Thoughts on Web 2.0 & Social Software

As I have read several of the articles for this week’s reading, I am surprised, excited and concerned. I am surprised that technologies such as Wi Fi and hand-held devices are being discussed in articles dedicated to the topic of social software and Web 2.0 (Dames, 2004). Although they undoubtedly facilitate “computing,” I have not considered them to be social software, but rather highways of electronic information. But perhaps I have been naïve.

I am excited for the possibilities that social software and the Web 2.0 can have for my professional and my personal life. I was first introduced to professional applications of social software during my co-op term in a Health Sciences Library. My librarian colleagues were regular readers of several key professional librarian blogs. I quickly picked up this habit and learned that it is a great way to form a professional community with librarians that are at a distance, as well as an effective method to stay on top of current and imminent trends in librarianship. In our HS library, the task of using wiki software for internal procedures was being implemented as I was leaving.

The authors of the articles in this week’s reading also re-iterate the fact that social software applications have vast professional uses. From my experiences and their examples, I agree that tools such as wikis, blogs and RSS can be powerful tools for internal communication and collaboration in libraries as well as with library patrons. I agree with Dames (2004) who suggests that a proper implementation of social software applications within the library setting can “help to boost librarians’ credibility and value as information agents at a time when the value of librarians is being questioned.”

Finally, I am excited at the way that the application of social software can create a useful community and engage the members of that community. As Miller shows, the result of this active social web community is “previously passive recipients […] who combine and recombine that which they are given in new and interesting ways [such that the content becomes] far more meaningful to the user” (Miller, 2005). As the authors each demonstrate, Web 2.0 applications are adept at bringing together people and objects (photographs, information) with common interests and purposes. I regularly read Guistini's Google Scholar blog. In a recent posting where he interviews Dr. Ves Dimov (of Clinical Cases & Images blog), the blogger Guistini has also highlighted ways in which blogs can be used in progressive ways in the medical field. Web 2.0 communication within the global physician community has the potential to have a very positive impact on the quality and speed of patient care. While there is some debate regarding the quality of information on weblogs, it seems clear that as sources of secondary or tertiary information, such blogs can be useful in pointing to information sources, providing commentary and the opinions on the [medical] issues at hand. (Bar Ilan, 2005).

As I read Rouch’s article, Social Machines: Computing Means Connecting, I have to admit that I had some concerns. While each of the technologies and “waves of the future” seems to be innovative and exciting propects, I was gripped by an overwhelming feeling of a lack of control. While I know that many of the ideas are far from hitting the norms in our society, the concern persists. At what cost are we going to allow technology to completely change our lives? Rouch speaks in his article of arriving at a technological point where the technology in our lives is so pervasive that its presence is invisible and its methods seamless. In my opinion, this is a scary prospect. I believe that it is important to be conscious of what technology is doing so that we can continue to control it and harness its uses rather than the opposite. Pang seems to agree when he writes: “They devote computing resources in ways that basically enhance communication, collaboration, and thinking rather than trying to substitute for them." (Pang in Rouch, 2005)

As I consider all of the technological possibilities on the horizon, it seems to me that people, and not the technology must continue to be the key motivator. Finding ways to make technology work for people rather than people for technology seems to be the only way to maintain the proper balance between the two. Miller supports this notion: “The use of social software holds great promise for organizations of all types, but a haphazard implementation of these tools that places technology before people is doomed to fail.” With this proper perspective in place, I believe that social software can have the positive impact that it is meant to have in building communities, fostering the sharing of knowledge and facilitating professional collaboration.