Report on the Modernisation of Public Libraries

On the way to Liverpool via Hong Kong (like you do) so I’ve had a chance to catch up with a bit of reading.

Here’s my take on the DCMS report on the modernisation of public libraries. First of all why does this report have to be such a celebration of the negative? Clearly there are problems but a document like this is not exactly going to attract future library professionals. Secondly, why do we need another ‘consultation document’? Surely enough is already known to allow for the creation of draft policy. And get to the point too. Eighty pages with colour photographs are unnecessary. Fire the designers and put what needs to be said on a single sheet of paper.

Overall, this is an uninspiring report. If what you’re after is a clear view on where things are heading, read the recent report by the Scottish National Library instead.Nevertheless, there are a handful of good ideas buried in the report. Here are 10 that caught my eye and could form the basis of future public library strategy.

1. The mission of public libraries is to inform and empower. The modernisation of libraries should be focussed on the promotion of reading and the celebration of physical books and local history. This is not to say that digital content is not important, but if public libraries focus too much on the digital they will end up fighting a losing battle with the likes of Google, Apple and Starbucks. And don’t make the mistake of getting rid of the librarians either. In a world of infinite content we need trusted information sources and trusted information sifters more, not less.

2. Put new libraries in the places that people go to nowadays — supermarkets, hospitals, job centres, leisure centres, post offices, schools, train stations etc.There should also be much more co-ordination with other community services. Every government department should have a presence in every local library.

3. A universal library card is a very good idea. When you are born you should get a library card and you should have to opt out of the system if you don’t want it.

4. There needs to be a national library database but I am unconvinced by the idea of allowing people to take a book out of one library and return it to another. The idea would be complex and expensive and would undermine the idea of building local libraries and local communities.

5. Stop trying to please all of the people all of the time. Young children and seniors are the key target markets for local public libraries. Secondary audiences might be kids wanting to do their homework, people wanting to interact with government services and people running their own businesses. As for teens forget them. They have already been lost, although they might come back when they get older.

6. There needs to be a new library act and a national library strategy but strategy should be adjusted at the local level to take into account local circumstances. For example, a small rural library is likely to be different to a large metropolitan library.

7. There’s a problem with library staffing but this might turn out to be temporary.Firstly we might see a bookshop diaspora and secondly there is an untapped army of senior citizens just waiting to be asked if they’d like to help out at the local library.

8. Take on board a few ideas from book retailers. Ensure that the book stock is rotated frequently or is freshened up by specific promotions (cookbook month, crime month and so on). As for libraries selling books this is a good idea but it alone won’t save the local library. Adding cafes is also a good idea but this alone won’t solve anything.

9. Do not make libraries loud. A key strength of libraries is their quietness. Allow conversation in some areas but remember that some people are trying to escape the frenetic pace of the modern era. In a similar vein remember that the more the world accelerates and becomes digitalised the more some people will want somewhere to go where they can feel a sense of physical connection to others.

10. The idea that there should be more integration with local schools and the national curriculum is a no brainer. Just do it.

Best quote in the report? Public libraries are :“one of the few remaining community facilities. Where else is there free and safe community access”?

Will We Own IT or Will IT Own Us?

Can you imagine what it might have been like to live in Florence during the renaissance? According to Kevin Kelly, founding editor of Wired magazine, we are, without realising it, witnessing something similar. We have already seen the creation of the internet and we are now witnessing its early adolescent development. The next big step will be adding basic intelligence to inanimate objects and then connect them to the net. After that, the big jump will be to link everyone and everything to a single brain — the network.

At this point the machine will know more about us than we know about it and we will delegate responsibility for our identity, our memory and our lives to the machine. It will be all knowing and all seeing. Does this sound like science fiction? Maybe not. In a few years time the internet will be wired up to billions of smart chips and sensors embedded in everyday objects and many of these objects will display a rudimentary form of intelligence.

From there it will be a small step to design machines that will be employed to do any task that we do more than once. If you have a job that can be distilled to a set of logical rules your job will become history. Humans will then be set free to focus on those things that require intuition, imagination or empathy. At least that’s the theory:.

Real Life Lost in a Virtual World.

This is beyond belief. A couple in South Korea have allegedly allowed their small baby daughter to starve to death because they became obsessed with raising an ‘avatar child’ in a virtual world called Prius Online. According to police reports, the pair, both unemployed, left their daughter at home alone while they spent 12-hour sessions raising a virtual daughter called Anima from an internet café in a suburb of Seoul.

