This article is downloaded from

http://researchoutput.csu.edu.au

It is the paper published as:

Author: Katy Greenland

Title: Negotiating Self-presentation, Identity, Ethics, Readership and Privacy in the LIS

Blogosphere: A Review of the Literature

Journal Title: Australian Academic and Research Libraries ISSN: 0004-8623

Year: 2013 Volume: 44 Issue: 4 Pages: 217-225

Abstract: This paper is a review of the literature around the Library and Information Science

(LIS) blogosphere, focusing on academic librarian bloggers who maintain their own blog

outside of their library workplace. The differences between library and librarian blogs are

defined, followed by a brief snapshot of the history, evolution and current landscape of the

LIS blogosphere. The review aims to understand what challenges these librarian bloggers

face in contentious areas of their blogging practice. Key challenges that emerged were self-

presentation and identity, ethical issues, readership and privacy. Through a discussion of

these key challenges, issues around anonymity, disclosure, accountability to the profession,

the interactivity of blogs and self-censorship come into play. The blurred lines between the

personal, public, private and professional in the world of blogs are observed.

DOI/URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00048623.2013.843236

http://researchoutput.csu.edu.au/R/-?func=dbin-jump-

full&object_id=50596&local_base=GEN01-CSU01

CRO Number: 50596

2

Negotiating self-presentation, identity, ethics,

readership and privacy in the LIS blogosphere:

A review of the literature

Katy Greenland, School of Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga

2650

Email: katy.greenland@gmail.com

Keywords: Australian academic librarian bloggers, privacy, ethics, blog readership, self-

presentation, blogger identity

Acknowledgement: The author would like to acknowledge the helpful comments made by Dr

Mary Anne Kennan, one of her lecturers at CSU, on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

100 word bio

Katy has a background in social work, social science and psychology and has worked in

community organisations, hospital settings, and local government. She currently coordinates

research grants, ethics and publications for the Faculty of the Victorian College of the Arts

and Melbourne Conservatorium of Music at The University of Melbourne and is passionate

about research, reading and the arts. Katy will complete her Master of Information Studies

(Applied Research) at Charles Sturt University in February 2014 and is keen to pursue further

study in the Library and Information Science field in the areas of librarian identity and

behavior.

3

Abstract

This paper is a review of the literature around the Library and Information Science

(LIS) blogosphere, focusing on academic librarian bloggers who maintain their own blog

outside of their library workplace. The differences between library and librarian blogs are

defined, followed by a brief snapshot of the history, evolution and current landscape of the

LIS blogosphere. The review aims to understand what challenges these librarian bloggers face

in contentious areas of their blogging practice. Key challenges that emerged were self-

presentation and identity, ethical issues, readership and privacy. Through a discussion of

these key challenges, issues around anonymity, disclosure, accountability to the profession,

the interactivity of blogs and self-censorship come into play. The blurred lines between the

personal, public, private and professional in the world of blogs are observed.

Blog, blogger, blogosphere…

Blogs, short for weblogs, allow content to be stored and tracked by scrolling through,

rather than being deleted or superseded as is the case with websites (Benson and Favini

2006). The blogosphere is the digital space in which blogs operate, and blogging is the active

and interactive activity in which blog posts are written, published and commented on (Kuhn

2007). The way the blogosphere hangs together mimics in a sense the way the Internet itself

is connected; through links (Chopin 2008).

Blogs vary depending on the context and are categorized in numerous ways in terms

of their technical and structural features, purpose, function, topic, authors, format, content and

other defining characteristics (Lee and Bates 2007; Aharony 2009b; Kuhn 2007). There is

consensus in the literature that blogs are websites containing dated entries in reverse

chronological order so the most recent entry appears first, and that they are participatory,

allowing comment and dialogue (Lee and Bates 2007; Kuhn 2007; Gunter 2009; Benson and

Favini 2006).

Blogs are dynamic, versatile and flexible tools that can evolve according to the

blogger’s needs (Luzón 2008). Links and references to other online articles, blogs and

comments integrate a blog into the blogosphere and facilitate discourse in a particular field

(Luzón 2008). In one study, Luzon (2008) analysed the links in 15 blogs by academics to

determine their purpose and function. He found that links help to establish communities and

provide a platform for bloggers to link back into their own blogs or to work they have

previously published elsewhere, serving a promotional purpose for themselves and others

(Luzón 2008).

