Library 2.0 Interest Group  
RSS
Threads [ Previous | Next ]
RE: Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
Showing 5 results.
Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
Tags: 2.0 library2.0 names naming trend
9:09 PM EDT 10/24/08
I've heard lots of people talking about how tired they are of hearing about "everything" being "2.0'ed". So do you all think it is just a catch phrase that should go away some time soon, or a practical umbrella term? When should we call it something else? And what would that something else be do you think?
RE: Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
Tags: 2.0 library2.0 marketing names naming trends
9:51 AM EST 12/29/08 as a reply to Michael Porter.
I don't know about the rest of the country, but Idaho librarians are just getting the hang of what 2.0 means. I find that those who have embraced Library2.0 are far from being 2.0ed out. They are my evangelists.

I do library marketing on the state level and am constantly surprised at how long it takes for a concept/slogan/program to catch on. I'm already bored with it by the time some people are just becoming excited about it! A personal story: I was intimidated by Library 2.0 until just 15 months ago. I knew something about it, but hoped I could live nicely without it! As it turns out, it was simpler than I ever imagined. Yes, I could post; Yes, I figured out how to RSS; Yes, I could bookmark. Let's let our library community become confident with 2.0 before we change the name. And that doesn't even bring to question the general public's acceptance...
RE: Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
4:47 PM EST 1/14/09 as a reply to Anne Abrams.
So ... who's up for 3.0? emoticon

The numbers don't mean much. Effective interaction, either 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 or by word of mouth, does.
RE: Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
8:52 PM EST 2/11/09 as a reply to Michael Porter.
We should remember too that for many of our users/patrons because of their age, web 2.0 is the only web they know.
RE: Continued Value or "2.0" as a brand?
5:55 PM EST 2/12/09 as a reply to Susan Kline.
That's an increasingly important point.

One might reflect, though, that as people increasingly see the web as "social" there's some probability that they'll see it less as "information." Looking for information may require a online rigor that folks used to a 2.0 modality no longer find natural.