Creating Cohesive Community Through Shared ...

2 downloads 15776 Views 224KB Size Report
2. to create opportunities for social interaction and community development; ..... include an official bookstore Twitter account or an individual who works in ...
vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Creating Cohesive Community Through Shared Reading: A Case Study of One Book Nova Scotia Alyssa Harder School of Information Management Dalhousie University Halifax, NS [email protected] Vivian Howard School of Information Management Dalhousie University Halifax, NS [email protected] DeNel Rehberg Sedo Department of Communication Studies Mount Saint Vincent University, Halifax, NS [email protected]

Abstract One Book Nova Scotia is described on the program’s website as “a province-wide community reading event for adults.” Formally programmed events have included the book announcement and launch, a series of author readings, and book discussions, both face to face and through Twitter. This paper analyzes the success of the One Book Nova Scotia program in achieving its goals of developing a reading culture and community in the province of Nova Scotia based on the findings of a participant survey, distributed in both 2012 and 2013, and an analysis of the 2013 Twitter discussion. This analysis reveals that participants tended to be well-educated females, aged 50-59, and often employed in libraries, bookselling or publishing, or news media. The goal of developing or participating in a reading community was a compelling motivator for many respondents. Although many respondents indicated their desire to be part of a reading community, Twitter was not proven to be an effective forum for fostering conversation or debate related to One Book Nova Scotia. Building on the analysis, the paper concludes with some recommendations to improve the effectiveness of future programs. These recommendations include the selection of a book with strong regional connections, an expansion of publicity methods, an increase in lead time between the announcement of the book title and the start of programming, and a more strategic use of Twitter as a discussion forum. Although these recommendations arise from the specific analysis of the One Book Nova Scotia reading program, they are general enough to apply to other One Book, One Community programs.

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Keywords shared reading; mass reading events; reading practices; social media; Twitter

Introduction and Background One Book Nova Scotia follows the One Book, One Community (OBOC) model that grew out of a 1998 Seattle-based program. OBOC programs represent an intersection of traditional forms of reading and reading practices with the communication technologies of the twentyfirst century and are one type of “Mass Reading Event” (or MRE), a term coined by Fuller and Rehberg Sedo (“A Reading Spectacle” 5). MREs are large one-time or annual events that promote shared reading on a wide scale, often through new technologies. OBOCs are the current-day evolution of the seventeenth-century literary society and the contemporary book club and, as such, borrow certain key practices from them. Chief among these is the fostering of discussion, a tendency to focus on personal interpretations of texts, and (perhaps most importantly) the creation of community through this book-focused interaction. What differentiates the MRE and, by extension, OBOC programming, from its antecedents is the use of digital technologies to unite geographically disparate people in virtual communities, i.e., people who are not necessarily living in the same community and who may never meet, through the practice of shared reading. Begun in 2012, One Book Nova Scotia is organized by Libraries Nova Scotia, and is described on the program’s website as “a province-wide community reading event for adults.” The One Book Nova Scotia website states that the program has four goals: 1. to encourage reading and contribute to the development of a reading culture in Nova Scotia; 2. to create opportunities for social interaction and community development; 3. to support life-long learning; 4. to allow those in the literary community to work together and develop stronger relationships. In 2012, the “one book” was Nova Scotia author Leo McKay Jr.’s 2004 novel Twenty-Six, the story of a mining disaster in a small Nova Scotia town, inspired by the Westray mining disaster of 1992. In 2013, the selection was Toronto-based author Alissa York’s 2011 novel Fauna, about a small group of people with diverse backgrounds who share a common love for Toronto’s urban wildlife. In both 2012 and 2013, formally programmed events included the book announcement and launch, a series of author readings, and book discussions. Participants in 2013 were also encouraged to utilize Twitter as a mechanism for discussion and as an information hub for the program. This paper analyzes the success of the One Book Nova Scotia program in achieving its goals of developing a reading culture and community in the province of Nova Scotia, based on the findings of a participant survey and an analysis of related Twitter discussions, and concludes with some recommendations to improve the effectiveness of future programs. Although the findings of our analysis are specific to the One Book Nova Scotia program, our recommendations should be applicable to similar OBOC reading programs. 2

