Libraries Transform: Because Statements

A simple search for the origin of the now infamous library sign stating "because not everything on the internet is true" led me to a story on the Libraries Transform site because page and this video. For me, key to the accompanying quote is noting transformation of library services and scope are not readily apparent to all. This video - and quote - has found it's way to our library blog.

"The ways in which libraries transform are as nuanced and varied as the people they serve. Physical transformations are easy to spot. Transformations in service and scope can be less apparent, but are ever changing." - Libraries Transform

Vanity searching, ego surfing ...

No matter what it's called, vanity searching, ego surfing, or Googling yourself - "A rose by any other name" - I never really considered the act a guilty or narcissistic pleasure as described in the opening paragraphs of the Time's article Why Google Wants You to Google Yourself. Within closing remarks and announcements at the end of my technology course, I remind students everything they created and presented online now belongs to them; projects may be marked private, edited and revised to suit their ongoing needs, or simply deleted. Regardless of their decision I advocate performing a vanity search, they should carefully evaluate the results and determine if their growing online persona is appropriate for a potential employer to view.

Generally speaking, I follow the advice and perform the same search on myself using Google, Bing, Yahoo, and Ice Rocket utilizing various forms of my name (quotes, no quotes, middle initial, etc.). After the initial wonder finding blog comments, ALAO board meeting minutes, a email posting from grad school years ago, and more recently uFollow, I've not found anything unusual or needing my attention. That is, until last week. Search results yielded links to several very dated (six years ago) technology handouts and tutorials I developed had been uploaded from my personal university web site to a course material sharing web site.

I like to share; all of my instructional videos on YouTube are public and I've never denied a request for using one of my LibGuides, but finding these resources posted without permission was irksome. I searched the site for project guidelines, privacy notices, and contact information to request removal of items uploaded without permission. I sent an email request, complete with specific links and document titles, on Tuesday. I had an answer the next day complete with digital copyright statements showing they had complied with the law and a requirement I state - categorically - my ownership of said documents. I found it ironic they could post what did not belong to them, yet I had to 'prove' they were mine to have them removed. Official notice the four documents had been removed arrived via email late Thursday. Yesterday I tested the links and they were indeed no longer active. I also found three more items (update: they have been removed).

Taking a circular route

ABC's Good Morning Americahad a short piece this morning with an interesting take regarding college students use of social networking sites. The piece, now an article on the ABC news site, After Years of Telling All, 20 Somethings Start to Clam Up, also discussed options for those who want to have their information removed from web sites. The article highlights an anonymous law school student who even with stellar grades and an impeccable resume was unable to secure a job in a law firm. After investigating she realized her job search was, in effect, being sabotaged by other people hijacking her personal Facebook pictures and posting them explicit comments on a message board. While none of the HR firms interviewed would admit to doing Internet searches on potential new hires, it is an open secret.

It has been a couple of years since I Googled myself to see what still lives on the Internet. After all, being told cyberspace is forever and seeing it are two different things. I took a few minutes this morning and searched. Most of returns were AU library, IRC, CMCIG, ALAO, and blog related. I did find a few understandable oddities; a PUBLIB list serv archive question from September 1999 (I was required to post a question for class) and a web page where an author cited a library handout I created in 2002 because I cited her article in the handout. Two of the most interesting results were blogging search engines IceRocket and LibWorm.

According to the About IceRocket page, they are "pioneering commercial search by putting the interests and wants of consumers before advertisers. IceRocket has innovative blog search technology to search blogosphere. " Arriving at IceRocket Blog Search via a blog post entry from Google, curiosity compelled me to see what I could find. I typed in my name, selected the "exact phrase" option, clicked search, and 345 posts authored by me returned! It seemed excessive until I realized the IRC blog easily has over 400 posts for collection development and information; add in this blog, the IRC book review blog, and CMCIG blog, and suddenly the number is not all that staggering. A perusal of several results pages revealed they were authored by me with the earliest dated 8/29/06 and most recent 3/5/07 (Monday). I was intrigued by a statistical selection, a small green icon next to different entries enumerating outside links. There were icons next to Library Cloud posts, but they did not work. Icons attached to other people's listings did work, so it may be linked the track back option in blogger that is not currently active here.

LibWorm is another blog search engine, "a professional development tool, and a current awareness tool for people who work in libraries or care about libraries." The main page states "Search the Biblioblogosphere and Beyond" and referres to itself as "the librarian RSS engine" with over 1500 available feeds. I first noticed this search engine a month or so ago when it was an outside link in the Library Cloud StatCounter account. When it was part of the returns for my initial Google search this morning, I decided to take another look at the product. A simple search returned over 282 records with only the first two pages actually belonging to me (as an author). An "exact phrase" search returned 44 records, only two pages, all of which were Library Cloud posts authored by me. LibWorm encourages you to create an account and submit a feed. I did create an account, but our feed already existed. Both of these blog search engines provide opportunities to search for library specific information. I have not used either beyond doing quick "me" searches, but they are worth a second look.

