Google Voice: A Voice in the Library

Introduction

Released to the public in 2010, Google Voice is touted as the next step in telecommunications.  To put it simply, it “gives you one number for all of your phones” and works with mobile phones, desk phones, and work phones (“About Google Voice,” 2015).  In order to use Google Voice, there is no downloading, uploading, or installation required.  Instead, all that is necessary is to create a Google email account and activate Google Voice (Mairn, 2012, p. 267).  Simple and free, the many possibilities offered through this service make it attractive to both public and academic libraries.  This paper will review existing literature on this topic, explore how libraries are already making use of Google Voice, and examine challenges and potential future uses as libraries continue to embrace technologies such as Google Voice.

Literature Review

There is a growing body of literature that covers mobile technology, its uses, and how libraries are adapting it to suit their needs.  Breitbach and Prieto (2012) mention a Pew Research Center report that shows that 96 percent of people between the ages of 18 and 298 own a cell phone as of 2010.  Another Pew Research Center report found that text messaging is the preferred method of communication among teenagers (p. 2).  In order to reach this growing demographic, libraries have begun to experiment with short message system (SMS) or text messaging reference services.  Breitbach and Prieto follow the Pollak Library’s use of such a service, tracking how the library offered SMS by merging Google Voice with LibraryH3Ip and what types of questions were received through text messages (p. 1).  Mairn (2012) discusses how libraries can implement three different types of mobile technology, specifically discussing Google Voice and its potential uses in libraries.  This includes creating personalized greetings for different audiences, blocking and screening callers, transcribing voicemail messages and sending them via email and text messages, and using it as a basis for SMS reference (p. 267).  As Google Voice continues to evolve and add services, more research will be needed to study how libraries incorporate them and how patrons respond.

Use of Google Voice in Libraries

Breitbach and Prieto (2012) and Mairn (2012) recognize Google Voice’s potential use for libraries both outwardly, in remote reference, and internally, where it can connect and assist departments and staff.  In Breitbach and Prieto’s study, they tracked the use of Google Voice merged with LibraryH3Ip within the Pollack Library at California State University, Fullerton.  This library serves a student body of approximately 35,000 students across 23 campuses, many of whom commute to school or take online classes (pp. 2-3).  Due to this, Pollack Library implemented a text messaging service using Google Voice, through which patrons can send text messages to the Google Voice telephone number, which are then collected and integrated into the system through LibraryH3Ip, so that librarians only need to check one place for both texted queries and IMs.

            Google Voice can also let libraries decide which phones ring based on who is calling and route calls so that, if a librarian is already busy with a call on Google Voice, the system will recognize that and use call waiting (“About Google Voice,” 2015).  This allows for smoother operation and faster service, since librarians can use their personal phones and take calls when they are away from the desk.  By personalizing the default settings, libraries can also set the library’s phones so that calls that come in after the library is closed will go directly to voice message.

Potential Applications

While Google Voice was only used to enhance the reference service already in existence in Breitbach and Prieto’s study of Pollack Library, they note that libraries can monitor the service through their Gmail account or with third-party options (p. 7).  They also predict that students who use SMS reference services at their university libraries will eventually bring the practice to public libraries.

Besides reference services, Mairn (2012) records various potential uses, specifically within library departments.  For example, Google Voice allows users to “personalize greetings, share voicemails, block or screen callers, have voicemail messages transcribed and then sent via e-mail and text messaging… and conduct conference calls” (p. 267).  A library could potentially save and share voicemails with staff members not on shift when a call comes in, block bothersome calls, and transcribe and email voice messages between staff members or library departments.  All of these things enable library staff to keep track of what is going on and make sure everyone is on the same page and has seen the same information.  To make it simpler, a library can create its own account, connecting Google Voice to the institution and not to a specific individual who might leave the library.

Issues

While Google Voice has only been available to the public for five years, many libraries have already established electronic reference through IM, online chat, and email.  In their study of Pollack Library’s use of SMS reference through Google Voice, Breitbach and Prieto (2012) found that the traditional walk-up queries was the most common type of reference question, followed by IM, QuestionPoint, telephone, and text messaging (p. 3).  Most of the questions received via SMS were non-resource based and ready reference, while only eight of the 142 received and analyzed during the study period were identified as complex questions.  Other methods of remote reference, such as QuestionPoint and IM received a higher percentage of complex questions (p. 3).  The authors concluded that patrons may have “self-regulated,” recognizing the limitations of SMS reference and so asking questions easily answered via text (p. 5).  Patrons who asked a question via text message seemed to want quick answers and difficulty arose when librarians replied with long URLs, screen captures, and other information that was difficult to access on cell phones (p. 6).  Studies found that another issue with Google Voice – and text messaging in general – is that it is principally used for more personal communications.  The lack of use for reference transactions may be because using text messaging to ask reference questions is simply a foreign idea to people in general (p. 4).