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Literature Review The practice of reading in groups is certainly not new, and descriptions of reading groups have been documented since the Middle Ages. Until the latter half of the nineteenth century, literary societies, reading societies, book societies, and book clubs were still primarily maledominated. This changed in Europe and North America following the Industrial Revolution, when middle-class women gained more leisure time and began forming literary societies with mainly female membership. Generally, these women were white, educated, and middle class (Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”). In Reading Beyond the Book, Fuller and Rehberg Sedo demonstrate that book clubs are modelled on familial reading sessions, where discussion focuses upon subjective personal interpretations and reactions to the text. Massive Reading Events extend this familial (as opposed to academic) reading style into a new media environment. The first true MRE emerged in 1998, when Nancy Pearl and Chris Higashi created a citywide program called “If All of Seattle Read the Same Book.” This program eventually became the One Book, One Community model, spawning more than five hundred related programs. At least a dozen such programs exist in Canadian cities and many in the US and UK as well (Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”). With some variations, OBOCs generally follow the same format: citizens in a particular geographic region are encouraged to read the same book, which is usually a piece of literary fiction. Associated events can include author interviews, pub crawls, lectures, online discussions, or even canoe trips (Fuller, Rehberg Sedo, and Thurlow 4; Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”; Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo). A rather unique variant on the OBOC model is the One Book, One Twitter MRE. In this case, participants were encouraged to read Neil Gaiman’s American Gods according to a schedule, and all discussion took place through Twitter (Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo). The other major model of MRE discussed in the literature is the “media spectacle” as exemplified by Canada Reads, Oprah’s Book Club, and Richard and Judy’s Book Club (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 100). These three programs link participants through the mass media of television and/or radio. What differentiates MREs from regular book clubs is, in part, the scale of the project and of the participation. Whether online or in the physical world, discussion and interaction between participants of MREs takes place in public places, as opposed to the private setting of a faceto-face book club (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 4; Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo; Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”). As a result, the “community” created by an MRE is less personal than that created by a private book club. Despite the fact that they may not ever meet face to face, in successful MREs, readers do experience a sense of belonging or connection to a community (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 206; Lang, “A Dirty Little Secret” 331). Rehberg Sedo identifies a number of cases where participants of various OBOC programs express a “thrill of belonging” (“Cultural Capital”) that may stem from a pride in the cultural prestige of the city, or a personal desire to accrue cultural and social capital through interaction with similar individuals. QuanHaase defines social capital as a group or individual’s ability to access valuable resources through social networks (151). Cultural capital can be considered a resource that raises the authority of an individual or group in the cultural sphere (Bourdieu 243; Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 247). Cultural capital can thus be accrued by demonstrating textual analysis skill in discussion, or simply by having read the book at all. Rehberg Sedo 3

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

found that readers in both Canada Reads and the Richard and Judy Book Club participated in order to read books they otherwise might not have read (“Richard & Judy” 200). However, scholars note that certain cultural literacies are required to participate in a MRE (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 120; Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”). Some of these literacies are tied to book culture, e.g., a familiarity with discussing and criticizing books. English-language books present a barrier to non-English speakers or those with limited English-language proficiency. Technologies such as the Internet cannot be used if one cannot afford them, and so the poorer citizens of a city or region may be excluded (Quan-Haase 157). Finally, the participant needs to be literate in the media used to deliver content. For instance, in One Book, One Twitter, participants need to possess or acquire a Twitter account and utilize hashtags to communicate (Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo; Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, “A Reading Spectacle” 13). What a reader gleans from an MRE also depends on the type or style of reading that is presented to him or her. In the case of Canada Reads and the Richard and Judy Book Club, reading is framed as a pleasurable activity where a reader’s personal interpretation is a valid and necessary way to understand the novel (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, “A Reading Spectacle” 20; Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, “Suspicious Minds” 33, 39). Ercogovac notes that personal interpretations give readers a stronger sense of connection with the book, and encourages non-readers to read (37-38). Organizers must have a clear sense of the audience for a particular MRE for it to be successful. Readers sometimes want immersion in a community through a book, and at other times want immersion in a book through a community. Organizers must identify cultural (il)literacies distinct to every MRE that may act as barriers to participation and reading needs to be framed appropriately for the audience. Once the audience has been researched, an appropriate book selection is key to a successful MRE. Books are generally chosen through a selection committee according to the goals of the program; texts that are chosen for OBOC programming tend to contain social themes, characters, and/or settings relevant to the target community. In other cases the goal may be to feature a specific author, e.g. one that will provide a regional basis for connection and/or make author-involved programming much simpler (Rehberg Sedo, “Cultural Capital”; Fuller, Rehberg Sedo, and Thurlow 17; Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo). Perhaps most obviously, the selected book must be discussable, though it is less obvious just what “discussable” means. Taylor settles on the idea that such a book is interesting and invites multiple interpretations (145). Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo (31) and Lang (“Enthralling but Disturbing” 137; “Reading Race” 328; “A Book That All Canadians Should Be Proud to Read”) demonstrate that in MREs with rich discussion, chosen texts offered multiple personal interpretations without stylistic or structural obstacles. Books that presented topics which made participants uncomfortable, e.g. ethnicity and race, were often avoided by participants. Lang studied the rich discussion that took place in the Small Island Read MRE, in which the book Small Island by Andrea Levy was featured (“Enthralling but Disturbing”; "Reading Race"). The research indicates that the text’s compelling plot, interesting characters, and accessibility of text were key factors in making the book discussable (“Enthralling but Disturbing” 123). Perhaps it is best to say that a discussable book is one that is open to disparate interpretations and personalized reading practices. 4

