Basically the service, called Beacon, connects an advertiser to ones facebook ‘friends”.

David Weinberger, from the HuffingtonPost.com describes it well in his post Facebook’s Privacy Default.

The new ad infrastructure enables Facebook to extend their reach onto other companies’ sites. For example, if you rent a copy of “Biodome” from Blockbuster.com, Blockbuster will look for a Facebook cookie on your computer. If it finds one, it will send a ping to Facebook. The Blockbuster site will pop up a “toast” (= popup) asking if you want to let your friends at Facebook know that you rented “Biodome.” If you say yes, next time you log into Facebook, Facebook will ask you to confirm that you want to let your friends know of your recent rental. If you say yes, that becomes an event that’s propagated in the news feed going to your friends.

You can understand Facebook’s perspective here, now that they have created this great service, how do they make money?I think Facebook would argue that they don’t send personal information to the companies so they are protecting user privacy. On the other hand, users might argue that just because they buy something from Overstock.com this does not represent an endorsement of the website.

Faced with an online user protest, Facebook has changed the controversial service (see Privacy concerns prompt U-turn at Facebook). Now users have to opt ‘in’ instead of opting ‘out’. This brings up some challenging questions that I think speaks to the trepidation that many librarians feel about public social networking sites. After all, if you signup for a ‘free’ service can you really blame the company for trying to make money off of you? Or should sites like Facebook been seen as a hybrid public service (akin to Google) and if so how are they supposed to know what acceptable business behavior is?

PS - Looking for MLA groups on Facebook try:

Medical Library Association’s Technology Trends
http://uva.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2464357736

Leadership and Management Section of the Medical Library Associationhttp://uva.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2523367558

MLA Social Networking Software Task Force
Medical Library Association (unofficial)http://uva.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2224177377

Educational Media & Technologies Section of Medical Library Association
http://uva.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2810070861

On October 5, Molly Knapp’s post “Bill Gates wants your health records”, mentions consumer health record management initiatives from Microsoft, Google, and RevolutionHealth. At first, I thought GREAT! We need a service like this! Then after I took a look at the sites, I realized that in addition to managing your health record they provide features such as access to “quality” health information and a method to find local health care services/providers. Does that sound familiar? Hello? MedlinePlus?

In addition to providing the services mentioned above, Microsoft HealthVault actually links you directly to MedlinePlus topics and provides a “scrapbook” feature akin to My NCBI (formerly known as the “cubby” in PubMed). RevolutionHealth did not link directly to MedlinePlus topics but it did link to several resources linked within MedlinePlus such as Mayo Clinic and Cleveland Clinics. RevolutionHealth also provided some Web 2.0 functionality, which allows users to post questions and create their own health pages. Goggle Health is still being developed but knowing Google and it’s propensity for mashups I think we will see many of the same features plus some new ones we have not thought of as of yet.

I do not necessarily know whether or not any of these services are a bad thing as long as consumers are able to find accurate health information. One thing that I do know is that these companies have the money and resources to pour into development and promotion of these services; plus some of these companies are already widely used (think about meeting users where they are).

So let me throw out some questions for discussion…

• What do you think of these services competing with MedlinePlus?
• What is the potential impact of these new services offering one stop shopping for managing your health record, accessing health information, and locating health services?
• How can/will Medlineplus compete with these services as their popularity/notoriety increases?
• How can MedlinePlus promote its services better?
• Should MedlinePlus be adding Web 2.0 services to their site?

  Point 1: It’s where the patrons are, right?
As we’ve mentioned before, undergraduates are flocking to social networking sites in droves. But reaching this user base is not as simple as setting up a library profile and finding friends. As Meredith Farkas observes, “there is a big difference between “being where our patrons are” and “being USEFUL to our patrons where they are.” To make social networking software work for your institution you have to be proactive: mention your Facebook presence in classes, solicit feedback from students using features available in the social networking software, and use your profile as a portal to the library within the social networking site.

Point 2: Where do hospital libraries fit in?
There are 59 profiles that match a keyword search for ‘hospital’ in MySpace, and I can assure you, not one of them is related to the health sciences. From locked-down networks to the simple fact that time is precious, perhaps hospital libraries would do better to explore social networking resources that put on a more serious face. Free online reference management systems like Connotea and Citeulike, new sharing and discussion features in open access journals such as BioMed Central and PLoS ONE and professional social networking sites like LinkedIn, or Pronetos and Sermo (an online network for physicians which counts the AMA as a strategic partner) focus on the health sciences and leave the “hooking up” to the kids.

Point 3: There’s simply not enough time in the day
The growth and amount of social networking software available can be threatening to a new user, but you don’t have to take on everything at once. We’ve mentioned 23 things, the self-directed exercises designed to give hands-on experience with social networking software tools. The soundest advice may be to pick out a couple sites that sound interesting to you and just jump in. (Don’t worry, you are not going to break the Internet.)

Point 4: The technology disconnect
Libraries have a long history as policy-driven privacy advocates, while social networking tools encourage users to tell the world everything about themselves. McDonald & Thomas ponder this disconnect in Educause Quarterly’s “Disconnects Between Library Culture and Millennial Generation Values”:

Dogmatic library protection of privacy inhibits library support for file-sharing, work-sharing, and online trust-based transactions that are increasingly common in online environments, thus limiting seamless integration of web-based services.

This is an interesting observation about philosophies of information. Do our users trust us? Does staunch support of patron privacy & protection of copyright limit a library’s influence when it comes to current trends in online interaction?

Point 5: Multi-tasking vs. critical thinking
Did you hear the one about the law professor who banned laptops from his lectures, or were you too busy chatting up friends online? As a Chronicle of Higher Education article points out, social networking encourages distraction in the classroom & multitasking, which thwarts traditional objectives of higher education such as inspiring critical thinking in learners.

Final Thoughts: The move from one-way to two-way information
We put up information on library websites and assume patrons will find and use it when they need it, while social networking sites encourage interaction between users by design. With the advent of Web 2.0, patron/user behavior is changing. For better or worse, as you consider your library and it’s position on social networking software, here’s a few more questions to mull over (taken again from McDonald & Thomson)

What is your library doing to:

• Support the user’s affinity for self-paced, independent, trial-and-error methods of learning?
• Create opportunities to make library information look and behave like information that exists in online entertainment venues?
• Explore alternative options for delivering information literacy skills to users in online environments and alternate spaces?
• Apply the typical user’s desire for instant gratification to the ways that libraries could be using technology for streamlined services?
• Redefine administrative, security, and policy restrictions to permit online users an online library experience that rivals that of a library site visit?
• Preserve born-digital information?

Well, what is your [medical] library doing? We’d love to hear your comments.