[Publib] "Is Google making us stupid?"

Mon Jun 16 10:50:57 EDT 2008

Right on, Marianne. Libraries will be smart to embrace new ways of 
making information available to the public....they are our 
customers/patrons who want information whether to find a new novel to 
read or to research some technical issue. The better we serve them with 
any tool such as a google or yahoo search or using Dewey Decimal System 
to give them an "Aha moment," the more appreciated we will be. Great 
service gets talked about among our users and the public. That is what 
also generates support for adequate funding for our operations.

Every opportunity to provide information or music or audio books is a 
subtle marketing opportunity for our institutions. We need to make the 
best of it.

Fred Beisser
Trustee
www.elbertcountylibrary.org
(Colorado)

Fred Beisser wrote:
> Right on, Marianne. Libraries will be smart to embrace new ways of 
> making information available to the public....they are our 
> customers/patrons who want information whether to find a new novel to 
> read or to research some technical issue. The better we serve them 
> with any tool such as a google or yahoo search or using Dewey Decimal 
> System to give them an "Aha moment," the more appreciated we will be. 
> Great service gets talked about among our users and the public. That 
> is what also generates support for adequate funding for our operations.
>
> Every opportunity to provide information or music or audio books is a 
> subtle marketing opportunity for our institutions. We need to make the 
> best of it.
>
> Fred Beisser
> Trustee
> www.elbertcountylibrary.org
> (Colorado)
>
> Marianne Follis wrote:
>> But that ship has sailed.  There is no going back, so we need to learn
>> how to use this new kind of thinking in the way we approach this new
>> kind of patron. 
>> And I have to say I think longing for the good old days will get you no
>> where.  Didn't the adults of the 50's think that Rock n Roll was going
>> to lead to the downfall of our nation's youth? 
>> Please don't tell me you don't like rock!
>>
>> Marianne
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Joe Schallan [mailto:jschallan at yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, June 
>> 16, 2008 12:50 AM
>> To: Publib; Marianne Follis
>> Subject: RE: [Publib] "Is Google making us stupid?"
>>
>> On Sunday, 6/15/08, Marianne Follis
>> <Marianne.Follis at cityofcarrollton.com> wrote:
>>
>>  
>>> . . . Does thinking, reading and processing information
>>> differently necessarily mean that we are becoming stupid?
>>>
>>> You could argue that even if we are not delving as deeply
>>> into information, aren't we encountering more of it?
>>>     
>>
>>
>> I think that is exactly Nicholas Carr's point -- that we are
>> delving less deeply into information. Our understanding becomes
>> like what Nebraskans used to say about the Platte River: A mile
>> wide and an inch deep.
>>
>> And, yes, I think Carr's central point is that the way the
>> net now leads us to process information *is* making us more
>> stupid, if, by "stupid," we mean having mostly superficial
>> knowledge and scattered attention.
>>
>> Encountering more information does not necessarily equate
>> with understanding, just as having access to 12,000
>> varieties of processed foods does not equate with better
>> nutrition.
>>
>> But I suppose it all depends on what you think stupidity is.
>>
>> The title of the article was provocative, of course, as was
>> my post. Because this is worth thinking about, and so you
>> do want to provoke.
>>
>> I'd like to see studies of cognition that would shed light
>> on the effects of multitasking on learning. I've seen
>> such things before, as I recall, that not surprisingly
>> indicate that we don't do as well on grasp and recall
>> when we're distracted.
>>
>> The college students quoted by Charles Cooper in his CNET
>> blog post took pride in their ability to multitask. I am
>> skeptical that they will get as much from a lecture
>> if they are busy at the same time with their
>> Facebook pages, instant messaging, and online shopping.
>> (Not to  mention the sheer rudeness of such behavior,
>> though I imagine *that* escapes them entirely. If
>> your mom and dad are spending $25,000 each year so
>> you can learn from a college professor, I'd be
>> inclined to think you may want to politely listen to
>> what she has to say to you.)
>>
>> Certainly by now someone has tested understanding
>> of concepts and recall of data under differing
>> conditions. Is there any reason to suppose that
>> distraction and inattention will do anything other
>> than degrade performance of those tasks?
>>
>> College students are for the most part young fools
>> (though I will go to hell and back for them when
>> I serve them as a librarian) and think they are
>> unique, that they have discovered new truths, and that
>> the lessons of human experience have been suspended in
>> their cases.
>>
>> I was such a fool. Probably bigger than most. And
>> it being the sixties, the culture was willing to
>> fully indulge my foolishness instead of correcting
>> it. Many businesspeople found you could turn quite a
>> few bucks on indulging the foolishness of the young.
>>
>> Those businesspeople are with us yet, and they
>> *love* the net.
>>
>> I feel bad, though, that the kids will never savor
>> the delights of long attention and contemplation,
>> nor the illumination that comes therefrom.
>>
>> We've hired a high school student to help
>> patrons on computers 10 hours a week. He's
>> good -- he can show patrons how to do basic stuff
>> in Word and Excel, how to print, how to attach files
>> to email messages, and so on, and this helps us a
>> lot and takes some pressure off a busy desk.
>>
>> (And he's a sure sign that for what a lot of patrons
>> now want from the desk, we certainly don't need
>> degreed professionals.)
>>
>> He told me he has a female friend who he swears
>> sent and received 12,000 text messages in one
>> month. I expressed skepticism after I did a little
>> mental math -- 400 a day! Then I thought that
>> if she is a teen who only sleeps four hours a night,
>> then it may be only 20 texts an hour -- one every
>> three minutes. With a good cell phone and flying
>> thumbs, I imagine handling that level of traffic
>> is doable.
>>
>> Still, the image of a teen coping with 12,000
>> text messages a month (and I still assume our
>> teen helper was grossly exaggerating) is
>> horrifying. When is time to eat, bathe,
>> converse with friends, much less read and study?
>> When is time, indeed, for some sort of real life?
>>
>> The poor thing. If true, this isn't much better
>> than heroin.
>>
>> Patrons come to my library often wearing the
>> little Bluetooth earsets so that they can be
>> constantly connected to their phones. I can't
>> imagine being chained to a device in that way,
>> with the whole world just ten digits away
>> from being able to yank my chain at any time.
>> This is progress?
>>
>> Is multitasking and inundation with tyrant-
>> devices any sort of human life?  Quiet, please,
>> and give me a minute to think! (An hour would
>> be even better.)
>>
>> I've drifted far off course. But, yeah, I'm
>> prepared to accept Nicholas Carr's thesis
>> that distraction and inattention make us
>> stupid.  Maybe even that reliance on
>> net-delivered infosnippets makes our
>> understanding of the world superficial.
>> And maybe even that it reprograms us to
>> have little patience for the long form.
>>
>> Joe Schallan
>> Phoenix
>>
>>
>>
>>      
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Publib mailing list
>> Publib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/publib
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>