Literature search methodology

The main literature-searching methodology for this review involved identifying peer-

reviewed articles through journal databases. The primary database searched was EBSCO

Host, followed by Emerald, Taylor and Francis and to a lesser extent Wiley and

ScienceDirect. When a highly relevant article was identified, that article’s reference list was

examined for additional relevant articles; a process called chaining (Ellis 1989).

Interestingly, this is similar to a sampling technique described, separately, by Viegas and

Gelber in which researchers discover other blogs to examine by looking at the links within a

blog (Viégas 2006; Gelber 2011).

A hermeneutic technique involving continual searching, honing of search terms in a

more circular, rather than solely linear approach to discovering literature was also used (Boell

and Cecez-Kecmanovic 2010). Typically, two or more search terms and Boolean operators

4

were used to try and narrow down the results, of which approximately forty were found. In

this review, the following search terms and operators were used:

Librarian AND blogger AND Australia OR culture

Librarian AND blogosphere

Librarian AND blog

Blogarian AND culture OR community

Librarian AND blogger AND community

Library blogs, librarian blogs – what’s the difference?

Before discussing the main findings of the review, it is important to clearly

distinguish between blogging as an individual person around LIS issues (librarian blog) and

blogging as a librarian within a workplace (library blog). For this review, the method used to

differentiate between librarian blogs and library blogs was to consider the purpose and nature

of the blog. The distinguishing characteristic is the purpose of the blog in question. Library

blogs are created specifically for and endorsed by a library (Belden 2009). They are usually

aimed at current or future library users, and are a useful marketing and communication tool to

share library news, resources and information (Belden 2009; McIntyre and Nicolle 2008).

Within the academic library context, blogs are used for purposes such as sharing

information with busy academics, researchers and students about new resources, services and

material that may be of use to them (McIntyre and Nicolle 2008). These blogs can provide

links to other relevant websites, databases and sources in order to locate the blog within a

broader context of academic discourse (McIntyre and Nicolle 2008). In this sense, library

blogs have an articulated purpose to contribute towards the mission of libraries, often as part

of a communication strategy (Belden 2009; McIntyre and Nicolle 2008). While an in-depth

discussion of library blogs is out of the scope of this review, there is ample material in the

literature on this topic.

Librarian blogs, on the other hand, are produced by individuals working in the LIS

profession who blog about their work and other topics. The audience tends to be peers within

the LIS profession, rather than library users. The librarian blogs of interest in this review are

generally personal and conducted outside of work hours. They are an important

communication channel method for the profession that allows for the creation of networks

and collaborations to emerge between peers (Luzón 2008). Powers (2008) concurs, adding

that librarians are able to be “in conversations” without the limitations of distance, time or

media through the avid librarian blogger community. Librarian blogs are situated within a

community of blogging practices (Kjellberg 2009). Communities form among librarian

bloggers on a remarkably diverse range of topics, from fashion to technology, to how much

they like or dislike their work (Farkas 2007). This means that librarian bloggers don’t just

blog about libraries, they blog about their lives, and about being a librarian.

The “blurred line between the personal and the professional in the world of blogs”

(Belden 2009, p 54) is a fundamental concept that has received insufficient attention in the

literature; in particular, the issues and tensions that can arise when librarians blog about their

library work outside of their roles as employees. Gunter (2009) weighs in here, suggesting

that blogging practices can erode the distinction between the people’s public and private lives.

He posits that the blogosphere is public and blogging is a public activity, however, the fact is

that private individuals are blogging in this public space (Gunter 2009). What is public

becomes personal, and what is private can also become public when it comes to blog. A

snapshot of the history and evolution of the blogosphere is necessary to understand the

context of the LIS blogosphere and to frame this review.

5

History and evolution of the blogosphere

Web 2.0 is the term used to describe the ability for Internet users to create and share

digital content through use of interactive tools such as blogs, wikis, and websites (Benson and

Favini 2006). Web 2.0 involves sharing of information, collaboration and open engagement

with others. Blogs are considered to be one of the pillars of Web 2.0, which refers to the

‘social web’ or participatory, interactive Internet we have today, while Library 2.0 refers to

Web 2.0 applied within the LIS field (Torres-Salinas et al. 2011).