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

The MRE, by virtue of its structure and use of new communication technologies, is able to provide new kinds of interactions between readers and books. These technologies help connect readers and books through author readings and/or question-answer session events (Fuller and Rehberg Sedo, Reading Beyond the Book 8). There is comparatively less literature that examines how reader-author interactions are encouraged online in the context of an MRE. However, Gruzd and Rehberg Sedo (35) attribute much of the relative success of the One Book, One Twitter program to American Gods author Neil Gaiman, already an active Twitter user. Thus, a successful MRE involves a book whose author should be “available,” in either a physical or digital sense. Effective and appropriate use of all platforms is necessary to foster discussion. The research literature of this emerging field has begun to demonstrate that the success of an MRE depends on its ability to effectively combine the primary text, digital technologies, and collective interpretation to create an engaging experience. The central role of the organizer in an MRE is to promote many kinds of interactions between the readers and the book, and success depends on whether readers’ desires for community are satisfied. The MRE is a model that enables patrons to have unique interactions with each other, texts, and their authors, though how deep or lasting the impressions of these interactions may be has not yet been studied. As such, playing to these strengths is important, as is clearly defining the target audience so the program and its various elements can be tailored appropriately. Understanding just what it is about a particular book that should unite readers allows organizers to create a more directed, successful MRE.

Methods This study investigated participants’ responses to the One Book Nova Scotia program using two techniques: a detailed analysis of the Twitter discussion related to the 2013 program only and an analysis of an online survey of participants, which was used to gather data in both 2012 and 2013. The online open source text and social networks analyzer Netlytic was used to conduct the Twitter analysis. Netlytic automatically analyzes and summarizes text and social network relationships from public online communication on social media sites such as Twitter (Grek Martin, Gruzd, Howard). Because posts on Twitter are publicly available, ethics approval is not needed for an analysis of tweets. Netlytic allows users to collect online conversational data (tweets, in this case), then analyze the text and visualize the relationships between tweeters. Using this tool, four sets of data from September and October 2013 were collected: tweets containing the words “1bns” (168 tweets total), “1BookNS” (109 tweets), “alissa york” (370 tweets), and “One Book NS” (253 tweets). Netlytic offers two main methods to visualize online social relationships: name networks and chain networks. The former is a network built from mining the accounts named in the messages (i.e., @usernames), while the latter creates an image based on posting behaviour (i.e., who replied to whom). Netlytic automatically groups Twitter accounts into clusters of related users. Netlytic also contains text analysis tools to examine the content of the tweets. As Grek Martin, Gruzd, and Howard point out, “[when using Netlytic], the context of the data (i.e., the posters’ entire messages) is immediately accessible, as the terms are hyperlinked to their original messages. Trends and patterns are observable and can be used to refine searches and 5

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

categorization.” Netlytic’s word cloud generator allows the user to isolate the most frequently mentioned words in a dataset. It also allows a user to create categories that select all tweets containing a given word. Two categories of tweets were created by the authors: re-tweets and notable tweeters. In the former, Netlytic collected all tweets containing the phrase “RT” (re-tweets) for each dataset, thus aggregating most tweets that did not contain any original content. The latter category selected users based on an activity-based evaluation method calculated by Netlytic using “degrees.” Indegree and outdegree are numerical values indicating how a user tweets: indegree is larger when there is a greater number of tweets that mention the user or that are directed at the user; outdegree is larger when the user sends out a higher number of tweets. Total degree adds the two values together, providing an aggregate that represents total overall activity, with a greater value representing a more active user. For the purposes of this study, a user was determined to be "notable" if their total degree was equal to or greater than five. This second group permitted the convenient isolation of conversational tweets, many of which contain original content. In order to conduct the online survey of 1BNS participants, ethics approval was needed. Once approval was granted from the Dalhousie University Ethics Review Board, the survey data were collected using the online survey tool Opinio in both 2012 and 2013. A link to the survey was posted on the One Book Nova Scotia website towards the end of the program in both 2012 and 2013. Invitations to participate were also posted on Twitter and on the One Book Nova Scotia Facebook page. The survey asked respondents a series of questions designed to establish their demographics, reading habits, and level of participation in the program itself (a copy of the survey is provided in the Appendix). Microsoft Excel was used to analyze the fixed response questions. Open or free-text questions were coded according to observed themes.

Twitter Analysis i. Network Analysis Using name network visualizations, the flow of information between users can be seen. Netlytic automatically colour-codes different networks of tweeters to permit easy differentiation. In each network, when the cluster containing @1bookNS (which is at the core of its cluster) is removed, there remains very little (if any) connection between the remaining groups. As an example the conversations including the key phrase “1bns” (n = 168) can be seen in Figures 1 and 2.

6

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Figure 1. “1bns” with @1bookNS cluster.

Figure 2. “1bns” without @1bookNS cluster.