            Another issue to consider is that Google is a money-making company known for its customized advertising.  If libraries choose to use Google Voice, they should be aware that patron information may be accessed and their privacy compromised.  It is therefore very important that libraries pay attention to the settings of their Google Voice account and make patron privacy a priority.

Conclusion

While the use of Google Voice in libraries is still rather small, Mairn cautions that libraries should not put off adopting mobile spaces, since the Web is becoming more prevalent and use of smartphones and other devices is increasing (p. 268).  The ability to connect multiple phones with one phone number, to text in reference questions, and to transcribe and email voice messages all with one free service is a valuable tool.  Libraries would do well to cultivate this tool and use it to connect with a rising patron population that is increasingly attached to some sort of device.  Mairn states that approximately 80 percent of the world’s population has access to information via mobile devices and that they will look for it wherever it is easily available and visible.  If libraries do not embrace mobile optimization, potential patrons will move on to other resources that work on their devices (p. 268).  Google Voice provides a way to embrace mobile devices easily and cheaply.

References

About Google Voice. (2015). Retrieved June 4, 2015, from 

   https://support.google.com/voice/answer/115061?hl=en

Breitbach, W., & Prieto, A. G. (2012). Text reference via Google Voice: A pilot study. 

   Library Review, 61(3), 188-198. doi: 10.1108/00242531211259319

Mairn, C. (2012). Three things you can do today to get your library ready for the 

   mobile experience. The Reference Librarian, 53(3), 263-269. 

   doi:10.1080/02763877.2012.678245

Walker, C., & Paquet, V. (2010, June 22). Google Voice blog: Google Voice for 

   everyone. Retrieved June 5, 2015, from 

   http://googlevoiceblog.blogspot.com/2010/06/google-voice-for-everyone.html

Assignment 3: Interview with a Librarian

For this assignment, I chose Option 1, which was to identify a library that uses a Content Management System for its website and interview the librarian in charge of the system.  I interviewed the Computer Services Librarian (whom I will keep anonymous) for the Piedmont Regional Library System.  This librarian is in charge of most of the technical aspects, including the regional website and the public access computers, of the library system.  Piedmont Regional consists of ten libraries across three counties.  Our interview was conducted via email.

Q: How and where did Piedmont Regional hear about Content Management Systems?

A: I talked to the web master at DeKalb County Public Library at a conference.  He recommended CMSs.  I investigated and reached the conclusion that this would be good for our library system.

Q: What were your motivations to adopt a CMS for its current use (the library website or any other purpose)?

A: Making it possible to have more staff posting content on the web page, frequently.  As a result, our web page would be more dynamic. 

Q: What were your decision making criteria?

A: We wanted a CMS that was popular and user friendly.  Popularity was important because we want a CMS that would have a community of support.

Q: What is the name of the CMS you are using now?

A: WordPress.

Q: What are the important benefits or advantages of the CMS you are using now over the old system or another CMS system you have used in the past?

A: The CMS has made our web site more smartphone friendly. Staff can also, now, make changes to our web page without having direct access to the web server or having to wait for me to edit and save files.

Q: How was the learning curve?

A: It depends on what you need to do. The learning curve is not bad on doing a simple post, but on managing CMS page there is a big learning curve. You will need to know how to install themes, plugins, and widgets. At some point, you will probably need to edit php code.

It was interesting to learn about the factors the librarian took into consideration when choosing a CMS.  After hearing a recommendation of CMSs from a fellow library webmaster, he investigated the pros and cons to such a system based on the needs of the region.  Among the factors considered were how a CMS would fit the library system, whether it was “popular and user friendly” with an existing community of support, the desire to have a more “dynamic” webpage, and the relative ease of use of the CMS.  After taking into account all of these aspects, the system chose to use WordPress.

Compared to the previous system used, the librarian specifically mentioned how WordPress has made the library website smartphone friendly and enabled staff to make changes to the webpage without relying on him too much.  This reminded me of the Joomla tutorial videos, one of which mentioned how the look of a website should be designed so that the formatting will not change when viewed across different devices.  WordPress also fit the need for a CMS that was popular and user friendly, providing access to support from other libraries and the online community.  Having a user friendly CMS also spread the workload so that staff can edit the webpage without direct access to the web server.