Historically, blogs have been thought of as serving a similar purpose to a personal

journal or as a link-based tool (Lee and Bates 2007). Blogs were originally comprised almost

completely of links, which still serve to facilitate conversations, but have evolved quickly and

dramatically along with the Internet itself, with often quite sophisticated and flexible formats

(Pankl and Ryan 2006; Chopin 2008; Luzón 2008).

Lee and Bates (2006) have highlighted the short timeframe between initial blog

availability in the late 1990s and global engagement, noting that in 2006, 36% of adult

Internet users read blogs, whilst 8% had their own. Gunter (2009) concurs, chronicling the

massive popularity of blogs, especially since the early 2000s. Both mainstream and non-

mainstream media now accept and recognise blogs as a well-used source of news,

entertainment, information and opinion (Kuhn 2007). The ubiquity of no-cost, versatile and

easy to use blog software and the ease with which people can create, maintain and comment

on blogs has contributed to their popularity (Torres-Salinas et al. 2011).

The development of the LIS blogosphere

Early literature on library blogs focused on defining what blogs were, what they

could be used for, and how libraries could create and maintain them (Belden 2009). The

literature of this early period, the late 1990s and early 2000s, related to library blogs within

the workplace rather than individual blogs by librarians. The first library blog is documented

in the literature as having been created in 1998, which is very early in terms of blogs

generally. It was only a couple of years later that library and librarian blogs started to become

popular, gaining momentum in the LIS sector from 2003 (Torres-Salinas et al. 2011; Lee and

Bates 2007).

An early study describes LIS blogs as “personal knowledge publishing”, in which

bloggers make observations, discuss and debate ideas and react to those of others on their

blogs (Luzón 2008, p 76). The early librarian blogs served numerous purposes for bloggers,

including being useful for professional development, keeping up with trends, reaching out to

readers, forming communities, and sharing and developing ideas (Aharony 2010).

Much of the literature addressing the LIS blogosphere would be considered positivist,

quantitative studies, involving analysis of blogs, in particular blog content, but also blog

dynamics, activity, nature, organisation, trends and development. The most common

methodology in the literature is content analysis, which was applied to determine the

functions and purposes of blogs (Chopin 2008).

Clyde (2004a; 2004b) and Bar iLan (2004; 2007) undertook content analysis studies

on LIS blogs fairly early on that described LIS blog characteristics, whilst Aharony and

Belden have carried out more recent content analysis studies in the LIS blogosphere. Aharony

carried out an exploratory analysis of blogs produced by LIS professionals, typically

subjecting blogs to statistical descriptive and content analysis in an attempt to better

understand the LIS blogosphere (Aharony 2009a; Aharony 2010; Aharony 2009b). Belden’s

approach mimics Aharony’s, using content and descriptive analysis to attempt to develop an

understanding of the use of blogs in archives and by archivists (Belden 2009).

6

Stephens (2008) carried out a major study that sought to test a model of a blogging

librarian as a ‘pragmatic biblioblogger’, or librarian who seeks, gathers and shares

information and knowledge; and further, whether this model provides insights into the

motivations and experiences of librarian bloggers. Some particularly useful aspects of

Stephen’s (2008) study are his findings about the behaviour of LIS bloggers. That is, the

perception of libraries towards their librarians blogging outside of the workplace, the

community of librarian bloggers, and the issues around freedoms and constraints these

bloggers feel. Significantly, his findings offer insights about how librarian bloggers feel the

LIS profession has been affected by librarian bloggers (Stephens 2008).

A recent study by Gelber (2011) was different, as it focused more on trying to

understand who the LIS bloggers are. Gelber (2011) used descriptive statistics and content

analysis methodologies to examine librarian blogs addressing cataloguing and metadata

topics, deliberately choosing these methodologies to ensure consistency with Aharony, Bar-

iLan and others (Gelber 2011; Bar-ilan 2007; Aharony 2009a). She then sought to understand

the authors, dynamics and topics addressed by the blogs (Gelber 2011).

The academic librarian blogger

In a survey of librarian bloggers, Farkas (2007) found that academic librarians were

more likely to blog than their counterparts in other libraries. She postulated that academic

libraries, in particular, are highly supportive of their staff becoming published and that blogs

are well-documented as being a place in which bloggers can practice their writing skills

(Farkas 2007). Academic librarian bloggers in the United States (US) have reported

motivations for publishing their blogs as including engaging with a community of librarian

colleagues, debating LIS issues and technologies, and discussing and reflecting on the LIS

profession (Powers 2008; Stephens 2008). It is for these reasons that academic librarian

bloggers were selected as a priority for this review.