In other words, @1bookNS formed the core of the Twitter conversation and appeared to be broadcasting a large number of the tweets. The generally lower indegree observed in the visualizations implies that other users were sending tweets with key phrases (often re-tweets of a tweet from the @1bookNS account) but not often receiving any tweets with key phrases. @1bookNS was clearly sending and receiving a great deal of these tweets, but other users were not interacting with each other to any great degree. Most participants were simply retweeting posts from @1bookNS rather than engaging in discussion or conversation using the key phrases. The type of users involved in a Twitter network can further reveal how successful a campaign is in engaging potential users. In this case, this categorization was accomplished by examining each poster’s Twitter profile page, publicly available through Twitter itself, and hand-coding the users. “Library/librarian” users are official library accounts, or those whose users indicate that they are librarians. “News/media” similarly refers to users who indicate that they are professionally involved in the news and media. “Books/publishing” accounts might include an official bookstore Twitter account or an individual who works in publishing or bookselling. Tweeters under the “individual” category are those accounts that appear to be run by a person not associated with any other previously identified category. “Unknown” indicates a node which, at the time of data collection, appeared to either no longer exist or be set to private. It is important to remember that identifying precisely who is behind a particular Twitter account is an inexact science, as users are not required to indicate a profession on their profile page, so some tweeters who may be employed in one of the three categories mentioned may not have revealed this fact on their profile. Table 1 summarizes this analysis and shows that, in general, the two largest groups of tweeters were "library/librarian" and “individual.”

7

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Table 1 Proportions of Twitter Accounts in Each Group According to Dataset. Dataset Library/ News/ Books/ Individual Other librarian media publishing 1bns 40% 2% 15% 31% 8% 1BookNS 38% 7% 7% 14% 13% alissa york 20% 16% 16% 32% 16% OneBookNS 29% 9% 9% 32% 14%

Unknown

Total

2% 21% 0% 7%

100% 100% 100% 100%

Individuals professionally associated with the first three groups listed—libraries, media, and the book industry—are predisposed toward participation in OBOC programming. They plan and run events, and may have a monetary stake in the program, especially in the case of the book and publishing industry. OBOC programming is often about bringing a community together, so to measure the success of One Book Nova Scotia through Twitter, the authors categorized users as either “individual” or “non-individuals” as seen in Figure 3. In this graph “unknown” users are excluded.

One Book NS alissa york 1BookNS 1bns 0%

20%

Individual

40%

60%

80% 100%

Non-individuals

Figure 3. Twitter users by percent of each dataset (‘unknown’ and ‘other’ users excluded). This graph reveals that the majority of followers in these conversations were not solely patrons attracted by the community or reading aspects of the program. There are a number of possible explanations. Perhaps it is because the Twitter network was not very successful in engaging participants; it is also possible that few people participated in 1BNS overall; or perhaps the 2013 participants were not the type of individuals who spend much or any time using Twitter. ii. Content Analysis Examining the tweets themselves in more detail can help reveal just what tweeters discussed over the course of the program, and therefore whether the social media tool was used effectively to create active discussion. Indeed, Lovejoy and Sexton state that tweets can be grouped into three separate categories: informational—which provide news, highlights, and other informational functions; action-oriented—which aim to convince followers to do something, e.g. attend events or make donations; and conversational—providing direct interaction with the community, e.g. conversations and @ replies (342). Here, the tweets examined were all those that contained the five most mentioned words. As one tweet may mention more than one of these five words, these data must be considered on a word-byword basis and cannot be combined into one overall statistic. It was discovered that the “alissa york” dataset contained a number of extraneous tweets mentioning “New York” and 8

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

other geographical places with “york” in the name, along with individuals who are named “alissa” but are not the author of Fauna. As such, this dataset was not included in this part of the analysis. In the following graphs, the terms in each dataset are placed in one of two groups: informational/action-oriented, or conversational. Here, the terms “alissa” and “york” are combined because they appear together all but one or two times in each dataset. year @1bookNS fauna alissa york 1bns 75%

80%

85%

Informational/Action-oriented

90%

95%

100%

Conversational

Figure 4. 1bns. year

1bns

book

year

@1bookNS

alissa york

fauna

fauna

1bns

@1bookNS 0%

20%

40%

Informational/Action-Oriented

Figure 5. 1BookNS.

60%

80%

100%

Conversational

0%

20%

40%

Informational/Action-oriented

60%

80%

100%

Conversational

Figure 6. One Book NS.

It is apparent from these particular graphs that the tweets in these cases tend not to be conversational in nature. The lack of conversational tweets indicates that tweeters generally used the network as a broadcasting device to announce upcoming events rather than a discussion venue. Expanding the list of most-mentioned words for each network reveals some of what tweeters discussed, and whom they messaged. Table 2 shows the ten most-mentioned words in each dataset (“alissa york” omitted for the reasons mentioned earlier), excluding the actual word the dataset filtered for, and with the terms “alissa” and “york” added together, as above.

