Being uncomfortable with sharing too much personal information in the online world as well as being an introvert, I understand the appeal of remaining anonymous as well as lurking in online communities. I have experienced both.
1. Anonymous member: This suggests a user who contributes content, but does so without revealing his/her identity. I think in some cases, online anonymity serves a valid purpose. For example, I belong to the SJSU MLIS Yahoo Group where I view and contribute to the Course/Professor Recommendation database each semester; contributors to this particular section are automatically anonymous by design so that SLIS students (who comprise the members of this group) will feel free to publish honest comments. Also there is a moderator, as Rosenberg (2010) suggests, if needed to monitor inappropriate comments. Without the use of anonymity I don’t believe these recommendations would be as helpful and many might not even be written.
On the other hand, while I often do not feel comfortable revealing my true identity to the online world (as evidenced by my blog name), I also do not typically contribute online content in a completely anonymous form (with the above exception). I usually prefer using a pseudonym; Grohol (2006) refers to this as “anonymity that hides a person behind an online persona via a username.” I agree that “people [can] build reputations in their usernames, and so their reputation becomes something they value and want to protect.” While my writing may not always come out sounding the way I want it to, I do think very carefully about what I post online. Even though my blog viewership more than likely consists of a small number of fellow library science classmates, it is possible in theory (although highly unlikely!) that the whole world could be watching. This should be enough to make anyone think twice regarding what they reveal about themselves online.
2. Lurker: As Reed (2009) noted, this suggests a user who may engage in the community by viewing content but does not actually contribute new content themselves. Before enrolling in this Web 2.0 class, I didn’t really have much of an online presence. Not that I have a huge one now, but it is growing slowly. For the most part, I have been a lurker; although I’ve never thought of myself that way before (other meanings of the word can conjure up some creepy images!). I would say the main reason for my “lurking” rather than “contributing” tendency has been due to the risk of “sound[ing] like an idiot”, as expressed so eloquently in three different comments to Reed’s blog. Yep, that’s the reason. Though upon reading this week’s assigned articles, I have a new appreciation and understanding for why online communities tend to thrive even more when more members contribute. I don’t know that my lurking behavior will change soon, but I will consider being more of a contributor in the future when joining new communities and making my way out into the online world.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Allowing library wiki patron participation: Why not?
According to Aaron Tay’s 2009 blog post, “As seen by the listing of libraries wikis, the vast majority of wikis are edited only by librarians in the same institution . . . None allow users to edit."
A contributing factor may be related to the amount of time and effort involved in maintaining and updating a wiki. When outside participation is allowed, content must be regularly monitored, particularly for spam, vandalism, or profane language. Or patrons may end up not contributing content at all or on a regular basis, in which case library staff may need to solicit input to keep the wiki updated. Therefore at least one library staff member is needed to facilitate patron participation in a wiki. Many libraries are already short on staff so there may not be anyone who can afford to give time to this endeavor.
Setting up a participatory wiki also requires a kind of trust that its members will contribute quality content. Therefore it may be difficult for library staff to fully accept the process of allowing patrons to contribute, thereby handing over “ownership” of the wiki. Meredith Farkas’s 2007 blog post discusses some of these concerns in more detail as well as ideas on how to encourage wiki participation if libraries would like to establish this kind of collaborative space with their patrons.
A contributing factor may be related to the amount of time and effort involved in maintaining and updating a wiki. When outside participation is allowed, content must be regularly monitored, particularly for spam, vandalism, or profane language. Or patrons may end up not contributing content at all or on a regular basis, in which case library staff may need to solicit input to keep the wiki updated. Therefore at least one library staff member is needed to facilitate patron participation in a wiki. Many libraries are already short on staff so there may not be anyone who can afford to give time to this endeavor.
Setting up a participatory wiki also requires a kind of trust that its members will contribute quality content. Therefore it may be difficult for library staff to fully accept the process of allowing patrons to contribute, thereby handing over “ownership” of the wiki. Meredith Farkas’s 2007 blog post discusses some of these concerns in more detail as well as ideas on how to encourage wiki participation if libraries would like to establish this kind of collaborative space with their patrons.
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
Online Collaborative Tools: So many choices . . .