Kjellberg and Powers (2010; 2008) agree that people turn to blogging, with its

capacity to generate informal networks, as a more efficient way to discuss ideas than

traditional publishing modes, which take so much longer. Blogs have opened up publishing

opportunities to librarians in a significant way, as bloggers are able to test out ideas with

colleagues before taking them further along traditional publishing pathways (Pankl and Ryan

2006). Kjellberg notes the gravitas that is now attached to online publishing through blogs

and other means, describing it as a type of ‘digital scholarship’ (Kjellberg 2010).

Lee and Bates (2007) observe that it is the informal, accessible nature of blogs that

has led to their success in the LIS field. That is, success measured both in terms of being

adopted by librarians and libraries, as well as having an audience of library users and LIS

professionals outside of their workplaces. They have become a catalyst for enabling librarians

to build online communities around ideas, and they now occupy an important status within

the LIS field, especially for academic librarian bloggers (Torres-Salinas et al. 2011). Bloggers

are creating online identities that they maintain through their blog, and there is strong

evidence in the literature that demonstrates blogging leads to the development of social

networks or online communities (Kjellberg 2010; Luzón 2008). Library and librarian blogs

are now an accepted part of library work.

Issues facing librarian bloggers

A number of authors have discussed the challenges librarian bloggers (and other

bloggers) may face when blogging outside of the workplace (Kirkup 2010; Kjellberg 2009;

Viégas 2006; Young 2006). While librarian bloggers create and maintain their personal blogs

7

in their own time, due to the readership and content of their blogs it seems inevitable that

issues pertaining to their library workplaces will arise from time to time. Very occasionally,

when blog posts or comments about a librarian blogger’s workplace become critical, or are

perceived to be critical, the LIS profession has seen significant consequences for librarian

bloggers (Belden 2009; Farkas 2007; Young 2006). It is the contentious issues facing

academic librarian bloggers and their consideration of the potential implications for their

blogging practices that have emerged as key discussion points in this paper. In particular, how

these bloggers negotiate self-presentation, identity, ethics, readership and privacy are

addressed.

Self-presentation and identity

Many authors have documented the existence of a clearly-defined blogger culture that

has emerged and developed over the past fifteen years (Kuhn 2007; Kjellberg 2010; Luzón

2008). Self-identity is created by the individual blogger, and can be thought of as a narrative

about themselves that is sustained and evolves through interactions with others (McCullagh

2008). McCullagh (2008) suggests that self-identity as an evolving narrative is a useful

framework for understanding how bloggers negotiate their blogs in terms of being both

private and public space. Bloggers negotiate the boundaries between themselves and society

and to do this they assess their readership and networks; controlling their disclosure and

participation in the blogosphere. In such a way, they manage the public and private aspects of

their blog (McCullagh 2008). An example of this is in the context of a blogger and their

workplace. Bloggers have reported that how they are perceived at work is important to them

and is a factor they take into account when blogging (McCullagh 2008). The way they present

themselves online is perceived by these bloggers to have implications for the ways in which

they are seen in their workplaces, and this factor informs their blogging practices. Farkas

(2007) recognises that libraries tend not to prescribe what their library staff can and cannot

blog about outside of the workplace, however, there are isolated incidences of librarians being

fired because of the content on their blogs or post.

In a published interview British law librarian, Jennie Findlay, who has her own very

successful blog, explains that she is “cautious about being too controversial” in her blog posts

(Well 2008). She is conscious of possible negative consequences for her or for her library,

realizing that her posts could be commented on or linked to (Well 2008). As a result, Findlay

keeps her posts ‘light-hearted’ rather than ‘in-depth’ (Well 2008).

Ethics

According to Powers (2008), the history of ethics in librarianship is marked by grey

areas, and never more so than today in which the fast-moving technological environment

gives rise to more and more ethical challenges. Within the LIS sector, though, there exist a

number of clearly articulated concepts that are commonly regarded as important tenets for the

profession and these can be applied to the LIS blogosphere too. Cenite et al (2009) define

these tenets as: integrity - robustness and reliability of information; attribution - credibility

and acknowledgement of sources; minimising harm - etiquette, respect for others and for

privacy; transparency - honesty and fairness; accuracy - correct information; and

accountability - identifying conflicts of interest, taking responsibility for posts, acceptance of

consequences.