9

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Table 2 Top 10 Most-Mentioned Words in the Twitter Datasets 1bNS 1bookNS One Book NS alissa york fauna @1bookns fauna @1bookns fauna @1bookns book 1bns/alissa york/year year year reading book alissa york book library reading 1bookns reading read selection selection title launch author Library/page time Launch/Nova @nsccwaterfront Nova Scotia Scotia Although the order changes slightly, and some words exist in one dataset but not the other, these word sets are very similar. It is clear that in all three datasets the @1bookNS Twitter account plays a large role, and is almost the only Twitter account mentioned in these lists. As such, users are interacting largely only with @1bookns (as the bottom three tweets contain fewer than 20 data points each). Participants seem to have been discussing the book and its author most often, as evidenced by the words “book,” “alissa york,” “author,” and “fauna.” However, the frequency of these particular words can at least partially be accounted for by retweets of certain tweets that occur in all datasets, usually of an @1bookNS informational tweet such as: @1bookNS: This year’s #1bns selection is... FAUNA by Alissa York! This particular tweet contains four words (five including “1bns”) from the “1bns” dataset, three from “1bookNS,” and four from “One Book NS.” In each network, there is a reasonably large proportion of re-tweets: for “1bns,” it is 56%; for “1bookNS,” 42%; and for “One Book NS,” 73%. Re-tweets are a low-involvement interaction; they do not involve original communication on the part of the individual. This type of tweet is effective at broadcasting a message or announcement, but is not particularly useful for generating discussion. Examining the datasets according to notable tweeters yields a picture of the kind of discussion that did occur. In this case, only @1bookNS for the “One Book NS” dataset turned out to have had somewhat substantial numbers of original, conversational tweets directed at it: of 61 original tweets, 38 were conversational, and of the conversational tweets, 21 were about the book, four were about an event, one was about participation in the event, and the remainder were responses to prompts or based on tangential ideas inspired by reading the book. Some tweets did, however, make some use of the “1bns” and “1bookNS” hashtags to prompt discussion (all tweets quoted below are from @1bookNS): Sept. 5/13: Where's your favourite place to read? Comfy chair? In a park? In a hammock? Find one in time for the new #1BNS read 10

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

-------------------------Oct 16/13: So if you could choose to be an animal in Fauna, which one would you be? #1bookNS (Oct. 16) -------------------------Oct. 30/13: What are you reading next? Think of it like a recipe exchange – everyone benefits when you share ...#1bookNS These attempts to stimulate conversation only garnered one response each and did not prompt follow-up discussion from @1bookNS. Overall, the tweets from the @1bookNS account asked questions based on the book but were not formed especially to encourage community building. The questions, just as in those listed here, also did not encourage much conversation among participants, as the answers often amounted to a single word or phrase. The chain network visualizations show just how little sustained conversation took place on Twitter. These visualizations show virtually no reply chains for each dataset save “One Book NS,” which did contain some interaction and conversation about Fauna. Two sustained conversations between users exist in this network, the longest of which consists of eight tweets. In that conversation, two users—@dizmixen and @ZabetReading—discussed their dislike of Fauna’s slow pace. In the other sustained conversation, a different pair of users found common ground in the book’s setting: @ aldelory: Reading @1bookNS Alissa York’s Fauna. Very cool for this former Torontonian. Look forward to discussing. -------------------------@CynthiaDunlavy: @aldelory @1bookNS I’m really enjoying Fauna; an excellent #fridayreads! -------------------------@ aldelory: @CynthiaDunlavy @1bookNS I like it too, especially as I lived in Toronto and used to run in those ravines. Will U do any of the discussion events? -------------------------@CynthiaDunlavy: @aldelory @1bookNS I also lived in Toronto so the familiarity is fun. the events in Halifax are Oct 3rd; busy that day so can’t make it. Thus the sustained Twitter-based discussion of Fauna focuses on only two topics: a dislike of the book, and feelings of identification with its setting. This suggests possible reasons for the lack of Twitter discussion. First, the story is set in Toronto which would not help Nova Scotians connect with their own community. Second, many readers found it was a slow book and my not have finished it. Ultimately, while not completely inactive, these particular networks largely fail to demonstrate an engaged and lively discussion; instead functioning as a broadcasting unit, advertising events and information about One Book Nova Scotia. 11

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Survey Analysis While the 2012 survey garnered 186 responses, the 2013 survey disappointingly yielded a scant 19 responses. The reason for this lack of response was unclear. Perhaps the 2013 program had fewer participants overall than the 2012 program, or possibly fewer that stayed committed to the very end, when the survey was made available. Because the survey was advertised through Twitter and on the One Book Nova Scotia website, it is possible a selfselection bias exists in all results, and participants with higher levels of digital literacy or comfort with digital media may be over-represented among respondents. Analysis was performed on all available data, despite the insignificant sample size in 2013. i. Demographic Characteristics of the One Book Nova Scotia Participant The majority of respondents were aged 50-59 in both 2012 and 2013. All but one of the 2013 respondents were female, in 2012, only 13 respondents (6%) identified as male. The 2013 survey asked whether or not individuals were librarians: 8 of the 19 respondents self-identified as librarians. Overall, participants were a well-educated group, as Figure 7 summarizes: 90 80

70 60 50

2012

40

2013

30 20 10

0

Completed university degree

Some university education

High school

Figure 7. Participants’ educational achievement.