According to the librarian, the learning curve for WordPress varies depending on the skill of the user and what one wants to do.  Creating a simple post is relatively easy while actually managing the CMS page is more difficult and has more of a learning curve because it involves knowing how to install themes, plugins, and widgets – skills an untrained staff member probably will not have.

Outside support seems to be one of the major factors in Piedmont Regional’s decision to use WordPress.  Rather than building a system from the ground up to suit the region’s needs, the region deemed it more important to be able to ask for help and advice from other libraries and the online community.  This would also be helpful in reducing the learning curve for how to manage the website.  The region’s webpage is vibrant and its design and theme easily changed to fit with the time of year or current programs.  This enables the libraries in the region to draw the public’s attention to what is going on and allows libraries to personalize their pages as well.

Thoughts of the Week, Part 2

I Could Really Use a Nap

I never thought I could read so much in three weeks.  The phrase “information overload” has taken on a whole new meaning for me… and I am already considering taking another Maymester class next year.  Maybe it is all of the new technology we are covering in class.  I have always stayed away from social media because I do not see the point, but I kind of like watching my Twitter feed.  I liked wrestling with Joomla and creating something that looked like an honest-to-goodness website.  Now, I am waiting for my Assignment 3 interviewee to email me about the questions I sent him.  All of this in less than a month.

Meanwhile, I have also spent the past month preparing for the chaos that descends upon the library every summer.  We call it the Summer Reading Program.  Every moment not spent reading articles for class has been spent drawing and painting and preparing for a Superhero Story Time.  My coworker, a brave volunteer, and I finally finished decorating the library yesterday and now we are ready to kick things off tomorrow.  I know it is going to be a blast.  Librarians, library assistants, and library volunteers really are superheroes!

And I could really use a nap…

Here's a peak at what we've been working on for the past two months.

Level 1: Read 10 books or 5 hours.

Level 2: Read 20 books or 10 hours.

This is my favorite wall.

Lesson Learned: Nothing sticks to brick.
And glue dots don't stick to butcher paper.

We ran out of walls.
This one is behind the desk.

QR Codes

I’ve seen them everywhere, from websites to advertisements and on the sides of cereal boxes.  Now I finally know what they are, besides funny looking pixelated squares: Quick Response (QR) codes.  According to Hampton, Peach, and Rawlins (2012), QR codes are “two-dimensional barcodes that can be scanned by a mobile device camera” (p. 404).  Interestingly, this technology has been around since 1994, when a Japanese company used it to track manufactured parts.  The company decided not to exercise their patent rights and now the technology is freely available and, apparently, everywhere.

Everywhere now includes libraries.  QR codes have a lot of potential for marketing, it seems.  Unlike conventional barcodes, which can hold between 20 and 40 characters, QR codes can store up to 7, 089 characters (Hampton, Peach, & Rawlins, 2012, p. 405).  Libraries have used them in online catalogs, websites, and to send a book’s call number, title, and author information to a patron’s smart device.

The great part about this is that there are a lot of websites that create QR codes and some of them are free.  To create a QR code for my blog, I used the website https://qrcode.littleidiot.be/.  I just had to paste the website address in and click "Generate B & W."  There was the option to personalize the code, adding a background picture and changing the color, but I chose to leave it alone.  It is probably redundant to put a QR code for my blog on my blog, but, theoretically, if I were to try and increase my social media presence, it would be really helpful to put the code on all of my accounts and connect them.  A library could do the same or create physical displays and include a QR code that would lead the patron to more information about the topic.

Joomla: The Continuing Saga

On the one hand, I learned about something called Lorem Ipsum.  It is filler text created from a scrambled section of one of Cicero’s philosophical writings.  On the other hand, Joomla also had me scrambled for hours at a time as I tried to adjust pictures so that they looked… just… right… and very often they did not.

After signing up for Joomla’s demo, I watched the tutorial videos and followed along.  I tried downloading extensions and when that did not work, I borrowed a laptop and worked on my Joomla site from there, while watching the tutorials from my computer.  I downloaded the JCE and Akeeba extensions and tried JEvents and a newsletter extension, but did not end up using either of those.  I did successfully add events and teasers that showed pictures.  I also added a cool looking Search bar like the ones on real websites.

While wrestling with extensions and picture placement, I also finally came up with a theme for my website.  With my newfound appreciation for dummy text, I decided to embrace the chaos and dedicate my site to garbled Latin, meta books, and long dead guest authors, creating the Lorem Ipsum Library.

