobile-enabled initiatives. As Horrigan (2009) discusses in his recent report, The Mobile Difference, only 39 percent of the U.S. adult population are “motivated by mobility” and have “largely positive and improving attitudes about how mobile devices make them more available to others” as well as high levels of usage for “non-voice data applications such as text messaging and internet browsing” (25). However, 61 percent are defined as “stationery media will do,” meaning they do “not feel the pull of mobility – or anything else – drawing them further into the digital world” (4). As Horrigan emphasizes that “the bar that qualifies as high-tech among users has risen” (p. 16), we must continuously ask whether such mobile services and applications will broaden participation in libraries or perpetuate an insurmountable knowledge gap.

References

Cisler, S. (2002). Letter from San Francisco: The Internet bookmobile. First Monday [Online] 7(10). Retrieved May 2, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/999/920

Dempsey, L. (2009). Always on: Libraries in a world of permanent connectivity. First Monday [Online] 14(1-5). Retrieved March 2, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2291/2070

Fox, M. (2009, April 1). Mobile practices and search: What’s hot! Paper presented at the Computers in Libraries Annual Conference. Arlington, VA. Retrieved May 8, 2009, from http://web.simmons.edu/~fox/mobile

Fram, A. (2009). More cell phone users dropping landlines. The San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved May 8, 2009, from http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/05/06/national/w090056D59.DTL&type=tech

Horrigan, J. (2009, March). The mobile difference: Wireless connectivity has drawn many users more deeply into digital life. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved April 10, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/5/-The-Mobile-Difference-Typology.aspx

Koman, R. (2002). Riding along with the Internet bookmobile. Retrieved April 10, 2009, from http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2002/10/09/bookmobile/index.html

Kroski, E. (2008). On the move with the mobile web: Libraries and mobile technologies. Library and Technology Reports 44(5). Retrieved January 11, 2009, from http://www.techsource.ala.org/ltr/on-the-move-with-the-mobile-web-libraries-and-mobile-technologies.html

Liston, S. (2009). OPACs and the mobile revolution. Computers in Libraries 29(5), 6-16.

Milstein, S. (2009). Twitter FOR libraries. Computers in Libraries 29(5), 17-18.

Raine, L. (2008, April 17). The role of libraries in a networked world. Paper presented at the Texas Library Association Annual Conference. Dallas, TX. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2008/The-role-of-libraries-in-the-digital-age.aspx

Raine, L. (2009, January 14). How libraries can survive in the new media ecosystem. Paper presented at the HELIN Library Consortium. Bryant University, Smithfield, RI. Retrieved March 8, 2009, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Presentations/2009/How-libraries-can-survive-in-the-new-media-ecosystem.aspx

Singh, S. (2008). U.S. raises $19b in spectrum sale. The Times of India (March 25). Retrieved March 8, 2009, from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US_raises_19b_in_spectrum_sale/articleshow/2896443.cms

West, M. A., Hafner, A. W., & Faust, B. D. (2006). Expanding access to library collections and services using small-screen devices. Information Technology and Libraries 25(2), 103-107.

Author Bio
Cara Wallis recently completed her Ph.D. at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. Her research interests include the social and cultural implications of new media technologies, particularly as these relate to issues of identity, power, and social change.

From National Efforts to Create Digital Archives to Local Efforts at Access Equality

Libraries and museums have a common core characteristic as stewards of collections that can be made available to others. There is a drive toward preservation informing the mission of both kinds of institutions, what Derrida (1995) has called “the archontic principle.” As digital technology made impacts on the modes of preservation available to libraries, several efforts were made at the national level to bring together research and practices for digital preservation, along with the means for institutions to share access to their collections. As digital technologies and personal computing grew more ubiquitous among the general public, community libraries were recognized for their potential to serve as an internet resource for people who did not otherwise have access to the web. These two strands within the literature on digital media and libraries inform this post. The focus here is on the United States, in part due to the US based nodes the MacArthur Foundation plans to support in its efforts at establishing distributed learning networks mentioned in the previous post.

Digital Archives and Distributed Networks of Preservation

Efforts to digitize library holdings go back to the 1970s, with Project Gutenberg as an early example (Maidenberg, 2008). In 1995, a group of organizations working to digitize their holdings formed the Digital Library Federation as a way to pool resources for infrastructure research and best practices based in collective experience (Kresh, 2007). Funding and institutional support from the US government came around the same time as millennial panics about the loss of digital data and increased circulation of the terms information society and knowledge economy (Ross & Hedstrom, 2005). Smith (2006) writes “in December 2000, recognizing that born-digital content of value to the nation is at risk of being lost to current and future generations, Congress created the National Digital Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program - NDIIPP." The Library of Congress was charged with oversight of the program, which funded research for digital infrastructures that would support a distributed network of multiple kinds of digital objects (LeFurgy, 2005). Over time, Congress has approved the extension of this network to include state, regional, and international organizations and an increasing number of private sector partners with stakes in preservation technology (Smith, 2006). Funding for the technical architecture was meant to address four critical areas of investment:

1. building a distributed storage platform to help preserving institutions attain redundant and geographically disbursed storage of digital materials at low cost;
2. establishing protocols for preservation-quality data transfer;
3. developing and testing tools and services for ingest, storage, metadata, and formats and
4. developing practices and standards for assessing the quality of preservation systems (Smith, 2006).