Other

In 2013, 79% indicated that they had completed a university degree, 16% had some university or college education, while 5% (only one respondent) chose “other” and did not indicate further what this meant. Similarly, in 2012, 67% of respondents had graduated from university. While residents of Nova Scotia have higher levels of university participation than the Canadian average, the provincial participation rate is estimated to be between 35-40% (Maritime Provinces Higher Education Commission). Clearly, One Book Nova Scotia participants appear to be much more well- educated than the provincial average. Participants also described themselves as avid readers, with most respondents indicating that they read for pleasure as often as they can, usually every day. The public library was the preferred source of pleasure reading materials and print was the preferred format in both 2012 and 2013.

12

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

ii. Comments about One Book Nova Scotia When asked how they found out about the One Book Nova Scotia program, the majority of respondents indicated that they found it through the library. Of those who participated in 2013, 73% indicated this was the case, while 78% of 2012 participants found the program through the same venue. In a free-text response question, 38% of those who responded indicated that their motivations were to some degree work-related (five of the six librarians who gave an answer); 54% named some sort of community motivation, such as creating a source of discussion among people, and the more ephemeral idea of connecting everyone through the shared experience of reading the same book at the same time. The 2012 respondents likewise placed high importance on community, as the highest proportion of individuals provided an answer to this effect (36%). In 2012, the second and third highest proportions cited an interest in the book (30%) and work (26%). Interestingly, two 2013 responses (15%) expressed interest in Nova Scotian authors, one of which stated that “...one book NS should be a NS author.” The 2012 selection was by a Nova Scotian author, Leo McKay, Jr., and the book focused on a local theme, coal mining disasters. An explicit interest in a regional connection was reflected in the 2012 survey responses, where 10% of responses explicitly indicated a connection with Nova Scotia as motivation to participate. Figure 8 summarizes respondents’ motivations to participate. 60 50 40 30

2012 2013

20 10 0

Work-related

Community building Interest in book

Figure 8. Motivations to participate.

Identification with setting

When asked, “What One Book Nova Scotia programs did you participate in?” (a question introduced in 2013), 47% of respondents indicated that they did not participate in any events. Attendance at author readings was the next most popular response at 40%. One individual, when explaining his choice of “other,” indicated that he had followed on Twitter, and in an answer to a later question expressed disappointment that Twitter did not turn out to be as good a method to discuss the book as he had hoped.

13

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Echoing the responses about what motivated survey respondents to participate in One Book Nova Scotia, the concept of the program—the idea of building community and engaging with books written by Canadian authors—informed the most free-text responses (seven in total) to the question “What did you like best about One Book Nova Scotia?” Responses in 2013 indicated an interest in the book itself, in the author, and the opportunity to try something new (i.e., participate in an OBOC program). In 2012, results were similar, with one key difference: 25% of 2012 responses indicated that the selected book’s obvious connection to Nova Scotia was a key motivator of their participation. Free-text responses to “Is there anything you would like to change about One Book Nova Scotia?” also indicated the desire for a book written by a local author (43% of 2013 responses). The second most common response expressed some desire for a more accessible book (29%). The 2012 respondents expressed general satisfaction with the book selection, although 9% of respondents expressed a preference for a “less depressing” read. A stronger theme in 2012 was the recommendation of better publicity for the program, a suggestion made by 22% of respondents. A small proportion of respondents in both years (7% in 2013 and 8% in 2012) expressed a desire for more time to read the book. Finally, 6% of 2012 respondents and 5% in 2013 indicated dissatisfaction with the use of social media and online resources. Despite these expressions of discontent with some aspects of the program, participants were enthusiastic about continuing the reading program. Of the respondents in 2013, 77% indicated that they would participate in One Book Nova Scotia next year, and 89% of 2012 respondents said the same.

Discussion and Conclusion The survey data from both 2012 and 2013 indicate that selecting a book that is interesting to the participants and has some Nova Scotian connection is an important factor in respondents’ enjoyment of the program and their likelihood to participate. Coupled with the 2013 survey responses and Twitter data, it seems that Fauna was not engaging due to its slow pace and its lack of connection to Nova Scotia; Fauna may be a book open to multiple interpretations, but for some readers it was not interesting enough to be worth discussing. It is perhaps for this reason that the Twitter conversation was almost non-existent; instead, Twitter functioned as an informational and action-oriented message board. It is possible that more effective tweeting by @1bookNS could have prompted more discussion. However, one particular name missing from the 2013 Twitter conversation is that of the author herself, as Alissa York does not have a Twitter account. In both 2012 and 2013, the survey data indicate that participants largely heard about the program through the public library. This detail, combined with the fact that 22% of 2012 respondents stated that the program should improve its publicity approach, suggests that the program may need to improve its advertising strategy. This suggestion is further supported by the fact that the participants in the Twitter conversation tended to be affiliated those with a vested interest in reading promotion such as the media, the book industry, and libraries. Whether or not participants want or are comfortable with online interactions through Twitter, it is clear that many survey respondents participated in One Book Nova Scotia because of the perceived opportunity for community connection. Survey responses ranged from positive views of the idea of all Nova Scotia reading the same book, to specific hopes that the shared 14

