The Shifted Librarian talks about instant messaging's broader social implications for libraries:

Which, of course, is where libraries come in. Back in the 1990s, libraries debated whether email was a valid use of public computers, and now we're having that same discussion about instant messaging.

And you know what? The answer is the same - patrons using the internet to communicate, connect, exchange information, or just plain chat is indeed a valid use of public terminals. We have to get over this issue now because when we don't let them IM in the library, we're telling them that we don't value their preferred method of communication, whether it's with their friends or with librarians. We're telling them that the library is not a place for instant messaging, so go somewhere else to do it.

Except that they are going to go somewhere else and do it (at least, those that can), and they're not going to come back and they're not going to think of the library when they think of instant messaging. Would your library find that attitude acceptable if we replace "IM" with "email?" How about if we replace "IM" with "telephone?"

I quote the whole long piece above because I don't just think it's applicable to IM and libraries but to where people get their information, who they talk to, who they trust and who they want to bring education and services to their communities. It applies to Extension and to universities. We need to continue to think about weblogs and RSS and IM and email and other ways of distributing information and, most importantly, of having conversations with people. If we don't continue to adopt new methods, even ones we're not completely comfortable with, people will go elsewhere to get the information they want and the expertise, learning, and personal and community development they're seeking.