Playing with this week’s online collaboration tools was a bit overwhelming for me. Unlike past weeks, I found that I had never heard of most of these, let alone actually used any of them other than Google Docs, Meebo, and Skype. And I’ve only used these three a combined handful of times beginning last semester during my library internship. I used Google Docs and Skype to collaborate briefly with two other SLIS student interns and Meebo to ask a digital reference question of a librarian. So I have not had much experience using any of these tools for extended collaboration purposes.
One of my questions when contemplating using any new kind of social software is how do you know which one is best to try and use? In one of this week’s readings, Dembo comments that “the problem with the proliferation of Web2.0 tools and free resources [is that it] makes it too easy to just jump in without thinking ahead.” Most of these tools seem pretty cool upon first review, but how do I know which ones will fit my needs and my organization’s needs the best? In another reading, Suarez (borrowing from McDonnell) lists as one of the questions to ask before full adoption of a wiki, “Is a wiki the best technology for what I am seeking to accomplish?” This question could easily be changed to reflect any of these collaborative tools, e.g., Is Google Docs the best technology to use for document collaboration or would TextFlow be a better option? Also what if I begin using one of these tools and then it goes away? For instance, out of this week’s links, I was disappointed to find that there were a number of them that no longer work (Present.io, drop.io) or in which the software’s fate is questionable (Etherpad, DimDim, Google Wave).
Suarez suggests that you may not need to dump what you’ve been using if it’s been working, but that perhaps a new collaborative tool will enhance what you’ve been using which might make it worth a try. He states that “social software needs to meet a set of requirements, of needs.” Carpenter makes a similar argument: “the goal is for a use case that’s “real”, not some made-up activity for the sake of testing the software.” Having not had much experience with any of these collaborative tools, I definitely feel lured in by their seemingly cool features. At the same time I agree that it’s very important to look at what’s already working for your organization, really think about what the organization’s needs and goals are, and make sure there’s a need that’s not already being met with existing software before investing too much time and effort trying out the latest tool that may be gone sooner than you think.
Friday, March 18, 2011
Exercise 5 – Discovering bookmarking in del.icio.us
This assignment was an exercise in exploring “the value of social bookmarking tools for re-finding items of interest and for discovery.” Since I first set up my del.icio.us account two months ago, I have basically only used it as a dumping ground for the required weekly class bookmarks as well as for links to my classmates’ blogs. This exercise opened my eyes to some quick and simple ways of discovering additional interesting “items of interest”.
The first of these involves looking at the popularity factor of a bookmark, i.e., the more people that bookmark an item, the greater chance it will be a valuable resource. I tend to view bookmarks as recommendations. One thing to note in looking at a recent bookmarked resource is that it may not yet have a large number of bookmarks until more people have had a chance to view it.
A second strategy in discovering interesting, relevant items involves common tagging. When bookmarking I tend to choose suggested tags because it inherently makes sense to do so for future searching. I also want others to be more likely to find my tagged items by using common labels. For example, I use the tag ‘socialbookmarking’ (46,110 bookmarks) over the similar but less used ‘social_bookmarking’ (11,130 bookmarks) due to the popularity of the former. Tagging is fairly new to me and I look forward to using it in del.icio.us as a way of researching topics.
A third strategy for discovery is to review another person’s set of bookmarks. I picked a person at random and found myself scanning his bookmarks overall to get a feel for the kind of items he chooses to bookmark. Upon seeing several interesting looking resources, I felt confident that the one I ultimately chose would be a useful one.
A fourth and final strategy involves looking at bookmarks of colleagues (in this case, my classmates) or those who are interested in similar topics. In doing so I found that my peers had indeed bookmarked some of the same sites as me. I also found other interesting resources due to our shared common interests, by being in the same class as well as library school in general. Scanning for people recognized in the library or social media fields is another idea for viewing bookmarks in order to connect to relevant resources that they deem valuable, somewhat like using references at the end of an article to find further information. With social bookmarking, I can review an authority’s or peer’s bookmarks, make my selections, and save them.
All the strategies I’ve practiced for this exercise have given me new, quick, and simple ways of discovering interesting and relevant information in my future search endeavors.
The first of these involves looking at the popularity factor of a bookmark, i.e., the more people that bookmark an item, the greater chance it will be a valuable resource. I tend to view bookmarks as recommendations. One thing to note in looking at a recent bookmarked resource is that it may not yet have a large number of bookmarks until more people have had a chance to view it.
