Blogs Falling in an Empty Forest is a New York Times article about blogging, specifically about the study showing an estimated 95% of blogs have not been updated in over 4 months.

Does this signal an end to blogging?  The death of a communication tool?  Not at all.  As the article points out, much of the information conveyed through blogging can also be conveyed through other tools, such as Facebook and Twitter.

As with all tools, users will seek out the tool that best fits their task (or at least the best that fits their skill set, and will still accomplish the task).  Blogging was an early “web 2.0″ tool, and was adopted and adapted to serve many purposes.  Through a combination of better tools for specific tasks, loss of interest/time/support for the creators, and the limits of readers to follow more than a given number of blogs on a particular topic, it is no surprise that many blogs are going into hibernation.

There is also a discussion regarding the expectations of the blogger.  If one strives for fame, fortune and glory, go for it… but a majority of bloggers will not achieve that level.  I suspect that more than a few people set goals beyond what the market could provide their particular skill set and audience.

When I set out to start blogging, I simply wanted to utilize a forum that would allow me to collect thoughts and ideas that I felt were important, and to use it to organize my own interests and actions, as well as to convey what I posted to those who might be interested.  Over time the focus has expanded to include more of my thoughts and ideas (I still cringe a bit when using the word “I”), but still focuses on what is happening in the library technology world.

Blogging has been harder to maintain than I originally thought, but it has also been far more rewarding.  I am still searching for the balance between all of the activities that demand attention, but I suspect that Libology will remain in the “active” category for some time.

found via ResourceShelf

Self-Publishers Flourish as Writers Pay the Tab is an article in today’s New York Times on how this one area of publishing is booming, while it seems all other areas are scaling back.

The headline itself doesn’t quite fit the article (but oftentimes the headline is written by someone other than the article’s writer) in that many of the prominent self-publishing companies don’t require much of a payment in advance (if any payment at all – see Lulu.com).

The downside of self-publishing, according to the article, is the lack of advance payments and the absence of the marketing efforts that traditional publishers offer.  However, when one is publishing a niche book, the marketing offered by a publisher, unless they specifically serve that niche, won’t necessarily do much for sales.

This is, as many things seem to be, reflecting a trend.  With web sites, blogs, wikis and other “new” media flourishing, it makes sense to apply many of those principles to the publishing world.  I want the traditional publishers to do well; they provide access and support to writers that we would sorely miss if they went out of business.  However, I suspect that in five years we will see more self-publishing (especially if you combine the small publishing companies that will form around the idea of print-on-demand and small press runs).

For libraries: prepare to widen your search for materials.  Traditional vendors will eventually need to find ways to include these “niche” publications in their offerings; in the meantime Amazon and others will be the primary nesting ground for these books.  There will be a period of time in which it will seem that it is harder to find the right books than before; afterwards it will be easier than ever.

There is a concept for all this, not mentioned in the article:  The Long Tail.

Jessamyn has the best overview of the Sarah Palin / Librarian debate that I have seen so far.  The key to this, and to any other emotionally charged story, is to check your facts, and remember that everyone gets it wrong sometimes (so don’t be so sure about something even if you are sure).

Unrelated, but soberingly relevant, is the United Airlines “bankruptcy” story from a couple of days ago.  The source seemed reliable, but the information was old.  Again, some basic fact checking in the early stages of this would have saved a whole lot of grief.

Update:  This New York Times article has a great overview of the UAL story… (thanks LISNews )

In an article in today’s New York Times about magazines making their backfiles freely available online, there is a discussion about one magazine in particular:  Sports Illustrated.

Starting this Thursday, March 20th, the entire run of SI will be available through their new site, called The Vault.  Read the article to get the gist, but it sounds like they have gone the extra mile to make it easy to use, comprehensive, and powerful.  I am not terribly interested in sports, but I suspect that the Vault will be my first stop for sports-related questions (maybe second after Wikipedia, depending on the question).

from the SerialsT list

TimesMachine is a complete, easy to use browser for all New York Times editions between September 18, 1851 (their first date of publication) through December 31, 1922 (the day before copyright still exists).

from Metafilter

Remember how, about 10 years ago, the concept of a “paperless office” began to seem like a weird joke? The proliferation of the desktop computer and the ascent of the internet introduced the potential of foregoing paper documents, relying instead on electronic versions. The source of the joke was that instead of reducing our paper use, having access to all these e-mails, websites and electronic documents increased our print output.

An article titled Pushing Paper Out the Door in today’s New York Times documents that paper use has plateaued, and is currently in decline. The actual cause? People saving money on ink, toner and paper. This matches what I have seen in various libraries: people tend to be more conservative when their own resources are being used.

As far as printing from public workstations and labs is concerned, I like the idea of having a certain number of pages printed being included in one’s account, then paying for any additional printing. This seems to strike a balance that allows for modest printing without being overly commercial about it.

link passed to the Web4lib list by Bernie Sloan

This seems to be fresh news, in that I can only find it on two sites:  The New York Times is opening their web content to everyone, eliminating the subscription model that has existed for years.

Not a bad piece of news…

The other location I found this on was the Metafilter blog

Jonathan Rochkind has an interesting commentary on this New York Times article about Google’s Algorithm titled Google Keeps Tweaking Its Search Engine.

I really don’t have much to add, except for the thought that we are too mired in the “algorithm” we currently have, which was built around small index cards in drawers, and need to recognize that there are many parts, facets if you will, to how we store and provide information. We need to be open to each of these facets and the ways we can use them.

Storage, Search, Presentation, Categorization… these are all parts of what we do; they do not have to all reflect the same structure, they just need to be able to interact.

The New York Times is offering it’s TimesSelect service for free – if you register with an .edu e-mail address.

You can register here.

from Web4Lib post

Lawrence Lessig has an Op-Ed in today’s New York Times called “Make Way for Copyright Chaos“, which discusses a shift towards the courts when interpreting copyright law.

from ©ollectanea

Freebase is (or will be, if you are like me and waiting for an invite) an online behemoth of a database.  Imagine taking Wikipedia and having users create links to related information, so that you can tap into the information and relationships as you would within a database; you would have the start of what Freebase can be.

This has the potential to be incredible.  There is a tightrope that the creators have to walk, however, as they try to find the balance between keeping things controlled, and allowing users to add/change the environment.  Too much of one or the other, and this expanded knowledge base becomes trivialized or restricted.

See this New York Times article for a great description.

from TechCrunch