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

reading program would generate spontaneous discussion between themselves and other Nova Scotians. The research literature demonstrates that regional links drawn from the book strengthen the appeal of a book and the sense of connection participants can draw from it. While a lack of regional connection will not necessarily undermine an OBOC program, including a book with such a connection is one clear way to guarantee a certain level of interest. This is particularly demonstrated by the two individuals who connected over Twitter through a discussion of the Toronto setting of Fauna, and the shared experience of having lived in that city. Participation is also limited by participants’ ability to read the book within the allotted timeframe. Librarian respondents in both years indicated that they wished for more lead time so as to be better able to interact with patrons. Similarly, some 2012 respondents suggested running the program a bit longer. One 2012 respondent indicated that he or she needed the time to arrange an interlibrary loan or purchase the book, while a 2013 respondent stated that she did not go to an author reading because she first wanted to finish the book, and could not do so in time. For some readers, participation is dependent on there being enough time between announcement of a book and the start of programming. It is in this gap area that Twitter could be useful as a warm-up of sorts where participants can be prompted (or do so on their own) to discuss the book itself, and so contribute to achieving the goal of community formation. One Book Nova Scotia does include clear goals and defines its target audience (adult Nova Scotians), both of which are essential to a successful OBOC event, according to the research literature. As previously mentioned, the One Book Nova Scotia website states that the program has four goals. The results of this study indicate that participants are most attached to the second goal, to create opportunities for social interaction and community development. They are seeking a sense of community based on the shared experience of reading the same book and discussing it, whether in a physical or virtual environment. The job of the OBOC organizers is to promote multiple modes of interacting with the book, and survey data show general satisfaction with author readings and book discussions, but the Twitter mode of interaction was significantly less successful. Drawing on the literature review, Twitter analysis, and survey data, several reasons are possible: lack of a sense of connection to the novel (in 2013), lack of time to read the novel, lack of publicity to draw in non-library users, and lack of an engaging official Twittter feed.

Recommendations Based in the analysis of One Book Nova Scotia, the authors can offer the following recommendations which are general enough to apply to One Book One Community reading programs in any geographic region: 1) Choose a book that is either set in the region, is written by an author from the region, or both. Programming should emphasize the aspects of the book that unite community residents; 2) Allow sufficient lead time between the book announcement and the start of programming; 3) Create a publicity strategy that includes advertising with community organizations over the entire targeted geographical area; 15

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

4) Strategize the use of Twitter: a) Schedule certain times for discussion in a manner similar to the One Book, One Twitter program (and advertise them); b) Ask more directed questions through the official program Twitter account, to encourage interaction between readers; c) Tweet regularly and often; d) Include relevant tweets leading up to the program, during the program, and to wrap up the program; e) Use hashtags consistently; f) Choose an author with a good Twitter following, or at least someone who is willing to utilize Twitter for the duration of the program, as this will allow readers to connect with the author. It may also offer another mode of interacting with the author for individuals who cannot make it to live events.

Works Cited Bourdieu, Pierre. “The Forms of Capital.” Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education. Ed. John G. Richardson. New York: Greenwood, 1986. 241258. Ercegovac, Zorana. “To Hook One Another on Reading.” Knowledge Quest 40.3 (2012): 3639. Fuller, Danielle. “Listening to the Readers of "Canada Reads.” Canadian Literature 193 (2007): 11-34. Fuller, Danielle, and Rehberg Sedo, DeNel. Reading Beyond the Book: The Social Practices of Contemporary Literary Culture. New York and London: Routledge, 2013. ----- “Suspicious Minds: The Richard and Judy Book Club and Its Resistant Readers.” The Richard and Judy Book Club Reader: Popular Texts and the Practices of Reading. Ed. J. Ramone and H. Cousins. Farnham: Ashgate, 2011. 21-42. ----- “A Reading Spectacle for the Nation: The CBC and Canada Reads.” Journal of Canadian Studies 40.1 (2006): 5-36. Fuller, Danielle, Rehberg Sedo, DeNel, and Thurlow, Amy. “More Than ‘Just a Little Library Program’: Discourses of Power in One Book, One Community Programming Committees.” Logos 20.1 (2010): 228-240. Grek Martin, Jennifer, Gruzd, Anatoliy, and Howard, Vivian. “Navigating an Imagined Middle Earth: Finding and Analyzing Text-based and Film-based Mental Images of Middle Earth through TheOneRing.net Online Fan Community.” First Monday 18.5 (2013). Gruzd, Anatoliy, and Rehberg Sedo, DeNel. “#1b1t: Investigating Reading Practices at the Turn of the Twenty-first Century.” Mémoires du livre / Studies in Book Culture 3.2 (2012). 16