Cenite and colleagues (2009) investigated bloggers’ ethical beliefs and practices,

surveying over 1,200 personal and non-personal bloggers. The survey focused on four key

8

ethical principles: truth, accountability, attribution and minimizing harm. The authors were

interested in discovering what sense of responsibility bloggers felt about their blogging and to

what extent they were informed by ethical beliefs. The bloggers’ perceptions of their

readership was found to be a key aspect, with half the sample reporting that they knew their

readers personally in some way, which informed their thinking around what to post and in

what ways (Cenite et al. 2009).

Some prominent US librarian bloggers have posited that librarian bloggers need to be

conscious about the content they produce in the blogosphere, as they are perceived to

represent librarians generally. This is demonstrated by Randy Reichardt, who considers that

he is a librarian blogger who blogs “on behalf of, and thus representing, our profession”

(2005, Cites and Insights, Ethics and Zines); whilst Karen Schneider (2005) feels that “every

blog produced by librarians, no matter how casual, represents librarianship to the world”.

Stephens believes that “our blogs represent us”, which is a call for integrity among the

librarian blogger community, and also an indication of the ways in which librarian bloggers

hold themselves and each other accountable (Stephens 2005).

A number of librarian bloggers have developed preliminary codes, such as Rebecca

Blood’s blog standards outlined in her Weblog Handbook and Karen Schneider’s article in

the Library Journal (Schneider 2005). Despite these efforts, and the noticeable significance of

ethical considerations in the LIS blogosphere, there is no single agreed code of ethics in this

space. Bloggers may not conform to a code, but the literature describes a discernable ethical

sensibility in the blogosphere.

McCullagh (2008) found that bloggers undertake careful reflection about whether to

post personal information about themselves and others. In McCullagh’s study, bloggers

reported that topics that were too personal for them to post about include: negative posts and

especially hurtful comments; emotional responses; text that would identify them (or others) if

their blogs were private; anything that could impact on their future employment; and the oft-

avoided trio of ‘sex, religion and politics’ (McCullagh 2008). This shows that bloggers take

into consideration their readership and issues around disclosure, privacy, readership and

respect for others when posting.

Readership

Blog readership comprises a blogger’s own social network, friends, family and

colleagues, as well as a larger audience that could be anyone coming to the blog through a

search engine, link, blogroll or other entry point (McCullagh 2008). Awareness of readership

is important as it informs blogger thinking about risk, responsibility and the potential

consequences, both positive and negative, of their blogging (McCullagh 2008).

Nardi and colleagues (Nardi, Schiano, and Gumbrecht 2004, p 225) are in agreement,

characterizing blogging in general as a “studied minuet between blogger and audience”. The

authors feel that the interaction between blogger and audience is at the crux of blogging and

describe the influence of the blog and the audience as “blogs create the audience but the

audience also creates the blog” (Nardi, Schiano, and Gumbrecht 2004, p 224). In their study,

Nardi and colleagues (2004) found that an academic staff member at a US college self-

censored, deciding never to post anything political due to a concern about his blog readership.

Further, the academic had considered starting another blog under a pseudonym in order to

feel free to post controversial and political opinions. Others in the study employed self-

censorship strategies such as using euphemisms and private entries when being critical.

These strategies are understandable, as disclosing has resulted, in some cases, in

serious consequences on bloggers’ lives and especially on their careers (McCullagh 2008).

9

Once information has been blogged, bloggers do not have full control over who accesses their

posts and at what point they do so. Information taken out of context can be significantly

misjudged and can have negative impacts on the blogger or those around them (McCullagh

2008). The literature indicates that negotiating privacy boundaries can be problematic for

bloggers and that privacy boundaries in the workplace are sometimes difficult to manage, but

the impacts of this are not clearly understood (McCullagh 2008). McCullagh (2008) explains

how a blog’s readership has serious implications for privacy and for what type and tone of

content a blogger posts. Readership, self-presentation and identity intersect here, and

questions emerge from this nexus around how bloggers perceive and negotiate privacy in this

space.

Privacy

Blogs are easy and straightforward to produce and maintain, disseminating a range of

information, sometimes quite personal, and opinions across the Internet (McCullagh 2008).