A second strategy in discovering interesting, relevant items involves common tagging. When bookmarking I tend to choose suggested tags because it inherently makes sense to do so for future searching. I also want others to be more likely to find my tagged items by using common labels. For example, I use the tag ‘socialbookmarking’ (46,110 bookmarks) over the similar but less used ‘social_bookmarking’ (11,130 bookmarks) due to the popularity of the former. Tagging is fairly new to me and I look forward to using it in del.icio.us as a way of researching topics.
A third strategy for discovery is to review another person’s set of bookmarks. I picked a person at random and found myself scanning his bookmarks overall to get a feel for the kind of items he chooses to bookmark. Upon seeing several interesting looking resources, I felt confident that the one I ultimately chose would be a useful one.
A fourth and final strategy involves looking at bookmarks of colleagues (in this case, my classmates) or those who are interested in similar topics. In doing so I found that my peers had indeed bookmarked some of the same sites as me. I also found other interesting resources due to our shared common interests, by being in the same class as well as library school in general. Scanning for people recognized in the library or social media fields is another idea for viewing bookmarks in order to connect to relevant resources that they deem valuable, somewhat like using references at the end of an article to find further information. With social bookmarking, I can review an authority’s or peer’s bookmarks, make my selections, and save them.
All the strategies I’ve practiced for this exercise have given me new, quick, and simple ways of discovering interesting and relevant information in my future search endeavors.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Library Success Wiki: one of the best
I was enlightened and impressed upon reviewing this week’s examples of library wikis and the varied ways in which they are used. These include sharing information for internal staff purposes (Antioch New England Graduate School's Library Training Wiki, Alaska Association of School Librarians), strategic planning (Durham County Library Strategic Plan wiki), conferences (ALA Chicago 2005 Wiki), subject guides (Plymouth Regional High School Library Wiki, Ohio University’s Biz Wiki), and even as a library’s website (University of South Carolina Aiken Gregg-Graniteville Library).
My favorite out of the group though is the Library Success: A Best Practices Wiki which is a conglomeration of ideas, links, and materials contributed by librarians or any interested party. It is truly a collaborative and positive endeavor whose purpose is to collect and organize information and ideas in order to help and inspire librarians everywhere in their pursuit of instituting successful programming. The wiki effectively accomplishes this due to many of the factors discussed by Cashel (2007) and therefore is one that in his words, works well: 1) “for groups that already know each other” – the community served is made up of librarians sharing a common goal of pursuing library successes; 2) “for co-assembly” in addition to “co-editing” – this is a project that encourages many contributors; 3) “when a clear nucleus is provided” – the first page introduction, community information, and contribution guidance is much appreciated by a new participant like me; 4) “with a clear final product in mind” – while this product is meant to be dynamic, its intent is clear; and 5) “in documenting consensus rather than opinions” – it is set up is a place for shared ideas and links, but not in the form of a discussion board.
On this wiki there is a wealth of information on most library topics of current relevance to librarians, and if not, you can just add it yourself! But beware because once you start editing, you may just get hooked and have trouble stopping. I’d never contributed to a wiki before and I must confess, it can be addicting, but fortunately in a very good way.
My favorite out of the group though is the Library Success: A Best Practices Wiki which is a conglomeration of ideas, links, and materials contributed by librarians or any interested party. It is truly a collaborative and positive endeavor whose purpose is to collect and organize information and ideas in order to help and inspire librarians everywhere in their pursuit of instituting successful programming. The wiki effectively accomplishes this due to many of the factors discussed by Cashel (2007) and therefore is one that in his words, works well: 1) “for groups that already know each other” – the community served is made up of librarians sharing a common goal of pursuing library successes; 2) “for co-assembly” in addition to “co-editing” – this is a project that encourages many contributors; 3) “when a clear nucleus is provided” – the first page introduction, community information, and contribution guidance is much appreciated by a new participant like me; 4) “with a clear final product in mind” – while this product is meant to be dynamic, its intent is clear; and 5) “in documenting consensus rather than opinions” – it is set up is a place for shared ideas and links, but not in the form of a discussion board.
On this wiki there is a wealth of information on most library topics of current relevance to librarians, and if not, you can just add it yourself! But beware because once you start editing, you may just get hooked and have trouble stopping. I’d never contributed to a wiki before and I must confess, it can be addicting, but fortunately in a very good way.
