OK, I have to ask, despite some of the amazing “conversation” happening in the biblioblogosphere [as the irony drips from that statement] the past couple of days. Have you all seen this announcement, and what do you think of it?
WASHINGTON – On January 9, 2007, the ALA Washington Office proudly announced the opening of its “virtual office” in the online environment Second Life.
[I will not even begin to try and link to an ALA press announcement. The page display at the ALA site doesn't seem to have proper line breaks and, more importantly, I doubt that link would be good for more than a day or two, if it is even good, period. As a linkable object, that is.]
I first saw the announcement in the weekly email thing that comes from ALA.
I don’t know what I think of it. My initial thoughts are not pleasant ones, though. I don’t have a well-formed opinion of Second Life, to start with. I don’t “get” it. Admittedly, I haven’t experienced it either. I also have no desire to do so. Some year maybe. But my real life is complicated enough, and if I really wanted to pretend to be somebody/something else I’d go back to playing D&D.
On one hand, I am glad that there is a group of librarians who are involved in Second Life. Whether or not many of us ever “get” Second Life, in particular, there is/will be a need for library services to be embedded in many places they are not currently.
But does the ALA Washington Office need to be there? Maybe I don’t know enough about what they do. I see that it was set up in 1945 to serve as a conduit between ALA members and federal legislators on Capitol Hill. Are there that many of our Congress critters hanging out in Second Life? OK, not likely.
I see from this page that there is also an Office for Information Technology Policy (OITP) established in 1995. Sounds more likely. I also see from a blog post of District Dispatch [found from the first page I linked] that it is, in fact, OITP that is involved in this “outreach.”
According to the news releases and the blog post:
At present, you can find the following items in the virtual office:
* An introduction to the Washington Office
* Information on upcoming activities at Midwinter and National Library Legislation Day.
* An interactive computer that will point users to ALA Washington online resources, including the District Dispatch podcast and blog.
* A slideshow of pictures of our office and staff.
OK. I’m still confused. I really do not know what to think. Why?
Is this the kind of thing ALA needed a dues increase for? I really am glad to see some of the things ALA is trying to do. I think they are trying, and that is important. And certainly not everything they do will please everyone. By the way, I voted for the dues increase.
But unless I can figure this one out, or someone can help me understand that this is a good thing I will be thinking long and hard before renewing my membership next year.
Now before some of you come jumping on me, please go read that press announcement or the blog posting and tell me that there is anything at all that explains what they are up to. What is the rationale behind this move? They talk about the things the librarians are doing there, but not word one about why we need to have a “branch” of the ALA Washington Office in Second Life.
I remember some of the debate about the dues increase and one of the main points that people on either side of the issue agreed to was the good work done by the ALA Washington Office. OK. How does this tie-in to that?
My only sensible guess is that there are many prominent techie types from other professions that hang out in Second Life and that this is a way to propagandize them oops, provide outreach to them. Of course, if that is the case then they cannot just come out and say that.
I really would like to see this as a good thing. But I’m fairly certain I don’t.
Any opinions, ideas, etc? By the by, they are asking for feedback on what we would like to see from the Washington Office presence in Second Life. You can leave comments on the blog post [which I hope is a stable, although ugly, link] or at The Shifted Librarian Blog.
Please keep in mind that I am soliciting other opinions to help me form my own. This means that I am actually able to be persuaded one way or the other. That ought to influence your rhetorical style when you provide feedback.
9 responses so far ↓
1 walt crawford // Jan 11, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Interesting. Based on the numbers one Nicholas Carr managed to put together, it appears that the “two million Second Life Residents” boil down to perhaps a quarter million avatars that have returned to SL at least once at least 30 days after they signed up. So that’s roughly 0.1% of the U.S. population–except that Second Life is worldwide. It’s hard to tell what the real growth rate is, because the “visited once in the last 60 days” number is usually lower than the claimed *growth* within 60 days, which should be impossible (since all of those new Residents count as visits). There are a LOT of ghosts in that particular machine (including mine).
I will say no more. In fact, ALA Washington has, over the years, been a pretty effective lobby, although some would dispute that: I regard it as a good use of my dues. The SL thing? I’m also open to persuasion.
2 rochelle // Jan 11, 2007 at 9:25 pm
I can’t speak to the why of the SL presence, but having been involved with ALA governance for awhile, I can tell you that the the SL presence is a small part of an increased focus on outreach and advocacy. Karen Schneider, an ALA veteran, presented her top 10 reasons for supporting the dues increase (not to mention that it was the first increase in 10 years). It’s a decent summary of what the money was needed for. http://freerangelibrarian.com/2006/01/support_the_dues_increase.php
3 Mark // Jan 11, 2007 at 9:49 pm
Thanks Rochelle and Walt for the comments.
I am familiar with Karen’s list, but thank you Rochelle for listing it. Someone else stumbling in here may not have seen or may want a refresher.
I agree that it *is* outreach. I am wondering about the need for this sort of outreach vs. other forms and to other groups–effectiveness of it, motivation for it. It may not even cost very much. But inexpensive does not necessarily translate into cost effective.
Here is Karen’s 1st reason for supporting the dues increase: “The Washington Office. The rest of ALA could vanish, and I’d get my bang for the buck out of these intrepid freedom fighters.”
I can’t disagree with that. But what does Second Life have to do with “intrepid freedom fight[ing]“?
That question is not directed to Rochelle or Walt; although they are free to take a stab at if they like.
Outreach. Agreed. Should libraries/librarians do outreach. Yep. Is Second Life a community, and thus deserving of outreach? Possibly the former and, if so, yes to the latter. But that is what the other librarians are doing. The relevant question remains “Why does Second Life need outreach from the ALA Washington Office”?
