I've been mulling this one over for a few days and since
Jenny Levine has gone and cited me in a discussion of this topic I guess the time for mulling is over and it's time to start writing.
I've participated in exchanges on lists in the past week regarding some Web authors wanting to be able to send "e-mail notification of new blog posts" and wondering which blogging software offered this "feature." Both of my responses (here's the longer one) tried to make the point that that is exactly what RSS is for, notification of updates, and I asked why anyone would bother to also add e-mail notification. Luckily I wasn't the only one who's of this opinion.
Now, I can't speak for Karen but the point I was trying to make was not that RSS should replace e-mail. If you've already got an e-mail based service and want to add RSS on top of that, fine. But, when starting something new, why look back and force an old(er) technology on top of it? Why not use the new service in your library as an opportunity to introduce your patrons to a new technology? If this isn't a "teaching moment" I don't know what is.
Bill's response to all this (after claiming that this was a "dead topic",) was to say that his job "is not to always drag people into using they don't want to use. [sic]" Bill, where are you getting this idea? I've met many people who don't know what RSS is or how it works, but upon demonstration I've yet to meet anyone who's told me that they "don't want to use it." Granted, you prefer e-mail, but now you're just placing your biases on your patrons. Is patron ignorance the reason to either a) not do something at all, or b) take the extra time and effort needed to back-pedal the technology? I don't think so.
Labels: rss