--
ResourceShelf Contributing Editor, Steven Cohen, shares a comment or two:
So, it seems that Google is starting a partnership with a few libraries across the country, which will include the digitation of all of the books in the collections and make them available on Google Print. Wow.
According to Search Engine Watch, "At the University of Michigan, the plan is to scan seven million titles over a six year period using a non-destructive scanning technology that Google has developed. The university will also be given a copy of each file to use as they see fit. A "digitize the complete library" arrangement is also the current plan at Stanford and Oxford, and the New York Public Library will also be running a pilot project."
This is sure to make waves across the library world. On one hand, making library materials available on Google could result in libraries getting more attention from users. In fact, it could be a great marketing tool for the participating libraries. On the other hand, what makes Google certain that they will reach potential users of the system? As we have found out with Open WorldCat, just because data is part of a database, it doesn't mean people will find it. Considering that Google will not be providing a specific search query system for this service, it will probably be just as tough to find materials from the participating libraries. Making a database bigger doesn't make it better.
I've heard the "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" approach before with Google (and I'm not implying that this is one of those instances), but libraries should be pushing their own materials through their websites rather than having to "rely" on Google to do so.
That said, I'm taking the wait-and-see approach with this new partnership. It could indeed have a very positive effect on users' attitutes towards libraries, but there could also be negative consequences.
--
--
Comments from ResourceShelf Contributing Editor, Dan Giancaterino
Here's the bottom line for Jenkins Law Library (where I work), which btw is 200 years old. About 1% of our collection is "out of copyright," i.e., published before 1900 (my arbitrary date.) These titles have accounted for less than one-half of 1% of total uses (checkout, internal use, copying, and ILL) in the last 10 years. Digitizing these titles sounds great, but it really won't help our users very much."
--
--
See Also: Some are leery of Google's online data project (via SLC Tribune/AP)
See Also: Google's digital books plan not user perfect (via Chicago Tribune/AP)
A family of resources to help information workers be more effective, raise the value of information in their organisations and contribute to success. Read more »
Recently I have found myself cooing over visualisation maps (and heat maps) of health and well being resources. The content rich data is overlayed with mapping technologies, and some interesting themes and patterns are emerging.
A lot of the talk around social media in the last year has been around information overload. Social media has provided us with new and exciting ways to create content. But it has also meant learning new ways to manage and engage with social media tools. Are we teetering on the edge of an information overload precipice?
Information overload is a figment of your imagination. Or a failure of your filter. Or a symptom of your technological submissiveness. Depends on who you ask.
What if you had to sort through 3.5 million articles and social media posts a day and try to pull out the most relevant items for your organisation? What if you then had to cobble it all together into something readable for your top groups and executives in your organisation?
Alacra Compliance saves time by aggregating information from both free and fee-based sources and enabling users to conduct an accurate federated search across these sources (coined “simultaneous search” by Alacra).
FreePint Family
Quilting big data threads
The fallacy of information overload
Information overload: fact, fantasy or filter failure? 