Friday, March 11, 2011
The UIUC Undergraduate Library
The University Library was originally founded in 1867, along with what is now known as the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. It is “the largest public university library in the U.S.” with over 11 million volumes, and third in North American academic libraries overall after Harvard and Yale. The Library consists of a Main Library, an Undergraduate Library, and 30+ departmental libraries. It serves a student population of over 30,000 undergraduate and 10,000 plus graduate students, as well as university faculty and staff and visiting scholars.
The Undergraduate Library first opened in 1969. Its architecture is somewhat unique in that it was built underground and is connected to the Main Library by an underground tunnel. This library “provides in one location more reference resources for undergraduate instruction than any other undergraduate college library in the United States” (History of the Undergraduate Library, 2010).
For the most part, all library web pages are set up similarly with a blue and orange navigation bar at the top and three columns filled with links and information underneath; heading and link colors are also blue and orange. One noticeable difference is the Undergraduate Library home page; although it has the same top navigation bar and stays true to the blue and orange color scheme, the arrangement of content and page set-up have a different look than other library pages.
Undergraduate Library’s (UL) Online Marketing Efforts
While the University Library and a handful of departmental libraries have each dipped their figurative “toes” into the online world of social media, the Undergraduate Library has delved much deeper into this marketing world and so the focus here will be on this particular library.
1. Facebook
Undergraduate Library @ UIUC has 496 people who like this or “fans”. On average the library posts 2-3 times per week and these are typically different than their Twitter postings. The majority of posts are by the library with occasional posts by other university entities such as the Union. There doesn’t appear to be a great deal of interaction by students on the Wall although the library does respond in a timely manner when there are student questions.
Besides the Wall, there are five additional tabs; these include Events which lists upcoming and past library events that invite student attendance and allow them to RSVP as well.
A potentially useful link is UIUC Library Search under Likes which is described as a “handy widget [that] searches the UIUC Library catalog, as well as some of our journal article databases, right from Facebook.” It is unclear how much this widget is used by patrons since there are only two reviews of 1-2 stars out of 5. Since Facebook login is required to use this app, and I don’t have an account, I was unable to test this out myself. Apparently it is the same search assistant that is available on the MySpace page, but that one no longer works. Over a year ago there was quite a lot of discussion on this site by outside librarians asking how to set up this app.
One way to get to the UL Facebook page is by clicking on the Facebook button located on the library’s home page. I had also Googled “university of illinois library facebook” and the first result pointed to an outdated Undergraduate Library @ the University of Illinois page. While the UL librarian has posted a link here to the new page, I’m wondering if there is a way this old page could be deleted so as to avoid any confusion.
2. MySpace
This account does not appear to be promoted and for good reason (I Googled it). UIUC Undergraduate Library features mostly outdated information including a library federated search tool that no longer works as well as a link to the old Facebook page. The library made one post in 2009 and the last patron post before that was made three years prior. There are two functioning links (the UL home page and Ask a Librarian) and a side panel of streaming tweets by askundergrad (the UL’s Twitter account), but for the most part this account appears to be abandoned.
3. Twitter
@askundergrad is the UIUC Undergrad Lib account and currently has 1,049 followers. There is a link on the UL home page as well as a streaming Twitter feed. Although the UL was one of the early adopters of Twitter (May 2007), the tool had not been used as effectively as hoped. There was a re-launch in 2009 and since then the library has continued to keep its feed updated and lively, making on average 7-10 tweets per day. Tweet content focuses on research tips, library services and resources, historical and current events, and other topics of interest to undergraduates. Relevant links are often included as well.
Examples of recent tweets:
# Need a computer? Every terminal in the UGL taken? Check out a laptop from the undergraduate library circulation desk!
# Movies with sound have been around 88 yrs tomorrow, but there were some classics before that: http://bit.ly/evUQWv
# Have a question yet to be answered to your satisfaction? Try QB: http://bit.ly/bDoK6f
# Free lunch! And... "City Kids, Country Kids, and Suburbanites: Does Geography Matter?" @ 703 S. Wright, 2nd floor: http://bit.ly/eRwov1
In speaking with the Learning Commons (LC) librarian who is in charge of the UL’s use of social media, it is clear that Twitter currently plays the biggest part in this arena. Graduate students spend 25 hours per semester uploading the majority of tweets to ahead of time for efficiency. The library is sensitive to current events though and does incorporate timely tweets as well. T
itional links to both Twitter and Facebook on other UL content pages (Learning Commons, Collaboratories, Partnering Across Campus, Digital Display, Technology, Undergrad Calendar). The Twitter feed also runs on the right side of the first four. In addition, the UL highlights streaming tweets at the library itself using digital signage and flat screen displays.
