Libraries & social networking - why? - part 2

As you can see from my previous post, I've compared 3 libraries and their use of social networking technologies. The theme of these two posts is: should libraries utilize social technologies. My answer to this question is yes - libraries should use social technologies if they enhance services to patrons. Libraries should not use social technologies if the point is only to use them. The end game in any library should be to serve the patron is the most efficient and useful manner. Librarians should always be looking for ways to improve their services if a need isn't being fulfilled. Value-added services are very important but it's important for libraries to be cautious and ensure that the new services provided really do add value instead of just looking exciting or like they are on the cutting edge. As you can see from my table in part 1 of this post. These three libraries use very different approaches to their services. All 3 universities offer mobile library services but Arizona State University takes advantage of a multitude of social technologies including podcasts, RSS feeds, vimeo, flickr, Youtube, Facebook, blogs, tags, and Wikis. Both UVM and Syracuse use a much more measured approach and only offer RSS, wikis, and instant messaging services. Arizona does offer many social technologies but it's done in a careful way, it;'s apparent that they've evaluated the services they offer, they've All of the services they've offered could be viewed by some as too much of a good thing and could possibly add confusion to the patrons experience but I think they've found a good balance by carefully providing services that are truly useful rather than just "fancy." Syracuse and UVM both have good websites that offer their patrons important services but I think they can do a lot more. I think it's important to establish the library page as a portal to the library but it should also provide the library with an identity. I think a library website should be a place patrons want to visit not only that they must visit. So while UVM and Syracuse have good websites I would only visit them when I needed some type of research for books. The ASU site has done a good job of making the library a part of the larger university community which I think is important. I would probably visit the site daily to find out about what was happening on campus, read news, find out about art exhibits or other interesting exhibits. I think that the UVM and Syracuse libraries are missing out on a lot of their community by not providing more social technologies like podcasts, Vimeo, Flickr, Twitter, Youtube etc. Again, an important aspect of any library website is in part to establish the libraries identity and to become an important resource for the greater university community. Social technologies can make it easy to establish that identity and to draw patrons back over and over again. A visited library, whether in person or on the web, is an important library and with more and more information accessible to any one with an Internet connection it's more and more important for a library to establish themselves as the go to place for information and services. I was disappointed in part with all three of these libraries because none of the sites had any readers advisory services. I think it's a mistake for libraries to focus on research only. it's equally important for libraries to help their patrons find a good book to read. Librarians should not forget that reading  for pleasure should be an important aspect of their patrons lives and that we have the opportunity to make it so if we offer readers advisory services - even if it's only a blog, or reviews of the newest fiction title added to the library. LibraryThing is a great service and can easily be embedded into any library home page.