Social Networks for Libraries

     My inclination when thinking about library advocacy is to use every social network available in attempt to reach the widest possible audience. However, there are an increasing amount of social networks out there, and maintaining a presence on all of them is time-consuming and, frankly, unnecessary. Just because MySpace and LiveJournal are still around does not mean that they will be effective in marketing a library (with those two, it might even do the opposite).

    Thankfully, there are networks that are particularly useful platforms to focus on using. For my purposes, I’ll be looking at Facebook and Goodreads. These two social networks have a handful of things in common - they both are:

• free
• allow for profiles
• allow for private messaging
• allow for group pages
• connect you to “friends”
• have widgets you can integrate into library sites, and
• link to each other

Outside of these standard similarities, the two sites operate with different purposes, and are best used accordingly.

   Facebook is a force in the digital world; it aims to connect individuals to just about anything. Users can share things with each other through messages, posts, links, and instant messages. Audiovisual media is also easily added and viewed on Facebook. Perhaps most relevant to libraries is the option to create a profile and page for an institution rather than an individual. These profiles can be a space where libraries can post hours, list services, promote events, advertise new holdings, give directions, and make other announcements (among others). These options make Facebook at particularly great platform for general library outreach, particularly because so many people use the network.

IUPUI's Organizational Profile Page is a media smorgasbord! 

    Goodreads, in contrast, is more focused. While Facebook is a heavy hitter in promoting a library, Goodreads is useful in working with a library (particularly if patrons are aware of the site). Books are the focus of Goodreads, and the network allows for the creation of monitored book groups that meet in person or online, provide lists, make recommendations, and display descriptions, reviews, trailers, author information, and book location (including libraries!). 

Lots of things to play with here!

Quizzes, quotes, trivia, and other miscellaneous related topics can also be found. All this in-depth information on books does mean that Goodreads does neglect other media like film, music, journals, and databases. Given that there are other sites that provide similar functions for other media - the Internet Movie Database, Amazon - it doesn’t need to.

     In my view, Facebook will always be the most profitable social network for a library to use, as its outreach methods are more diverse and its audience wider. On a personal note, though, I have a much better time on Goodreads than Facebook. 

So many options to rabbit-hole down into...

The former I check frequently but quickly, while the latter can easily suck up much of my time. I’ve also had the opportunity of using both sites for managing a book club I belong to. While Goodreads would be my choice for that purpose, the older members of my group found it particularly difficult to use, and we switched to Facebook instead (which also has caused some issues with the less tech-saavy members). Fortunately, though, these two social networks are not mutually exclusive. A library or an individual can link their accounts and use Facebook for general life purposes, while using Goodreads to discover new books of interest, organize them, rate them, and recommend them. Thank goodness for both!