4. Blog
It is not clear to me how one would initially find this blog. I searched “blog” on the library web site which led me to this page of UIUC Library RSS feeds. A link for the Undergraduate Library News and Blog is halfway down the page.
On the blog page itself, the university’s branding colors of blue and orange are effectively incorporated into the top navigation bar. Blog posts are used to expand on tweeted information about certain library events. One month’s worth of entries (5 in February) are displayed at a time with the latest update as of 2/27/11. There is no option for patron comments. This page also provides library links such as Ask a Librarian, My Account, UIUC Catalog, etc.
5. YouTube, Flickr, Foursquare
On the UL home page there is a link to six “Videos Produced at the Undergraduate Library.” These videos also appear on YouTube via askundergrad's Channel. In Flickr I searched and found the Undergraduate Learning Commons' photostream which contains 16 photos posted in 2006. In Foursquare I found an Undergraduate Library page with 3 tips, 151 people, and 427 check-ins; also a link to the askundergrad Twitter page.
Payoff of UL’s Current Marketing Efforts
Regarding overall branding efforts, all library web pages are set up using the same blue and orange navigation bar at the top along with blue and orange headings and links. This makes for a consistent online brand.
Regarding the use of social media, unfortunately the Undergraduate Library has not been as successful in having two-way conversations with students as the LC librarian would like. She seeks to engage students further so as to give them a sense of all the library has to offer. It is clear from our conversation that the Undergraduate Library and its staff want to be as accessible and approachable as possible to students. In the process of interviewing students, the library has found that many are not aware of various library resources and services. So the challenge lies in trying to find effective ways to use social media to address this issue.
Currently the UL Facebook account is used to post about library information and events as well as other topics of interest to students; generally there does not appear to be much student response. When using Facebook for outreach, student privacy is a concern for the library. For example, students can RSVP for library events via Facebook which can raise privacy issues. So at the moment, it is somewhat unclear how to best use this tool to connect students with services and resources.
The way the UL is using Twitter in “connecting undergraduates to their intellectual life via library services” is quite impressive. Posting 7+ informative tweets per day requires the organization and use of multiple tools in addition to Twitter as well as many working hours. The LC librarian has some very definite ideas about how to effectively use this tool and they seem to be paying off in an increased number of students who follow @askundergrad.
While the UL blog is informative about events, I’m not sure how students typically find it and therefore how many actually read it. Also at this point it is basically a one-way conversational tool since there is no way for patrons to add comments.
I did not see any online promotion for the library’s YouTube videos, Flickr photostream, or the Foursquare page. At this point it would seem that these are not a priority in the UL’s online marketing efforts.
Thoughts Regarding UL’s Marketing Efforts Going Forward
At first glance it may seem straightforwardly easy to review a library’s social media accounts and offer suggestions for improvement. But when you really get into the meat of it and consider all the factors that affect the successful use of these tools, it becomes a rather daunting task. Such is what I realized during my conversation with the LC librarian. I also realized that the Undergraduate Library is clearly concerned with working on these issues.
Having said that, here are some of my thoughts on the UL’s use of social media:
When thinking about the use of social media, the question arises in my mind of whether or not students even desire to connect with the library via these tools. Perhaps to begin with, the library could create a survey asking students how they would prefer to receive library information.
Links to Facebook, Twitter, and the library blog could be placed on all of the library’s content pages, not just a select few. If it is not already being done, these tools could also be promoted in the physical library itself via fliers and at instruction sessions. While all three of these pages are updated regularly (Twitter updates are amazing!), perhaps the content could be even more user-friendly by asking questions and soliciting feedback more often.
Privacy issues regarding Facebook need to be looked at in-depth so the possibility of adding a more useful search widget or other library widgets to the page might be incorporated. Also on the subject of Facebook, I think the outdated Undergraduate Library Facebook account should be deleted. Students may not use the library’s home page to find the current account; instead they may search Facebook directly. Since I don’t have a Facebook account, I don’t know which account would come up first using this kind of search. It could be confusing to anyone who visits the outdated account instead of the current one.
I would also recommend deleting the Undergraduate Library MySpace account since there is very little current information and the federated search link is dead. Besides most college students now use Facebook rather than MySpace.