Formula for the Future

Reading an article in something recently with the headline Technology + Sex = The Future. I don’t think this is true but what is the formula? My best guess at the moment is Hope – Anxiety = The Future.

Other possibilities?

Greed – Fear
Technology – Human Nature
Machines + Convenience – Need for Love

Any other thoughts?

Twitter – on the Road to Nowhere?

twitter-1.png
This is interesting. The average Twitter user has 27 followers. 80% of Twitter users have tweeted less than 10 times Only 17% of Twitter users are active These figures are from RJ Metrics (i.e. not Twitter) who looked at 2 million tweets from 50,000 users. Hence they should be taken with a large pinch of salt. Nevertheless things aren’t looking good.

Gimme the facts – fast

iminds4.png

Are you finding that you no longer have the time to read The Week (the weekly compendium of all the good bits from the world’s best newspapers)? If so I have just the thing for you. Go to Apple’s iTunes store and download something from the iMinds series – instant knowledge in just 9 minutes.

Yes, that’s right, learn about Astronomy, Confucius, the Magna Carta, Apartheid, the US Civil War, International Criminal Tribunals, Behavioral Economics or…wait for it…. Evolution in just 9 minutes! Mind you there is one slight problem. These miniature audio books don’t seem to tell you who is speaking and do not appear to give any sources for the material either.

BTW, I see there is even an iMinds on Gandi. You know, that Indian bloke wot said “There is more to life than increasing its speed.”

In Cyberspace Everyone Can Hear You Scream

Do you use Gmail, Google’s webmail service? If so you might have been rather upset a few weeks ago when something showed up in your inbox. Some people apparently got an invitation to try something called Buzz. Sounds innocent enough but if you clicked on it you were told that you were “following” a number of people and that a number of people were “following” you. Spam? No. Just another service from Google, albeit one you probably didn’t ask for.

How does it work? Simple. Google has gone through your email inbox and decided that some of those with whom you correspond are followees. Only problem is they didn’t actually ask you whether you wanted them to do this.

A few years ago you would have been at least asked whether you wanted your privacy invaded. Nowadays people just assume you won’t mind. This might seem like a storm in a teacup but think about it. Anyone that you are deemed to be “following” is now publicly available on your Google profile to anyone who takes a look. You can (eventually) remove this feature but why should you if you didn’t ask for it in the first place? In Cyberspace everyone can hear you screeeeeeam!

Technology Adoption

Nice quote just in from Matt Doyle…

“The writer Douglas Adams observed how technology that
existed when we were born seems normal, anything that is developed
before we turn 35 is exciting, and whatever comes after that is
treated with suspicion.”

Ref: Slate (see comments)

The Future (and History) of the Office

Where did offices come from? Perhaps if we understand the history of the office we will be in a better position to speculate about its future and debate how to adapt the modern office to modern needs.

It is generally accepted that the communal office was invented around 1900. Before this, people tended to work outdoors or at home. This included doctors and accountants who worked from rooms at home and shopkeepers who lived above their shop. Customers were local and companies, where they existed at all, were small.

So what gave rise to the rapid growth of office building? The main reason was the development of the factory. Mass production is not a new idea, going back to China and Greece thousands of years ago, but it is generally acknowledged that the factory production system as we know it today came into being around 1790 when Eli Whitney created mass-production techniques to satisfy the musket (i.e. rifle) needs of the US government. Henry Ford usually gets the credit for developing factory production after this although individuals such as Marc Isambard Brunel, Henry Maudslay, Samuel Colt and Elisha King Root made vital contributions. Regardless of who started things it was WW1 and WW2, when governments needed large quantities of armaments, that factory owners realised that they needed somewhere to house the growing number of clerical and administrative workers. Bingo, work as we know it today was born.

Another reason for the creation of the office was the invention of the typewriter. Before 1868 typewriters did not exist and so there was obviously no need to build rooms to house typists. Even after 1874 when Remington (the gun company) perfected the manual typewriter, demand for office assistants or typists was small. Later in 1920 when Olivetti invented the electric typewriter demand was still relatively modest. There was simply nothing much to type back then. This all changed in the 1950s when consumerism, global markets and information processing power really took off but it is worth remembering that the communal office is a very recent invention and therefore we should not be afraid to turn it upside down and re-invent it if necessary.

In the early years, discipline and control were everything and formal organisational hierarchies were translated into large rooms full of identical desks, watched over by a large clock and someone in charge. But things have now changed and I believe that it is time to re-think how employees interact with each other in physical and virtual spaces and also time to reflect on how environments (and the tools found in these environments) can be used to improve the quality of thinking.