The National Science Foundation also sought to support a distributed network of specialized digital holdings in the form of the National Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology Educational Digital Library (NSDL). The NSDL “comprises a set of projects engaged in a collective effort to build a national digital library of high quality science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) educational materials for students and teachers at all levels, in both formal and informal settings” (Zia, 2001). As a repository for learning environments and educational materials, the NSDL faced distinct challenges from the NDIIPP or other projects that have focused on knowledge stored in print form.

References to the library at Alexandra come up repeatedly in reflections upon the possibility of interconnected digital libraries that would together serve as a repository for all the knowledge produced by humankind (Kresh, 2007).  Since its announcement in 2004, Google’s Google Books project has received the most attention for its attempt to digitize every book that has been published and create such a repository (Coyle, 2006; Jeanneney, 2005; Maidenberg, 2008; Toobin, 2007). The company began working towards this goal through partnerships with university-based libraries and publishing companies and are currently working with US courts to create a settlement agreement from (Pickler, 2009) a class-action suit by the US Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers. The embedded nature of Google’s profit structures and the search tools that serve as access points for users has caused concern among many in the publishing, preservation, and copyright trades since 2004. Responses include the creation of the Open Content Alliance (OCA), which is simultaneously undertaking the mass digitization of books with the goal of creating a digital repository for shared digital media, including its metadata (Maidenberg, 2005) and international outcry against Google’s cultural politics and economic structure ("German Authors,” 2009; Jeanneney, 2005; Picker, 2009)

On one of Google’s self-published blogs, the company emphasizes the ways their project will create access for larger populations to works that can be difficult to find (Smith, 2009). Leetaru (2008) describes Google’s project and those of its competitors as one of access digitization rather than preservation digitization. The difference mostly comes down to the digital formats used to create a digitized version of an analog form. Coyle (2006) creates a similar distinction between “mass digitization” and “non-mass digitization.” The expense and technical support required for digital preservation contributes to the willingness of preservation institutions to collaborate with other institutions or digitization projects as part of their mission to sustain the relevance of their collections for digital publics.

Access and Digital Inequality

The emphasis on access in the mission statements of both Google Books and the OCA fits with discourses surrounding the term the digital divide, which emerged in the mid 1990s as more households and business connected individuals with the web (Estabrook et al., 2007; Gates Foundation, 2004; Hargittai, 2003; Jenkins et al., 2006; Kafai et al., 2007; Warschauer, 2003). Beginning in 1995, the US Department of Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) produced a series of reports titled Falling Through the Net that provided empirical grounds for recognizing stratification “in the use of information technology, attributable largely to socioeconomic factors of race, income, education, and geography” (Gates Foundation, 2004, p. 6). Over time, the term itself has been criticized for oversimplifying how inclusion and participation in digital economies and publics works in relation to the socioeconomic factors mentioned above (Hargittai, 2003; Jenkins et al., 2006; Kafai et al., 2007; Warschauer, 2003). The NTIA has changed the title of its reports to A Nation Online. Hargittai (2003) proposed the term digital inequality: “a refined understanding of the ‘digital divide’ that emphasizes a spectrum of inequality across segments of the population depending on differences along several dimensions of technology access and use.”

The MacArthur Foundation’s DML Initiative is part of the shift away from what Warschauer (2003) and others have characterized as a device based model for understanding the benefits of access to ICT. Research reports from Jenkins (2006) and Ito (2008) are rooted in a literacy based model of ICT access (Warschauer, p.46). This shift came about in part from the disappointing results of early efforts to put computers in the hands of people who were considered to be on the wrong side of the gap (Kafai et al., 2007; Warschauer, 2003). Hargittai (2003) and others have advocated for public policy that supports “affordable access to the telecommunications network” in the form of universal service and promotes autonomy of use or “the freedom to use technologies when, where and how one wishes.” The series of posts on this blog that provide information on new media practices in globalized regional contexts point to specific manifestations of digital inequality as well as ingenuity in efforts at autonomy of use.

Two key reports (Estabrook, 2007; Gates Foundation, 2004) that address US public libraries as sites where people make use of the Internet’s resources mirror an increasing emphasis among library professionals to serve their communities in ways that incorporate digital technologies (Kresh, 2007). University libraries are focusing on comprehensive digital resources for their students through subscriptions to digital archives of scholarly publications like JSTOR, while public libraries are developing strategies for utilizing their physical spaces to connect patrons to digital resources and learning opportunities (Kresh, 2007).

