Thing #2: Library 2.0

My first and strongest impression of library 2.0 is that the ideas and concepts it encompasses are important, but not as essential to the continued success of libraries as many would imply. Understanding Flickr, Myspace, and Twitter allows for other avenues to be utilized in the continuing quest to not only serve the public, but educate and notify them as well. However, Stephen Abram and others leading the furious charge into the techno-saturated future would have us believe that in order for libraries to not only thrive but survive, Library 2.0 must be learned and embraced not today, but yesterday. Time is apparently of the essence. And yet, holdovers of the past continue to be relevant in the satisfaction of library patrons. Our current collection contains thousands of VHS tapes and audio books on cassette. These media formats are decades old and have effectively been considered dead for some time, yet they are consistently checked out. Circulation and patron traffic statistics are at their highest ever, so where is the proverbial fire? I understand the importance of keeping up with technological advances; I am in my twenties, so this concept is ingrained in me almost as much as my millennial brethren. However, it seems like a bit of perspective is in order. When simple and obvious changes such as the updating of extremely outdated infrastructures is next to impossible to achieve (some departments are working on computers a decade old), how can it be argued that priorities should be set in regards to the implementation of programs such as Del.icio.us and Twitter?