Ringtones of all kinds
The dying screams of a hard drive
The living screams of a floppy drive
Tests of the emergency broadcast system
Someone else’s hammer-typing
Every alarm sound ever
Library 2.015 Spring Summit-The Emerging Future: Technology and Learning
Join the SJSU School of Information for the Library 2.015 Spring Summit-The Emerging Future: Technology and Learning, a free online seminar scheduled for April 30, 2015 from 12 p.m. to 3 p.m. Pacific Daylight Time.
Library 2.015 Spring Summit
Thursday, April 30, 2015
12:00 – 3:00 p.m. PDT
Online via Blackboard Collaborate
Inspired by the iSchool’s Emerging Future MOOC, this interactive seminar on future technology trends in library and information services will present key issues faced by information professionals and educators. Attendees will learn about and discuss ways to prepare for the future, both professionally and organizationally.
The Library 2.015 Spring Summit will be divided into three parts, with opening and closing keynote panels and one hour of quick topic presentations. In Part 1, Chasing Storms or Rainbows, a keynote panel will look at the effects of emerging technologies on current and future learning trends. Part 2, In the Know, will feature three short sequential presentations: how to plan and fund new technologies; how to stay up to date with new technologies; and a drill down on the key impact areas of new technologies. Part 3, The Here and Now, will be a closing panel discussion on technology and social media trends.
Don’t miss this free professional development opportunity sponsored by the SJSU School of Information. Registration is required. Sign up Today!
Please feel free to forward this invitation to your friends and colleagues.
I sit on the advisory board of this open access professional journal. We’re looking for some people!
|P R E S S R E L E A S E
Collaborative Librarianship – Seeks an Editor-in-Chief or Editors-in-Chief.
March 20, 2015 – (Denver, CO) – The Advisory Board and Editorial Team of Collaborative Librarianship (eISSN: 1943-7528) are pleased to issue a call for an Editor-in-Chief or Editors-in-Chief to lead the publication into its next phase of development and service to the library community. The Board and Team see the journal, now into its seventh year of publication, well-positioned for this change. Having developed trust and respect since its founding in 2009, the journal boasts a scope of participation and readership that now spans library communities across the United States and abroad.
The ideal applicant/applicants should be committed to the values and principles of collaboration, to advancing scholarship in library and information science through an open access platform, to expanding one’s professional network across the United States and around the world, and to promoting professional development opportunities in scholarship for new and advancing librarians.
Open Access: Gold, but without author fees. In the interest of fostering collaboration, Collaborative Librarianship commits to publishing in an open access environment. Authors are required to agree to “Creative Commons Attribution, noncommercial, no derivative 3.0 license.” See tab “For Authors,” “Copyright Notice.”
Interested individuals who wish to partner with others in this opportunity are encouraged to consider a joint editorship.
Qualifications: Persons interested in this opportunity should have a degree in librarianship, have a strong background and record of professional publication in some field of related scholarship, be familiar with the open access movement and trends, and have a general knowledge of scholarly publishing standards and processes. Editorial experience is a plus.
Responsibilities: Working with the existing management team through an initial period of transition, the appointee/appointees will gain a thorough understanding of all major aspects of the journal operations. The incumbent will exercise responsibility for the character and content of the journal; conduct effective communication with other members of the management/editorial team; assist section editors in soliciting submissions; ensure timely publication of issues; establish the table of contents for each issue; oversee editing processes; respond to author and reader inquiries; manage the budget; oversee press releases, promotion and marketing; report directly to the management team and the advisory board; and work to ensure the journal’s long-term stability and success.
Transition: A newly appointed editor will negotiate a suitable period of transition, though January 2016 is optimal.
Application Materials: Curriculum Vitae; succinct letter of interest highlighting qualifications; brief vision statement of possibilities for Collaborative Librarianship for the next five years; two to five references.
Applications should be submitted via attached email files to Ivan Gaetz or Valerie Horton, Co-General Editors, by May 15, 2015.
Ivan Gaetz Valerie Horton
Brief Profile of Collaborative Librarianship:
Six full years of regular publication, January 2009 to the present, 4 issues per year.
“Views” count: (as of January 31, 2015) 465,966. By summer 2015, the journal will exceed
500,000 total views for all items published. Over the past three years, total “views” count increases by approximately 40% annually.
Systems Platform: Currently on Open Journal Systems. Other options currently being
considered include the publishing arm of Digital Commons of the University of Denver.
Compensation: The journal currently does not offer monetary compensation to its editorial
team, its advisory board, reviewers, or any of its contributors. Editor commonly obtain press credentials, gratis by request, for conferences of the American Library Association.
Business Plan: The journal maintains a reserve fund managed by a partner
501(3)(C) organization, the Colorado Library Consortium, based in Denver, Colorado, and receives a small revenue stream from journal aggregators. Occasionally, given certain project expenses, appeals for funds have been made to our sponsoring organizations.
Citations: The journal increasingly is cited in other scholarly publications, in professional
literature, on blogs, etc.
For more information on various aspects of the journal, see:
Mission: See tab “About”
Scope: See tab “About”
Current Management: See left sidebar, “Editorial Team”
Sponsoring Organizations: See tab “Journal Sponsorship”
More information about the journal and this opportunity can be obtained by contacting Ivan Gaetz or Valerie Horton.
It has been nearly two years since the first disclosures of government surveillance programs by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden and Americans are still coming to terms with how they feel about the programs and how to live in light of them. The documents leaked by Snowden revealed an array of activities in dozens of intelligence programs that collected data from large American technology companies, as well as the bulk collection of phone “metadata” from telecommunications companies that officials say are important to protecting national security. The metadata includes information about who phone users call, when they call, and for how long. The documents further detail the collection of Web traffic around the globe, and efforts to break the security of mobile phones and Web infrastructure.