Blogging provides a forum for librarians to deliberate and to debate, and anyone wishing to

contribute can do so. Yet information shared on blogs is tied to self-presentation and identity

(McCullagh 2008). There can be risks to individual bloggers in terms of privacy, especially

when the permanency of cached blog content is considered (McCullagh 2008).

There is no single agreed definition of privacy in the literature, and a range of

conceptions of privacy is valuable because it encompasses several issues. Privacy refers to

notions such as an individual’s right to be respected, personal space, dignity and autonomy, as

well as those aspects of a person’s life they wish to restrict access to or keep control of

(McCullagh 2008). McCullagh’s (2008) conception of privacy as it pertains to this paper

incorporates, firstly, information privacy, which refers to control over one’s information, and

secondly, expressive privacy, which involves freedom and autonomy to choose, act and

interact, as well as self-identity.

Understanding the accessibility and public nature of the blogosphere is important in a

discussion about privacy for bloggers. Some bloggers in McCullagh’s (2008) study were

quite aware of the public nature of their blogs and took action to preserve their privacy,

sometimes restricting the access and visibility of their blogs to their families or employers.

These actions helped them negotiate that boundary between themselves and society to achieve

their desired level of private-ness and public-ness.

In Powers’ (2008) opinion, blogs are public and bloggers, as authors of their entries,

are accountable for those entries, regardless of whether they choose to remain anonymous

through use of a pseudonym or use their own name. Powers (2008) maintains that blog

readers hold blogs accountable; this includes the references and links in a blog post, as well as

comments made by others. However, Kuhn (2007, p 24) posits that accountability can only

occur when the identify of a blogger is transparent, going so far as to say that accountability

and transparency “make blog discourse more authentic”. According to Farkas’ (2007) survey,

around a quarter of librarian bloggers blog anonymously, either because they personally

prefer to be “under the radar”, or because their library workplace does not support staff

having their own blog (p 42).

Conclusion

The academic librarian blogger is a member of a dynamic, diverse and ever-growing

online community that confronts and discusses issues facing the profession (Powers 2008).

This paper has provided background and context about the development of the blogosphere

10

and LIS blogging. The review identified several key issues, raising questions about how

librarian bloggers negotiate self-presentation and identity, ethics, readership and privacy in

terms of their blogging. Future research is needed to investigate these challenges in order to

gain a deeper understanding of the implications for the blogging practices and library work of

academic librarian bloggers.

11

Reference list

Aharony, Noa. 2009a. “An Exploratory Analysis of Librarians’ Blogs: Their Development,

Nature and Changes.” Aslib Proceedings 61 (6): 587–604.

doi:10.1108/00012530911005535.

———. 2009b. “Librarians and Information Scientists in the Blogosphere: An Exploratory

Analysis.” Library & Information Science Research 31 (3) (September): 174–181.

doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2009.02.001.

———. 2010. “LIS Blog Comments: An Exploratory Analysis.” Libri 60: 65–77.

doi:10.1515/libr.2010.006.

Bar-ilan, Judit. 2004. “Blogarians-A New Breed of Librarians.” Proceedings of the 67th

ASIS&T Annual Meeting 41: 119–128.

———. 2007. “The Use of Weblogs ( Blogs ) by Librarians and Libraries to Disseminate

Information.” Information Research 12 (4).

Belden, Michelle. 2009. “Archives and Archivists in the Blogosphere by Michelle Belden.”

Journal for the Society of North Caroline Archivists 7 (1): 43–71.

Benson, Amy, and Robert Favini. 2006. “Evolving Web, Evolving Librarian.” Library Hi

Tech News 23 (7): 18–21. doi:10.1108/07419050610704321.

Boell, Sebastian K, and Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic. 2010. “Literature Reviews and the

Hermeneutic Circle.” Australian Academic Research Libraries 41 (2): 129–144.

Cenite, M., B. H. Detenber, a. W.K. Koh, and a. L.H. Lim. 2009. “Doing the Right Thing

Online: a Survey of Bloggers’ Ethical Beliefs and Practices.” New Media & Society 11

(4) (May 20): 575–597. doi:10.1177/1461444809102961.

Chopin, Kimberly. 2008. “Finding Communities: Alternative Viewpoints through Weblogs

and Tagging.” Journal of Documentation 64 (4): 552–575.

doi:10.1108/00220410810884075.

Clyde, Laurel a. 2004a. “Weblogs – Are You Serious?” The Electronic Library 22 (5): 390–

392. doi:10.1108/02640470410561893.