After a while, I started to catch on to the pattern of things on the Joomla Administrator site.  Once the major features were installed and the categories set up, editing and fixing things seemed to be a little more intuitive.  There were so many options and steps and pages and… stuff.  As I continued to create new things to put on the website, I grew paranoid that I would forget to go back and edit something.  (Like that newsletter option.)  Keeping the site simple and straightforward worked best for me.

My biggest problem, as seen in the picture at the top of the page, was a box of text going too far to the right.  Crazily enough, this was what plagued me for the majority of the time I worked on the site.  I just could not get the picture and the text to stay in the white box.  After using my best resources – my awesome classmates – I must have clicked something right, because the text lined right up.  Somehow.

What helped most (even beyond the tutorials) was keeping logged into my Twitter account and checking the class discussion boards every so often.  I got around a lot of problems by asking classmates or reading what someone else had asked.  While the tutorial videos did a good job of taking me step-by-step through how to set up a website, I did not dare wander off the beaten path and try to add, say, a newsletter mailing list, because the videos did not explain all the steps.  Maybe with more time, I would have figured it out, but that just was not possible with this assignment.

The source of most of my website’s text?  Lorem Ipsum Generator: http://www.procato.com/lipsum/

Thoughts of the Week

I have just completed my first week of class and already have learned much more than I expected.  I have learned how to tweet and how to set up a blog, which were both completely foreign concepts to me before.  Hopefully by the end of Maymester, I will have learned some of the finer points of writing a blog post.  I have also learned how helpful and fun it is to have contacts in both public and academic libraries.  Through tweets and mile-long discussion threads, I have read a variety of different opinions and experiences courtesy of my classmates.  Already, I have dozens of ideas for future library displays and crafts, library Twitter accounts, and new methods of handling the more bizarre patron interactions.  This just from viewing a few pictures on Twitter and reading madly to keep up with discussion assignments.

I was more than a little nervous about taking my first Maymester during a month that is already hectic with Summer Reading Program preparations, but so far the pace seems to agree with me.  That mild state of constant panic over due dates keeps me from procrastinating and the friendliness and thoughtfulness of my classmates keeps me interested.

One week down, two more to go!

*Image from http://secondchancetodream.com

Timeless Tweets: Of Libraries and Twitter

Friends with Libraries

Reading through this week’s assigned articles about the role of social media in libraries has caused me to ponder some ethical questions.  Bodnar and Doshi (2011) write about Georgia Tech’s library, which has a Twitter account and actively seeks out Tech students on Twitter so the library can follow their accounts and be on the lookout for potential reference questions.  While it is great that Georgia Tech is embracing social media and using available resources to connect with their patrons, is it ethical for a library (or any organization) to follow an individual’s social media account, even if it is set to the public option?  Bodnar and Doshi raise this same question, stating that while following student accounts allows the library to “actively engage” students and “seek out  opportunities for reference and other library-related interactions,” is it ethical to follow student timelines that “contain profane, explicit, or private information?”  Should it only be up to individuals to choose to follow or not to follow the social media account of a library or any other public organization?

To Tweet or Not to Tweet?

Now for the next question.  Reading Verishagen and Hank’s article about how libraries use Twitter, the part that stood out to me most was the mention that the Library of Congress has been archiving public tweets since 2010 and has access to all of public tweets posted since Twitter’s beginning in 2006.

While I know that what is posted on the Internet is there to stay, should something like this be explicitly archived and organized, as in the case of the Library of Congress Twitter archive?  Should the public have a say in whether or not their tweets are archived – or is the fact that they are posting it on the Internet tacit permission to save it for possible future research?  The Internet keeps everything forever, but having tweets archived and available for research purposes is different from having tweets lost and floating somewhere in the tangles of the Web.

For those who do not want their tweets archived, however, there is another option!  It is called #NoLoC and is a registered Twitter app that will automatically delete a tweet after 23 weeks, before the tweet is sent to the Library of Congress in the 24^th week (Mansilla, 2010).  The application is available at http://noloc.org/ and by including #noloc, #noarchive, #noindex, or even #no in a tweet, you can prevent your tweets from being archived by the Library of Congress.

References

Bodnar, J. & Doshi, A. (2011). Asking the right questions: A critique of Facebook, social media, and 

libraries. Public Services Quarterly.

Mansilla, N. (2010, May 16). #NoLoc.org – Delete that tweet, lest it be immortal! Retrieved May 18, 2015, from http://mansilla.com/2010/05/noloc-org-delete-that-tweet-lest-it-be-immortal/

Verishagen, N. & Hank, C. (2014). Are there birds in the library? The extent of Twitter adoption and use by Canadian academic libraries. First Monday, 19(11), 115-129. doi: 10.5210/fm.v19i11.4945 http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4945/4161