Holmberg, K. (2009) What is Library 2.0? Journal of Documentation, 65:4. 668-681.

Summary

This article is an attempt to define Library 2.0 by means of a literature review and then co-word analysis. After presenting a multitude of definitions already presented in the field, Holmberg et al. go on to present the findings of their research which consisted of getting definitions from 29 individuals and then synthesizing their word use. The authors determined that interactivity was the most pervasive aspect of Library 2.0 but that other necessary building blocks include: users, social aspects ("soft values"), technology and tools, web and Web 2.0, library and library services, and participation.

What I learned

Ultimately I feel I learned very little from this article. Perhaps it's because I am in my fourth semester of library school, but none of their findings are anything new or interesting to me. I could have provided that exact definition if asked. I feel like this type of scholarship, while helpful to give everyone a jumping off point when discussing this area, does not do much to push librarians forward. By even defining Library 2.0, we are admitting that we have not been able to evolve faster than our users, that we are merely responding to their responses to Web 2.0. This feels backward looking to me, rather than forward-thinking. Perhaps it is because I am a young person who has grown up with these constant technological changes, but it seems to me that no debate needs to exist about whether or not libraries should get involved with these participatory new tools. It should be obvious that as new technologies emerge, we should be testing them out, using them, (if they're good) presenting them to our users, and then seeing if our users are getting any value out of them. We not only need to go where our users are; when possible, we need to already be there when the users arrive.

What I am taking away

This is an academic approach to a real world situation, and while it does add to and synthesize the literature it also doesn't present anything inherently new or helpful to me.

Discussion question

"Interactivity can be interaction between the librarians and the customers or library users, but also between library staff or between users of the library services." This description/definition of "interactivity" leaves out a critical layer of both librarians and users interacting with the information and/or content. Was this an intentional omission? What does it mean?