Tim Hodson at Information Takes Over points out the thorny issue of library visibility in the new Web 2.0 world. As libraries are better able to make library information available "seamlessly" from course management systems, campus or city or enterprise portals, in embedded in blog posts (check out the University of Minnesota Library's OpenUrl implementation of "post this citation to your blog on the SFX menu") or findable via internet search engines and special digital library "uber" search engines, how will anyone know that the library provides the content? How will libraries get credit and be recognized as valuable? Hodson states that 'there is a danger that the library will not necessarily be seen, while the results are.'
Does this mean that libraries shouldn't enable access or embed library services everywhere that we can? Should we tell our users that they MUST come to the library web site to access our licensed electronic collections? Or is the answer to make the transistions obvious rather than seamless. We allow ways to link to library "stuff" but put up a series of billboard type pages that the user must wade through telling them that the content is available because of their library. Or should we pop up a PSA style announcement "brought to you by your "local" library"?
Enormous Billboard blocking view of Kremlin by uriba (cc) 
Perhaps the real answer lies deeper than the user interface and rests with how the library is marketing itself and communicating its value. Just because you might be able to put up a billboard doesn't mean that you should. Some billboard locations just annoy the users - ruining the view of beautiful natural splendor, or blocking someone's way. Is this the moment to insert ourselves and try to market the library?
Hodson proposes that "rather than saying; we do books, ain't they lovely, we should be saying; we have negotiated access to these services for you so that they work with whichever search engine is of moment."
He goes on to suggest that we ride the Google wave and its popularity by pointing out all the ways we're enabling our services to work with it. It's not just Google we need to think of. Think of the announcement last week for Windows Live Academic. How many libraries enabled their OpenUrl resolver with Live Academic and announced this on their home page or blog? Did any issue a press release and get an article in the campus newsletter or student paper? Did any libraries point out the new features in Google Scholar and remind their users that yes - they can link directly to the "their local" library's licensed content from Google Scholar.
Bruce Newell, Montana State Library, stated "
In this world, convenience will always trump quality. It's our job as librarians to make quality convenient.
So let's make our quality convenient - embedded in environments where our users work, converse, read, think, search, and play. And then we better stand on the tallest stool that we can find and communicate the fact that we've made it convenient and easier.
Photo by Gusstav (cc)
Tags: library | library 2.0 | marketing
