[WEB4LIB] Open Worldcat and RedLightGreen and the state of the union

[K.G. Schneider]

> Open WorldCat allows you to locate libraries by zip and will include all
> libraries within a certain (what diameter?) proximity to the zip you typed
> in. If RedLightGreen had this, it'd be even neater.

With Roy and Jerry commenting (gushing? :> ) I indeed tried RedLightGreen. I
was impressed with the theory behind all of this, and with many of the
features--I really liked the related subjects, ability to scope within a
search, etc. (Though I vaguely wondered, what am I scoping *by*? LC? Local
thesaurus? Phases of the moon?)

However, in addition to the zip code scoping, in terms of actually using
this, as a user, I'm not sure I'd do it again. I found it frustrating to
locate a promising title, click down to the library, and then find that the
library didn't carry it. Shampoo, rinse, repeat. That seems backwards. Is
that working for most users? 

On a related note... well, actually as a major digression...it's interesting
we're discussing this on Web4Lib, but that OpenWorldCat has been all the
biblioblogbuzz. This is NOT, repeat NOT to criticize OCLC, and I think
OpenWorldCat is nifty enough to discuss. But I have noticed that PR
departments in many organizations have figured out who the key bloggers are
and forward posts to them. I've seen new services, goodies, etc. promoted
uncritically on major library blogs, almost verbatim from whatever flack
sent it to them. I would expect librarians to take solicitations with a
grain of salt, or at least to put their announcements in context with other
services, but as someone who receives a lot of these "invitations," I know
otherwise. 

Not too long ago I was sent an announcement in the form of "gee, special
person, take a look at this resource, what do you think of it?" Well, I took
that as a literal solicitation for input and flailed away at the keyboard,
earnestly organizing my thoughts. In the hour or two I spent doing this, the
person who sent me the announcement had publicly posted the resource all
over hell and back, and bloggers were indeed posting it left and right,
verbatim, without noting any of the issues I had encountered. I was annoyed
and dismayed; obviously that was not a real request for input, but a way to
flatter me into posting about the item. (Note: I never said a word about the
resource, for other reasons.) Next time I get a message asking for my
"input," unless I know the source well enough to know otherwise, I'll assume
it's just pro forma flack flattery, and I'll save my breath for the blog
posting. 

I've referred to blogging as the literary version of unsafe sex (actually, I
used a more risqué term, but this is a family list ;> ), and I believe we as
librarians, as information specialists, ought to be very careful in what we
promote, how we promote it, and how we analyze what we're sent. As naïve
newsmakers, we're fodder for all kinds of musicmen. 

Anyway, RedLightGreen--yeah, kewl! I don't see myself using it, because of
that bass-ackwardness, but I think it's intriguing.

Karen G. Schneider
kgs at bluehighways.com