I wonder just how much difference there is between the necessity for "literacy" now and in the days before computers invaded. The task is still pretty much the same: to develop evaluative instincts and apply them to whatever one encounters, in all communications/information media. Maybe there's more to be wary of [On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog...], more in terms of sheer volume and possibilities for temptation, and certainly there are lots of choices to make (which of several possible databases, for instance), but "information literacy" is not a matter of knowing how to use computers, negotiate search interfaces, create bibliographies. The meta-skills of finding and evaluating are best developed in contexts where the activity is really useful, and not just some sort of practise for eventual utility, and I think that puts their most proper development squarely in the hands of teachers, instructors, professors. That's sometimes a problem, notably when the instructors aren't really interested in ['don't have time for...'] extending and updating their own skills. Librarian guest lectures can be quite useful, and departmental courses aimed at specifically disciplinary skills seem like a good way to initiate majors into the mysteries, but there's really no substitute for professorial example.