Now presenting: Open Stacks #8

Also available via the podcast feed.

Just about fourteen minutes. Not the most coherent fourteen minutes of recorded audio content ever, but there’s some kernels of cohesion in there, I promise.

Show notes:
1. Jybe test drive
2. Are Public Libraries Criminalizing Poor People?
3. Bill seeking to open up children’s patron records in Maine:
–Portland Press Herald piece
–Morning Sentinel piece
4. Belligerent IM Patrons

A day or two ago, I came across a site called Podcast Tags. After my experiences with Technorati tags, I was unimpressed to the point of having nothing to say about it. A discussion with Steven tonight gave rise to a thought or two.

The site’s tagging approach works in much the same way as Technorati. In crafting a post that links to a podcast, the content creator also includes a link that includes the rel=”tag” syntax. The creator then pings the Podcast Tags site, giving notice of the new content, and sometime later the content and associated tags are indexed on the Podcast Tags site.

It has potential. There’s one problem I see right away. The site correctly ignores posts that do not contain enclosures. However, it has no ability (for the moment) to discern what type of enclosure is in the post (see Update). Therefore if your post has .jpg or .mov files and uses the rel=”tag” attribute (as it might if you were also pinging Technorati with every post), then they will be indexing non-podcast tags as part of their database. Oops! So the onus is on the content creator to only ping Podcast Tags when there’s a new podcast in the feed. While this is possible, it’s inconvenient and unrealisitic. So that’s something to be worked out.

But solutions like these need to be encouraged and explored as we examine ways to provide ongoing access to syndicated media content. And it forces us to examine larger questions of how we can effectively index audio and video content. Is creator-generated metadata a realistic possibility? Not sure. Can we bring user-generated tagging (folksonomies!) into this process? I’m inclined to say yes. Is this a space into which we information professionals need to be asserting ourselves? Absolutely.

Update: I got a nice email from Mack over at Podcast Tags who pointed out that, although at first they did not have the ability to distinguish between media file types inside of enclosures, that is no longer true. Therefore the issue I pointed out above with selective, manual pinging is a non-factor. That’s great news for the functionality of the site.

CNN taped a segment on podcasting that has been pre-empted a number of times over the past two weeks. To satisfy the waiting masses, Michael Geoghegan of Reel Reviews has made it available for viewing.

Because that’s how Library Journal has generously characterized me in this little piece of “breaking news.” But why, oh why, would the blurb’s author link to a category archive rather than link to the specific post?

Here’s a concept that I had never heard of: autocasting.

From what I gather, you can use a piece of software (AutoCast is an example) to automatically generate mp3 files from a synthesized vocalization of your RSS feeds. These files can then be included in a podcast feed. Interesting. I know there are plenty of folks in the library blogosphere who’d like a program that did the opposite, providing an automated transcript of my shows. I wonder if there is really a market for machine readings of human-generated blog posts.

Two interesting librarianly posts related to podcasting:

Michael Stephens - Implications of Podcasting in Library Land

“A podcast created by staff should probably be reviewed by the marketing point person to insure it meets the standars (sic) that SHOULD HAVE BEEN SET UP for all library promotional materials. This is not just the duty of IT staff.” True, true, true.

Meredith Farkas - Podcasting in education

“While there probably isn’t much we librarians can do directly with podcasting for our patrons, I am certain that we can assist many non-traditional learners by encouraging educators to use it.” I don’t necessarily agree with the premise that there isn’t much we can do with podcasting, but I think, more importantly, it’s a mistake to limit this discussion to audio content. The possibilities become much broader when you begin to look at videocasting and screencasting as content avenues. This is noted both by Michael and by docwolf in the comment on Meredith’s post.

Here it is: CIL Recap Show

As always, the show is also available via the podcast feed.

Listen to how many times I use the word “space” in 15+ minutes. Rejoice when I edit out my coughing fit. It’s can’t-miss entertainment.

If I get a chance, I’ll post some related links a bit later tonight.

I’m posting a short excerpt from Sarah Long’s article on recruitment, as I suspect there are some people who will disagree strongly with the premise:

“The average age of librarians working today is between 46 and 50. It’s easy to deduce that there will be a great number of retirements in the next few years.

There is much concern in library circles about what is going to happen as the retirements take place. Recruiting more people into librarianship seems to be the obvious answer.”

I may talk about this issue in my next full show, but suffice it to say that this does not correspond to my experience either as a job seeker or as a person in an organization with plenty of retirement age staffers.

Look for more CiL audio commentary later tonight…

I just noticed that yesterday was the two-year anniversary of the existence of Open Stacks (originally entitled Planet Neutral). It’s amazing how much has happened since then. I’ve been invited to write articles and speak at conferences. I’ve made friends and acquaintances that I value highly both on an emotional and intellectual level. The library blogosphere has exploded. It’s been a great ride so far, and with the development of the show, new horizons await. Thanks for being a part of the journey.