4 Richard // Jan 11, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Mark,
If it’s the Washington office, Congress’ recent appearance in SL might have something to do with it. http://tinyurl.com/yle2py If there’s legislation coming, nice to know that ALA is keeping tabs on it.
Also, whether or not this is a good thing to do or not I occasionally imagine myself transported back to the early 1990′s. Replace “Second Life” with “Internet” or “World Wide Web.” “I don’t get this World Wide Web thing that everyone is talking about…if I wanted to spend hours in front of a computer I’d go back to the office.”
Now whether we’ll all be saying this about SL in 10 years remains to be seen. It does appear however to have developed momentum that the earlier VR communities never did. I attribute that to the availability of broadband.
Walt – the numbers thing is also disturbing, but I think my replacement would still work. Remember how inflated web stats were in the beginning (or still are if we’re counting MySpace traffic).
I’m not sure I’m willing to permanently hang my hat in SL any more than I wanted to spend the rest of my life as an AOL or Compuserv subscriber. Now that Linden Labs has committed to releasing client and server software as open-source it should be interesting to watch what happens next.
5 Mark // Jan 11, 2007 at 10:44 pm
That is very interesting, Richard, so thanks. But I’m still not slightly swayed. Why? That article is about taxation. ALA has nothing to do with that.
And maybe some Congress critters are spending time in SL. But for my tax $$ I’d much prefer those that understand the internet enough to use SL be spending their time explaining how the internet works to their comrades. You know, to folks Sen. Ted Stevens.
I do agree that things will get interesting, and maybe even quickly, but I’m still in the dark about the need. Richard has provided a possible answer–possible because there is probably more to it all than simply taxation. But what is that other?
6 Angel // Jan 12, 2007 at 10:32 am
Hmm, I think I will let you sort this one out. Not convinced on this front, and the fact I am at the stage of deciding if I write ALA yet another dues renewal check means it is probably not the best time to ask me about what they do or mostly fail to do.
Best, and keep on blogging.
7 Leo Klein // Jan 12, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Frankly, I wish they’d set up shop in some Cartoon World that had better illustrations. SL is so ugly.
8 Mark // Jan 13, 2007 at 11:42 am
Angel, I’m not sure how much I will be able to sort out, for several reasons. The biggest one is because I do not see ALA as a very transparent organization.
Secondly, I really don’t care enough to waste a lot of time trying to track down an answer. The question of ROI would be almost impossible to determine, based on reason #1. I have no doubt I could get some sort of an answer if I emailed someone at OITP, but (IMHO) I do not think I would get the real answers to questions such as, “How much time are you and your staff spending in Second Life?” “Is this a paid account; paid for by ALA?” “Who are the real targets for your outreach presence in SL?” “What other (important) work is not getting done due to time spent in SL?”
There may be good reasons for OITP to be in SL. Richard may be on to something that wasn’t explicit in the article he linked. But my guess is these efforts are more propaganda (albeit, positive propaganda) than anything else, and based on reason #1 I doubt ALA will be forthcoming with the real intent of these efforts.
Now, I am not trying to pick on ALA as being different than almost any other large organization. Yes, they almost all engage in these sorts of things, and even when they provide reasons for some action, or lack of, it is a PR reason. It may contain a kernel of the truth, but is not the whole story.
And the last reason–the one that prevents me from overcoming my laziness and putting more work in my busy life by making the effort to ask my questions–is the list of official personnel involved in this effort. I do not need that headache.
The really sad part is that after the last week or so I think more people will agree with me on that statement. And I do find it truly sad! As juvenile as I might be on occasion, I outgrew the kindergarten playground a long time ago. I have no desire to have other people dislike the same people I dislike. I’d much rather have others be able to show me my dislikes are misguided.
ALA, for whatever reasons, has finally and thankfully decided to try and become a bit more “hip,” a bit more 20(.9)th century. I applaud them for it. But that doesn’t just mean hire somebody to help you implement a bunch of blogs and wikis and go play in Second Life and do this and that and…. It means careful evaluation of a need and the suitability of a tool for what the goal actually is. And since ALA is a membership organization it means communicating these things to your membership.
As much as I like blogs and wikis and some of the newer tools, first and foremost, I expect ALA to be a transparent organization. I also expect them to try new things, things that might not work out in the end. But I want to know why–why they are trying it and for those that don’t work out, why they didn’t work.
For now, all I see regarding the SL efforts of the ALA Washington Office is an effort to be hip and to allow some of the hipper members of ALA staff a “valid reason” to play on our dime. I know some will accuse me of jumping to conclusions. Fine. Give me real information. And do NOT make me search for it.
Another concern of mine regarding all this new ALA 2.0 business–one which I am loath to being up in this venue–is that as much noise as we in the biblioblogosphere make we constitute a very tiny fraction of librarianship (and/or ALA)! This is not to say that our concerns (as if there is one set … Not! But assume so for argument’s sake.) are not legitimate or even extremely important. Many of them are. But we do not constitute librarianship or ALA, in full.
ALA certainly needs to move forward into the 21st century, as do libraries and librarians. But at what pace and in what manner and in which areas? Despite what many out here might answer, it is not, “All areas, yesterday!”, just as it isn’t for every library.
OK. OK. I’ll shut up for now. Can anyone else help us with any answers, opinions for the view that we (ALA) needs to be in SL, or maybe just more questions?
9 Mark // Jan 13, 2007 at 11:43 am
Hi Leo and thanks for the great laugh! I about split a gut and was *very* glad I didn’t have a mouthful of liquid when I read your comment.