- How does user generated content (ie ratings, reviews, tagging) impact upon or change the way in which users interact with or experience the library and its collection? What are the pros and cons of user generated content in designing and maintaining library catalogues and databases?
It is important to recognize that because of the change of print book as we know it, to the triumph of technology, in this case, the e-books, libraries have hard to work extra hard to keep up with the transformation from typical library books to e-books. Because of the cutthroat competition to stay relevant, libraries are tasked with the responsibilities of finding innovating mechanisms that improve their interactions with regular customers. The ability to allow a customer to browse online, retrieve data about the book, star the book, and write reviews allow libraries to perform their traditional roles while embracing new technologies (Partridge, & Munro, Carrie, 2010).
While understanding the importance of electronisation of the library, we must reckon with the fact that digital networks bring the customer to the forefront of cultural creation. This means that the individuals become the primary role players in determining what they would like to see, read, or borrow. However, the ability to share about certain interests, books, or any other items availed in the library depends on the community’s general consensus that such materials are up to standards. Perhaps this provides the explanation why the use of reviews, QR Codes, or rating of books becomes key ingredients in determining what patrons would love to borrow from the libraries ( Furner, 2007). To put in another way, the introduction of the digital platform has dissolved the monopoly of the old intermediaries over means that had humongous influence on what the public had interest on. Using customer reviews, ratings, QR codes, users are able to succinctly have control of what they want, when they want it, and why they want it. Perhaps the only disadvantage of the user generated code is the isolation of some segments of the literary works that the users might not identify with. For example, if users make a trend of not borrowing books about Music, the library would stop stocking them. This means that individuals with that interest might be hurt.
QUT library and their catalogue was of much value and helpful to the consumer. The reason I say that is because I realized that through simple software such as the QR code, the QUT library found an easy way to connect patrons in less expensive manner. First, the QR code saves time by making saving information about a book trouble-free and less tasking. The simple QR Code scan allows the patron to see a call number of the book as well as write down all the important details relating to the book. It is easy to track down who borrowed the book, and when it is scheduled to return as well as being able to plan on how you can read the book without actually taking it from the library.
As an information professional, I found LibabryThing of the most value since it gives one an opportunity to rate the book. This way, you can correctly advice people on which books to borrow and which one not to borrow. In addition, from a personal perspective, I still found the LibraryThing helpful. I find it a helpful tool that empowers one to know what to get and what not to get (Pirmann, 2012).
References
Chang, H. & Iyer, H. (2012). Trends in Twitter Hashtag applications: design features for value-added dimensions to future library catalogues. Library Trends, 61(1), 248-258. Retrieved from: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/v061/61.1.chang.html
Cho, A., & Giustini, D. (2008) Web 3.0 and health librarians: an introduction. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association, 29, 1, 13-18.
Furner, J. (2007) User tagging of library resources: toward a framework for system evaluation. Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress. 73rd International Federation of Library and Information Associations General Conference and Council, 19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa.
Greenhill, K. & Wiebrands, C. (2012). No library required: the free and easy backwaters of online content sharing. Paper presented at VALA2012. Retrieved from: http://www.vala.org.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=580&catid=87&Itemid=159 (read the paper or watch the video).
Han, M.(2012). New Discovery Services and Library Bibliographic Control. Library Trends61(1), 162-172. Retrieved from: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/v061/61.1.han.html
Lee, J.H. & Jones, M.C. (2011). Thinking inside the Xbox: Elements of information organization in video games. Proceedings of iConference, 2011 (attached).
Partridge, Helen L., Lee, Julie M., & Munro, Carrie (2010) Becoming "Librarian 2.0" : the skills, knowledge, and attributes required by library and information science professionals in a Web 2.0 world (and beyond). Library Trends, 59(1/2), pp. 315-335.
Pirmann, C. (2012). Tags in the catalogue: Insights from a usability study of LibraryThing for Libraries, Library Trends, 61(1), 234-147. Retrieved from: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/v061/61.1.pirmann.html
Spiteri, L. F. & Tarulli, L.(2012). Social Discovery Systems in Public Libraries: If We Build Them, Will They Come?Library Trends 61(1), 132-147. Retrieved
Furner, J. (2007) User tagging of library resources: toward a framework for system evaluation. Paper presented at the World Library and Information Congress. 73rd International Federation of Library and Information Associations General Conference and Council, 19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa.
Richardson, F. 2008. User Generated Content: Everyone is a Star, retrieved March, 2009,
http://www.fr.com/practice/User%20Generated%20C
Pirmann, C. (2012). Tags in the catalogue: Insights from a usability study of LibraryThing for Libraries, Library Trends, 61(1), 234-147. Retrieved from: http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/library_trends/v061/61.1.pirmann.html
Hetcher, S. 2008 “User-generated Content and the Future of Copyright: Part Two – Agreements between Users and Mega-Sites.” Santa Clara Computers and High Technology Law Journal, 24, retrieved March 312009,http://www.chtlj.org/sites/default/files/media/articles/v024/v024.i4.Hetc