Tags: Social networking concerns, IceRocket, LibWorm, Blog search engines

Let's ChaCha

TechCrunch had an interesting post yesterday regarding a new search engine called ChaCha. This search engine works like a regular search engine and also provides and option to search with a guide. Yes, someone to chat with you while you search the Internet. A check of the search engine’s press page shows I am a bit late on the mark with this post as they debuted in September, but the premise is interesting.

Live help with searching is something libraries attempt via chat and instant messaging. OhioLINK's Chat with a Librarian service is a prime example of this endeavor. I have some experience using the OhioLINK Chat with a Librarian software and while it has improved significantly since its original debut, the software remains somewhat cumbersome. However, Chat with a Librarian does present opportunities during chat to push specific pages and a type of assisted search. It also offers something commercial search engines do not, an experienced librarian (without an agenda) to provide research assistance. I decided to try out ChaCha and see what type of results I could get.

I performed a ChaCha search, aka searching without a guide, for "library information science." After four tries, it timed out on the first three times, I got four pages of results. The first six were clearly marked sponsored, and four within the twenty first page returns were sponsored. Moving to the second page provided less sponsored links and slightly better information. Unfortunately, this indicates to me the quality of the returns is not particularly comprehensive as the results favor sponsors over searchers. The search screen provides a box of related search terms on the right that included links to library science schools, librarianship, library science graduate programs, Journal of Academic Librarianship, Library of Congress, library science degree, library science careers, and library professional journals. I would have linked to these terms, but ChaCha specifies you are only to link to their main page and not subsequent results Rounding out the page, displayed above the related searches, were quick links (ala Google) to Web, News, Images, Video, and Audio results for my initial Library Information Science Search.

I decided to try the same search using Search With Guide. It hooked up pretty quickly and I asked KarenB for information regarding schools that offer library and information science degrees. KarenB asked me if I wanted info information for schools in the US or the UK. I replied US and was transferred “to another guide who can help you search even better!” My second guide was Deboraha and I told her I had been transferred and was looking for library information science schools in the US. Five minutes later and I still do not have a response from Deboraha. In fact, she has not provided any information to me beyond her original canned message welcoming me to ChaCha and saying hello. After waiting a total of ten minutes, I cancelled the search and started again. I had an opportunity to rate Deboraha and her guided search; it was bad.

My second guide was TiaK. I was greeted with the same canned message, not a bad idea and one that OhioLINK Chat uses as well. I mentioned she was my third guide she asked about the first two. I gave a short synopsis and TiaK assured me she would find results more quickly. She did; it took her about three minutes to locate two results, one from the University of Illinois and the other from University of South Florida. When it took a bit longer, a bit of dead air space, I asked if she could target schools in Pennsylvania and Ohio. With this extra information, TiaK found ALA’s LIS Directory. The whole session took about seven minutes and without question TiaK got a better rating than Deboraha.

Naturally I became a bit curious about the guides and meandered through ChaCha’s site:

• ChaCha’s privacy policy states:

"We value Guides greatly and they are essential to ChaCha, but they are not our employees. Guides are independent contractors, and we are not legally responsible for their actions."

• ChaCha’s About Us page provides reasons for searching with a guide indicating:

  "By searching with a Guide your query is sent to a real person who is skilled at finding information on the internet and knowledgeable on the subject at hand so that you get the few exact results you want, not the millions of results you don't. ChaCha only provides quality, human approved results."
  

• Also detailed within About Us is information regarding why users should trust their particular guide:
  
  

  "The primary reason is that we pay them and their pay is directly related to their performance. At the end of every session, you can select between one and five stars to rate their performance. While we expect you to be honest when rating a Guide, ChaCha can also detect any needlessly malicious ratings."
  
  "Another reason is that everybody knows a lot about something - ChaCha is able to connect you with the somebody who knows the something you want to know. Not only can they point you in the right direction, we've often found that communicating with a Guide can expand your general knowledge on the subject or even turn you on to new or different information that's even more relevant to what you're searching for."

Interested in becoming a guide? The posted qualifications are not all that stringent; in fact only seven criteria which include age (over 18), citizenship, spelling and English fluency, high speed internet, and ability to search the Internet are listed. Fortunately, Campus Technology reports there are further requirements of tests and questionnaires and a CNet article indicates there are different levels of guides "apprentice, pro, master, and elite" who will "earn reputations based on user ratings and how the system rates their performance" (CNet, 9/3/06) as the service progresses.

Overall I like the idea, but found the general search engine lacking. The guided search screen is user-friendly (wonder if they will market to libraries?), but the guides a bit frustrating. I would like to know more about who is doing the search and how they determine if the quality of results. I definitely do not like the sponsored links presented above others, but know that is how search engines make money.

Tags: Chacha, Search engines, Guided search, Search engine review, Chat