In the 2004 Gates Foundation report Toward Equality of Access: The Role of Public Libraries in Addressing the Digital Divide provided statistical data supporting libraries as a site of Internet use for groups that categorically lacked other means of access. The report also acknowledged libraries as a site that facilitated the learning of computer-related skills through its staff and computer training classes. The 2007 report Information Searches that Solve Problems sponsored by the Pew Internet & American Life project and the University of Illinois School of Library and Information Science presents results from a national survey of how Americans across socioeconomic factors utilized various resources to deal with specific types of problems. The study found that the Internet was the top source of information for problem-solving and that

65% of adults who went to a library for problem-solving help said that access to computers, particularly the internet, was key reason they go to the library for help. And 62% of adults who went to the library for help actually used the computers at the library (Estabrook, 2007).

Conclusion

Although the Library of Congress initiated its NDIIPP program with the aim of creating a shared infrastructure and policies for the preservation of national heritage, it is also currently focused upon access and participation, with the launch of a collaboration with Flickr.com as a key example (Springer et al., 2008). This collaboration leverages existing commercial social media networks to facilitate forms of user contributions such as comments and tags. A report on the success of the pilot program mentions that the collaboration between the Library and Flickr led the website to establish The Commons and serve as a link between digital image archives and various publics. On its website, Flickr claims its twin goals with the project are

1. To increase access to publicly-held photography collections, and
2. To provide a way for the general public to contribute information and knowledge.

References

Coyle, K. (2006). Mass digitization of books. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(6), 641-645.

Derrida, J. (1996). Archive Fever. (E. Prenowitz, Trans). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (original work published 1995)

Estabrook, L., Witt, E., Rainie, L. (2007, December 30). Information searches that solve problems: How people use the internet, libraries, and government agencies when they need help. Pew Internet & American Life Project: Washington, DC. Retrieved from: http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/Pew_UI_LibrariesReport.pdf

Gates Foundation. (2004). Toward equality of access: The role of public libraries in addressing the digital divide. Retrieved June 1, 2007, from http://www.gatesfoundation.org.

German authors outraged at Google Book Search. (2009, April 27). Der Spiegel. Retrieved from: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,621385,00.html

Hargittai, E. (2003) The digital divide and what to do about it. In D. C. Jones (Ed), New economy handbook. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Ito, M., Horst, H., Bittanti, M., boyd, d., Herr-Stephenson, B. Lange, P.B. et al. (2008, November). Living and Learning with New Media: Summary of Findings from the Digital Youth Project. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning. Retrieved from: http://digitallearning.macfound.org

Jeanneney, J.-N. (2007). Google and the myth of universal knowledge: A view from Europe (T.L. Fagan, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (original work published 2005)

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A.J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st
century. The MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.digitallearning.macfound.org.

Kafai, Y. B., Peppler, K. A., & Chiu, G. M. (2007) High tech programmers in low-income communities: Creating a computer culture in a community technology center. In Steinfield, Pentland, Ackerman, and Contractor (eds.), Communities and technologies: Proceedings of the Third Communities and Technologies Conference, Michigan State University, 2007, London: Springer, 544-563.

Kresh, D. (Ed.). (2007). The whole digital library handbook. Chicago: American Library Association.

Lagoze, C., Arms, W., Gan, S. Hiiman, D., Hoehn, W., Millman, D. et al. Core services in the architecture of the national science digital library (NSDL). Proceedings of the 2nd ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries, July 14-18, 2002, Portland, OR, USA.  doi: 10.1145/544220.544264

Leetaru, K. (2008, October 6). Mass book digitization: The deeper story of Google Books and the Open Content Alliance. First Monday 13(10). Retrieved from: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2101/2037.

LeFurgy. W. (2005). Building preservation partnerships: The Library of Congress National Information Infrastructure and Preservation Program (NDIIPP). Library Trends, 54(1), 163-172.

Maidenberg, K. (2008). The race to create a digital library: Google Books vs. the Open Content Alliance. Scroll, 1(1). Retrieved from http://jps.library.utoronto.ca.

Picker, R. (2009, April 29). Antitrust updates: Google Book Search; Section 2 Ssymposium; The mediated book. The University of Chicago Law School Faculty Blog. Retrieved from: http://uchicagolaw.typepad.com/faculty/2009/04/antitrust-updates-google-book-search-section-2-symposium-the-mediated-book.html

Ross, S. & Hedstrom, M. (2005). Preservation research and sustainable digital libraries. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 5(4), 317-324. doi: 10.1007/s00799-004-0099-3

Smith, A. (2006, June). Distributed preservation in a national context: NDIIPP at mid-point. D-Lib Magazine, 12(6). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/june06/smith/06smith.html.

Smith, Adam (2009, April 29). Google Book Search settlement will expand access. Google Public Policy Blog. Retrieved from: http://googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/2009/04/google-book-search-settlement-will.html

Springer, M., Dulabahn, B., Michel, P., Natanson, B., Reser, D., Woodward, D. et al. (2008, October 30). For the common good: The Library of Congress Flickr pilot project. Retrieved from http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/flickr_pilot.html.

Toobin, J. (2007, February 5). Google’s moon shot. The New Yorker, 82(48), 30‐35.

Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Zia, L. (2001, Novemeber). The NSF National Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Digital Library (NSDL) Program: New Projects and a Progress Report. D-Lib Magazine, 7(11). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november01/zia/11zia.html.