Entry 11: Geek the Library, Part 4

The report states that the Geek the Library program did have a good deal of success. What I want to know is the “why”—why is it this program succeeded like it did? And what is the future for it?

The report goes by steps in reporting why it was a success. Step one, for instance, was the goal of raising awareness. Success was found through polling; for example, polling whether or not citizens of the “pilot” library counties noticed Geek the Library signs or not—and more did than did not. Visual advertising apparently became key, as shown in these statistics:



A question the campaign also asked itself (not as an entity but a conglomerate of individuals, I mean) was whether or not people liked the campaign—and the result was positively positive (or neutral)! Those who reacted negatively seemed to have very unimportant quibbles.

Step two in Geek the Library’s mission was “Changing perceptions.” The way a shift in perception was measured was in the asking of about 40 questions concerning library perceptions and attitudes. Results (apparently) were positive and likely to impact long-term support for libraries; for example, the shifting idea of the library as something “nice-to-have” to a necessity. When compared (in the pilot areas) to other public services for a willingness in citizens to raise taxes to fund libraries, libraries failed to top the other services but did increase in percentage from the last voting year. How about that!

The report claims that in pilot areas, people were educated in ways they could help their public libraries, as they didn’t even know before the campaign that libraries were in dire straits financially to begin with. More residents in these areas also began to increase in perception of the transformative values in a library; that the library allows one to pursue passions and interests. Another perception that was changed concerned funding. A great percentage of people who had believed libraries had enough funding to get on with learned that funding was, in fact, insufficient for day-to-day operations.

Step three in the campaign, called “Driving behavior,” focused on taking new awareness and changed perceptions and turn them into action. Because it is still a relatively new campaign, not a great deal of focus was given to how funding had changed; there was, however, a noticeable difference in conversation with regard to libraries. In short surveys in both pilot areas, about two-thirds of respondents said they had begun to take action for their libraries. In these pilot areas, many went from sitting on the fence to supporting a library ballot measure. Although percentages and statistics did not make stunning, high-jumping movements forward or upward, movement is visible.

So this explains, I suppose, how the campaign worked—but I think I recall asking why? I’ll leave this here for now and do some more investigating.