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Lang, Anouk. “A Book That All Canadians Should Be Proud to Read: Canada Reads and Joseph Boyden's Three Day Road.” Canadian Literature 215 (Winter) (2012): 120-136. ----- “A Dirty Little Secret: Taste Hierarchies and Richard and Judy's Book Club.” Participations 7.2 (2010): 316-340. ----- “Enthralling but at the Same Time Disturbing: Challenging the Readers of Small Island.” Journal of Commonwealth Literature 44.2 (2009): 123-140. ----- “Reading Race in Small Island: Discourse Deviation, Schemata and the Textual Encounter.” Language and Literature 18 (2009): 316-330. Lovejoy, Kristen, and Saxton, Gregory D. “Information, Community and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media.” Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 17 (2012): 337-353. One Book Nova Scotia (1BNS). “About.” One Book Nova Scotia. 2012. Web. Maritime Provinces Higher Education Commission. Profile of Maritime University Students: Enrolment, Participation, and Degree Completion. Fredericton, NB: 2003. Web. Quan-Haase, Anabel. Technology and Society: Social Networks, Power, and Inequality. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, 2013. Radway, Janice. “A Feeling for Books: The Book-of-the-Month Club, Literary Taste and Middle-Class Desire.” The Book History Reader. Ed. D. Finkelstein and A. McCleery. New York: Routledge, 2006. 469-484. Rehberg Sedo, DeNel. “Introduction.” Reading Communities: From Salons to Cyberspace. Ed. DeNel Rehberg Sedo. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 1-24. ----- “Cultural Capital and Community in Contemporary City-wide Reading Programs.” Mémoires du livre / Studies in Book Culture 2.1 (2010): n.pag. doi: 10.7202/045314ar ----- “Richard and Judy’s Book Club and ‘Canada Reads’: Readers, Books and Cultural Programming in a Digital Area.” Information, Communication and Society 11.2 (2008): 188-206. doi: 10.1080/13691180801934487 Taylor, Joan Bessman. “Producing Meaning Through Interaction.” From Codex to Hypertext: Reading at the Turn of the Twenty-first Century. Ed. Anouk Lang. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2012. 142-158. Wright, David. “Watching The Big Read with Pierre Bourdieu: Forms of Heteronomy in the Contemporary Literary Field.” CRESC Working Paper Series, Working Paper No. 45 (2007). Web.

17

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

Appendix Online Survey Questions Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey! It should only take a few minutes and will provide us with valuable feedback about your experience in the One Book Nova Scotia reading event. 1. Are you an employee of a Nova Scotia library system? (2013 survey only) Yes No 2. Did you participate in One Book Nova Scotia? Yes No 3. Did you participate in One Book Nova Scotia as a library employee? (2013 survey only) Yes No 4. How would you describe your typical pleasure reading habits? I read for pleasure as often as I can, usually every day I read for pleasure occasionally, at least once a week I read for pleasure rarely I do not read for pleasure

5. What types of material do you usually like to read for pleasure? 6. What formats do you usually choose for your pleasure reading? (You can select more than one response). Print Digital Audiobooks No preference Other 7. Have you ever participated in a book club? Yes No

18

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

8. How did you find out about the One Book Nova Scotia program? Radio Television Twitter Facebook Other social media Newspaper Library Bookstore Friend Other 9. What motivated you to participate in One Book Nova Scotia? Please select all that apply. Interest in this particular book or author Interest in reading a new or unfamiliar book Desire to attend author readings Desire to be part of a shared reading community Desire to support a Nova Scotia reading initiative Other 10. Which One Book Nova Scotia events or programs did you participate in? You may select more than one response. (2013 survey only) I did not participate in any events Book announcement and launch Author readings Book discussions Other events 11. Did you attend any One Book Nova Scotia events with another person? Yes No 12. What did you think about the events you participated in? 13. What did you like best about One Book Nova Scotia? 14. Is there anything you would like to change about One Book Nova Scotia? 15. Do you think you will participate in One Book Nova Scotia next year? Why or why not?

19

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

16. What do you think large-scale reading programs such as One Book Nova Scotia achieve? (You can select more than one response). Increased literacy Increased pleasure reading Increased knowledge of books and authors Increased enjoyment of reading Increased library use Increased book sales New opportunities to socialize and make friends Other 17. How old are you? Under 19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79 over 80 18. What is your gender? Male Female Other 19. What is your highest level of education? Some high school High school graduation Some university or college University graduation Post-graduate degree Other 20. Where do you live (your hometown)? 20

Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, vol. 10, no. 1 (2015)

21. How do you usually obtain your pleasure reading materials? From the public library From a bookstore Purchase print books online Purchase digital books online Download Borrow from friends or family Other

21