Instant messaging (IM)

Instant messaging, also called "chat," has been attracting a lot of attention as a vehicle for providing reference service and improving communication among library colleagues.

What is IM, and how does a library get started with it?

Instant messaging creates a live, telephone-like text-based connection between two users. (Some but not all chat networks can create conference-call–like group chats.) Each user types into a text field, and what is typed appears in both users' "chat windows" when the user who typed it hits the return or enter key.

Because IM protocols were not standardized early on, there are several different IM networks. The "big three" networks are AOL Instant Messenger (AIM), Yahoo! Messenger, and MSN Messenger; Google Talk is a recent up-and-comer, and ICQ is an older, mostly geek network. These networks are largely non-interoperable, meaning that an AIM user cannot chat directly to a Yahoo! user. Some IM clients, however, can monitor the different networks simultaneously, so it is possible to establish an account on all the IM networks and still use one program to access them all.

(You may also have heard of IRC Chat. The crucial difference between IM and IRC, aside from the newer IM protocols refusing to interoperate with it, is that IRC is specifically designed for group chat rooms rather than one-on-one conversation. Libraries that provide IM reference generally do not use IRC for that purpose. Some librarian interest groups such as code4lib do use it, however.)

To provide IM reference, establish the same "handle" (nickname) and password for your library at the big three IM networks. This is free. Next, find an IM client program that can talk to all three networks, and install it on all computers that will be used to provide IM reference service. On Windows, Trillian and GAIM are good free options. On the Macintosh, try Adium or Fire. Follow the program's instructions for connecting to the various networks, and configure the program so that it connects automatically whenever it is started up.

Most chat clients turn URLs into clickable hotlinks automatically; whether your patron can click on a URL you send depends on the program the patron is using. Virtual-reference–like co-browsing may be possible with JYBE, but this unfortunately depends on the patron downloading a browser plugin, so may be practical only on in-library machines.

Meebo, which provides a web interface to the commonest chat networks, is a fine way to experiment with IM, or to use it on a machine without an IM client program.

Some things to consider:

  • To log or not to log? IM programs optionally keep transcripts of all chats. This can be an excellent tool for tracking usage and monitoring service quality, but it also presents patron-privacy issues. At the very least, know whether your program is logging and if so, where those logs are kept so that you can delete them periodically.
  • How should a busy reference librarian prioritize chat, telephone, and face-to-face service? How does the librarian reassure a chat patron that s/he has not been forgotten?
  • IM programs offer "away" messages for when a participant is not just then available; some programs automatically set an idle user's status to "away." Do sort out what your preferred chat programs do, and what you want them to do.
  • A few security problems have occurred over chat networks, though they are a very uncommon attack vector. Standard email-safety rules apply: don't download files over chat, don't click on links from strangers, and if your chat program is acting funny, shut it down and call tech support.

Chat has proven a low-cost, low-risk, high-return service-point for off-site patrons, especially younger patrons. By all means experiment with it!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Dorothea--

Do you have any pointers about how to get more information on the security issues? I need some authoritative sources before I can push this forward in my library. Thanks!

--Joy

I went looking for a comprehensive summation of the issues, but as yet I've had no luck; it's all trapped in articles about specific threats.

I'll keep looking. My advice holds good, as best I can tell; normal Internet precautions will take care of nearly all threats.

It's misleading to refer to IRC as "non-interoperable". It preceeded (afaik) the other IM protocols you mention and its protocol is clearly defined in public RFCs (the same mode of specification used by all our favorite interoperable protocols -- email, HTTP, etc.).

It's about as interoperable as it gets. To say that it is not interoperable with the other protocols is more a reflection on the other protocols, imho. Perhaps "these protocols are not compatible with the older, public standard IRC protocol" would be more accurate.

Separately, Google Talk uses XMPP (ne jabber), which is defined in its own RFCs.

Diachronically, you're right -- it's unfair to tag IRC that way because when IRC was developed, there was nothing else to interoperate WITH. Synchronically, though, the effect is more or less as I have described; someone using IRC can't communicate with someone using AIM etc.

(I should look around for a chapter of Linguists Anonymous...)

I will make the suggested change.

It's worth noting that some of the issues mentioned above, i.e. privacy and how to prioritize IM, and a lot more are well-covered by ALA/RUSA's Guidelines for Implementing and Maintaining Virtual Reference Services and elsewhere in the virtual reference literature.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.