———. 2004b. “Library Weblogs.” Library Management 25 (4/5): 183–189.

doi:10.1108/01435120410533765.

Ellis, David. 1989. “A Behavioural Approach to Information Retrieval System Design.”

Journal of Documentation 45 (3): 171–212. doi:10.1108/eb026843.

Farkas, Meredith. 2007. “The Blog.” Library Journal 4 (December): 40–43.

Gelber, Natalia. 2011. “Blogging on the Profession: A Closer Look into Personal Cataloging

and Metadata Weblogs.” Technical Services Quarterly 28 (4) (September 15): 385–405.

doi:10.1080/07317131.2011.597688.

Gunter, Barrie. 2009. “Blogging – Private Becomes Public and Public Becomes

Personalised.” Aslib Proceedings 61 (2): 120–126. doi:10.1108/00012530910946875.

12

Kirkup, Gill. 2010. “Academic Blogging: Academic Practice and Academic Identity.”

London Review of Education 8 (1) (March): 75–84. doi:10.1080/14748460903557803.

Kjellberg, Sara. 2009. “Scholarly Blogging Practice as Situated Genre: An Analytical

Framework Based on Genre Theory.” Information Research 14 (3): 1–13.

———. 2010. “I Am a Blogging Researcher: Motivations for Blogging in a Scholarly

Context.” First Monday 15 (8).

Kuhn, Martin. 2007. “A Code of Blogging Ethics: Interactivity and Prioritizing the Human.”

Journal of Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality 22 (March

2013): 37–41. doi:10.1080/08900520701315244.

Lee, Caitríona M., and Jessica a. Bates. 2007. “Mapping the Irish Biblioblogosphere: Use and

Perceptions of Library Weblogs by Irish Librarians.” The Electronic Library 25 (6):

648–663. doi:10.1108/02640470710837092.

Luzón, MJ. 2008. “Scholarly Hyperwriting: The Function of Links in Academic Weblogs.”

Journal of the American Society for Information … 60 (1): 75–89. doi:10.1002/asi.

McCullagh, Karen. 2008. “Blogging: Self Presentation and Privacy.” Information &

Communications Technology Law 17 (1) (March): 3–23.

doi:10.1080/13600830801886984.

McIntyre, Alison, and Janette Nicolle. 2008. “Biblioblogging: Blogs for Library

Communication.” The Electronic Library 26 (5): 683–694.

doi:10.1108/02640470810910701.

Nardi, Bonnie a., Diane J. Schiano, and Michelle Gumbrecht. 2004. “Blogging as Social

Activity, or, Would You Let 900 Million People Read Your Diary?” In Proceedings of

the 2004 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - CSCW ’04,

222. New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/1031607.1031643.

Pankl, E, and J Ryan. 2006. “Shhh! Librarians Blogging.” Lousiana Libraries 69 (1): 7–10.

Powers, AC. 2008. “Social Networking as Ethical Discourse: Blogging a Practical and

Normative Library Ethic.” Journal of Library Administration 39762.

Schneider, Karen. 2005. “The Ethical Blogger.” Library Journal 130: 36.

Stephens, Michael. 2005. “10 Things I’ve Learned as a Blogging Librarian.” Tame The Web:

Libraries and Technology.

———. 2008. “The Pragmatic Biblioblogger: Examining the Motivations and Observations

of Early Adopter Librarian Bloggers.” Internet Reference Services Quarterly 13 (4)

(October 13): 311–345. doi:10.1080/10875300802326475.

Torres-Salinas, Daniel, Álvaro Cabezas-Clavijo, Rafael Ruiz-Pérez, and Emilio Delgado

López-Cózar. 2011. “State of the Library and Information Science Blogosphere after

Social Networks Boom: A Metric Approach.” Library & Information Science Research

33 (2) (April): 168–174. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2010.08.001.

13

Viégas, Fernanda B. 2006. “Bloggers’ Expectations of Privacy and Accountability: An

Initial Survey.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10 (3) (June 23): 00–00.

doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00260.x.

Well, A. 2008. “Information Professionals Guiding You to the Best Bits of the Blogosphere”

(March).

Young, Michelle L. 2006. “Blogging: An Introductory Look at an Old Pastime in a New

Medium.” Library Hi Tech News 23 (8): 27–28. doi:10.1108/07419050610713691.