A new survey by the Pew Research Center asked American adults what they think of the programs, the way they are run and monitored, and whether they have altered their communication habits and online activities since learning about the details of the surveillance. The notable findings in this survey fall into two broad categories: 1) the ways people have personally responded in light of their awareness of the government surveillance programs and 2) their views about the way the programs are run and the people who should be targeted by government surveillance.
Overall, nearly nine-in-ten respondents say they have heard at least a bit about the government surveillance programs to monitor phone use and internet use. Some 31% say they have heard a lot about the government surveillance programs and another 56% say they had heard a little. Just 6% suggested that they have heard “nothing at all” about the programs. The 87% of those who had heard at least something about the programs were asked follow-up questions about their own behaviors and privacy strategies:
34% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs (30% of all adults) have taken at least one step to hide or shield their information from the government. For instance, 17% changed their privacy settings on social media; 15% use social media less often; 15% have avoided certain apps and 13% have uninstalled apps; 14% say they speak more in person instead of communicating online or on the phone; and 13% have avoided using certain terms in online communications.
Those most likely to have taken these steps include adults who have heard “a lot” about the surveillance programs and those who say they have become less confident in recent months that the programs are in the public interest. Younger adults under the age of 50 are more likely than those ages 50 and older to have changed at least one of these behaviors (40% vs. 27%). There are no notable differences by political partisanship when it comes to these behavior changes.
25% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs (22% of all adults) say they have changed the patterns of their own use of various technological platforms “a great deal” or “somewhat” since the Snowden revelations. For instance, 18% say they have changed the way they use email “a great deal” or “somewhat”; 17% have changed the way they use search engines; 15% say they have changed the way they use social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook; and 15% have changed the way they use their cell phones.
Those who are more likely to have changed at least one of their behaviors include the people who have heard a lot about government surveillance (38% say they have changed a great deal/somewhat in at least one of these activities), those who are at least somewhat concerned about the programs (41% have changed at least one activity), and those who are concerned about government monitoring of their use of social media, search engines, cell phones, apps, and email.
There are no partisan differences when it comes to those who have changed their use of various technologies.
Additionally, a notable share of Americans have taken specific technical steps to assert some control over their privacy and security, though most of them have done just simple things. For instance, 25% of those who are aware of the surveillance programs are using more complex passwords.
One potential reason some have not changed their behaviors is that 54% believe it would be “somewhat” or “very” difficult to find tools and strategies that would help them be more private online and in using their cell phones. Still, notable numbers of citizens say they have not adopted or even considered some of the more commonly available tools that can be used to make online communications and activities more private:
These figures may in fact understate the lack of awareness among Americans because noteworthy numbers of respondents answered “not applicable to me” on these questions even though virtually all of them are internet and cell phone users.
This survey asked the 87% of respondents who had heard about the surveillance programs: “As you have watched the developments in news stories about government monitoring programs over recent months, would you say that you have become more confident or less confident that the programs are serving the public interest?” Some 61% of them say they have become less confident the surveillance efforts are serving the public interest after they have watched news and other developments in recent months and 37% say they have become more confident the programs serve the public interest. Republicans and those leaning Republican are more likely than Democrats and those leaning Democratic to say they are losing confidence (70% vs. 55%).
Moreover, there is a striking divide among citizens over whether the courts are doing a good job balancing the needs of law enforcement and intelligence agencies with citizens’ right to privacy: 48% say courts and judges are balancing those interests, while 49% say they are not.
Yet, 57% say it is unacceptable for the government to monitor the communications of U.S. citizens. At the same time, majorities support monitoring of those particular individuals who use words like “explosives” and “automatic weapons” in their search engine queries (65% say that) and those who visit anti-American websites (67% say that).
Overall, 52% describe themselves as “very concerned” or “somewhat concerned” about government surveillance of Americans’ data and electronic communications, compared with 46% who describe themselves as “not very concerned” or “not at all concerned” about the surveillance. When asked about more specific areas of concern over their owncommunications and online activities, respondents expressed somewhat lower levels of concern about electronic surveillance in various parts of their digital lives:
The analysis in this report is based on a Pew Research Center survey conducted between November 26, 2014 and January 3, 2015 among a sample of 475 adults, 18 years of age or older. The survey was conducted by the GfK Group using KnowledgePanel, its nationally representative online research panel. GfK selected a representative sample of 1,537 English-speaking panelists to invite to join the subpanel and take the first survey in the fall of 2014. Of the 935 panelists who responded to the invitation (60.8%), 607 agreed to join the subpanel and subsequently completed the first survey (64.9%) whose results were reported in November 2014. This group has agreed to take four online surveys about “current issues, some of which relate to technology” over the course of a year and possibly participate in one or more 45-60-minute online focus group chat sessions. For the third survey whose results are reported here, 475 of the original 607 panelists participated. A random subset of the subpanel receive occasional invitations to participate in online focus groups. For this report, a total of 59 panelists participated in one of six online focus groups conducted during December 2014 and January 2015. Sampling error for the total sample of 475 respondents is plus or minus 5.6 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence.
Are you looking for ways to enhance your social media marketing?
Do you want new tools to simplify your marketing tasks?
We asked a group of social media pros for the hottest social media tools they use today.
Check out these social media tools to see if they’re a good fit for you!
The December 28, 1959 issue of Life magazine featured this illustration of life in 1975.