Additionally I would also like to see a more visible blog which offers patrons the ability to post comments.
There is currently what appears to be an inactive Social Media link on some of the UL web pages. The LC librarian mentioned working on creating a library page that lists and explains the various social media tools available. I think this is a great idea for promoting these tools and directing students to them in order to encourage more of those highly valued two-way conversations between students and their library.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Building presence in the online CMS . . .
Academic librarians need to consider certain issues when trying to build presence in an online course management system (CMS). They must decide the overall intent or goal of integrating library services and resources into the CMS, such as whether to cover a majority of courses by delivering general, broad services or target specific courses by delivering more personalized services. In the latter case especially, the library must assess staff size and ability to take on this more time consuming alternative. If staff and their time are in short supply, librarians must consider which courses would benefit the most from an integrated library presence, e.g., those with a major research component.
Librarians must then strive to collaborate with instructors on ways to best serve students’ library and information literacy needs in relation to their coursework. This collaboration is a key component that cannot be overstated. Initially it’s important to discuss what expectations the instructor has regarding what he/she would like students to learn in terms of research skills, etc. Just as important is clarification by the librarian about what services the library is able to offer the class. The role of the librarian in the course itself also needs to be established. For example, will the librarian be regarded more as a T.A. with limited instructor privileges or perhaps as a guest instructor with privileges equal to the class instructor? These kinds of issues are best resolved at the beginning of the course. Then communication should continue throughout the semester if the partnership between the instructor and librarian is to be a successful one, thereby carrying over to the ultimate success of the students.
As previously mentioned, librarians need to assess what services they can offer through the CMS that would be most valuable to students for their particular class, such as electronic reserves, supplementary course content, or bibliographic instruction. In my Libr 220 experience as a student embedded librarian for three UCM classes, I found that one undergraduate Psych class only needed instruction on finding article permalinks while a graduate nursing class needed substantial guidance with the many components of a major research paper. In all cases, trying to build presence in an online course management system requires proactive commitment on the part of librarians and their libraries. In the end, it is well worth their effort.
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Timely iLibrarian posts re: Twitter
iLibrarian posted two timely blog links this morning on ways to use Twitter. The first post links to Jeff Young’s column, 'Embedded Librarian' on Twitter Served as Information Concierge for Class, which discusses an interesting and relevant way to use Twitter in a library environment. Plus it’s a quick read.
The second post summarizes the key points of Stephanie Sammons column, How to Use LinkedIn With Twitter for Better Networking, which are useful for professional networking. For further elaboration, check out Sammons' full article.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Twitter: A dip in the stream
I am a bit overwhelmed by the idea of a streaming real-time Web. While it’s exciting, it can also be mind boggling at times. Take for instance this week’s exercise using Twitter. After a week of trying to familiarize myself with this medium, which included attempting to follow 10 assigned tweeters along with many class tweeters, I haven’t quite figured out its appeal to the average person or how anyone actually manages to follow more than a few tweets per day (and I thought managing blogs in Google Reader was challenging!). I just don’t know if this is something I could personally keep up with without becoming bleary-eyed and exhausted while doing so.
Erick Schonfeld’s post in which he quotes John Borthwick’s suggestion of “letting go of the notion that you can ever master the stream,” lessened my guilt about not being able to keep up. No problem there; I have no grand illusions of ever mastering Twitter let alone the entire stream. Borthwick is also quoted as describing the stream as something that “we as users and participants can dip in and out of and whether we participate . . . or simply observe we are a part of this flow.” Currently I’m more comfortable as an observer but I do like the idea of still being a part of the flow.
Although I feel trepidation about the reality of conquering Twitter on a personal level, I am encouraged and wowed by some of the very positive attributes of this medium. Two in particular stand out to me. Firstly, using Twitter and other social media for social and political change as mentioned in some of the readings this week is truly amazing and impressive. Secondly, in his blog post Ken Fromm points out that “[Twitter’s] arbitrary constraints can have a liberating and profound effect on creativity.” I have found this to be true; the 140 character limit per tweet forces me to focus like a laser on what I really want to convey. Unlike blogs such as this where I could go on, and on, and on . . . Suffice it to say, the “short and sweet” nature of Twitter greatly appeals to me. I just wish that some tweeters would keep this concept in mind before posting their 20th tweet of the day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)