Comments on: Collecting related content isn’t curation

By: Rex Hammock

Rex Hammock — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 07:01:50 +0000

I'm convinced. Curation, it is.

By: Taariq Lewis

Taariq Lewis — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 05:03:51 +0000

Comment from GOOG Buzz:

The arguments against content curation in social media using the term remind me of the arguments of traditional physicists who considered equilibria in Neoclassical Economics not "really" the same and equilibria as defined by hard natural sciences. Albeit now 110 years since the birth of neo-classical economics, the use of scientific paradigms to describe social science has yielded many benefits...and a few crimes. What about the blogger as journalist? Wasn't this an issue for traditional journalists who considered bloggers not pure journalism professionals? Is there any debate now that bloggers are as much journalists as those who study the science of journalism?

Most of the criticisms against content curation appear to align with the definition purists who claim that curation is not accessible to those who care for information artifacts. Either information artifacts are not as "precious" as physical ones, or, curators in social media don't have the expertise to be able to make deep judgments about content.

I think the artifacts should not judge the curator, but the actions of the curator should determine whether they are simply filtering, tagging, or actually curating. I also believe that curating is a term/buzzword, but has a meaning that is invoking a revisit of the once quiet side of museum science. This is good for museum science. Now we can pay attention to this amazing practice that has gone ignored as technology has raced ahead.

Lastly, why the strong resistance against the inevitable cross pollination of ideas? Isn't there more opportunity for both social media and museum science if we mix the two?

By: Rex Hammock

Rex Hammock — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 03:01:50 +0000

I'm convinced. Curation, it is.

By: Taariq Lewis

Taariq Lewis — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 01:03:51 +0000

By: Pawan Deshpande

Pawan Deshpande — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:07:09 +0000

You are right that curation requires reflection and research and spending the time necessary to examine complete collections of everything known about a singular topic.

In the online world successful "curators" do specialize in one singular topic. A personal tweet stream with arbitrary links or a delicious profile with arbitrary bookmarks is not curation, it's link collection as per your post. But an individual, much like a museum curator, who specializes and curates on a single topic day in and day out, does in fact become an expert and curator.

To this end, brands are always experts in a particular topic such as a customer issue or a specific technology issue and can easily become powerful curators. By continuously providing the most relevant and best content to their customers they can build a sustainable relationship with prospects or customers. Our recent eBook "Content Curation: Taming the Flood in B2B Social Media" explores this in the B2B marketing arena: http://www.hivefire.com/ebook

By: KINGRPG

KINGRPG — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:37:58 +0000

I like that you think. Thank you for share very much.

By: Scobleizer

Scobleizer — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:15:00 +0000

An interesting discussion is going on here: http://www.google.com/buzz/louisgray/eTmJm31AfKM/Collecting-related-content-isn-t-curation-Rex and we are talking about the definition there and why my definition of curation fits with older definitions.

By: William Mougayar

William Mougayar — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:05:57 +0000

As someone who has developed a curated aggregation platform about 2 years ago, I think that both Scoble and Rex are at extreme ends of definitions, but somewhere in-between the 2 extremes lies the greater opportunity. Scoble has merely taken a liberal approach to interpreting what curation means to him, based on his needs, which are somewhat biased towards real-time, social media and a ferocious appetite for consuming tons of content 24×7.
And “To look after and preserve” is a solid foundational principle, but it might be a bit too narrow for today's fast and furious streaming web.
Somewhere between this and Scoble expansive vision lies perhaps a broader balance that takes into account the novelties that the Internet has brought.
My view of Curation is that it plays along 3 dimensions; it's a a) before, b) during and c) after task. In the context of content, a) you need decide what content you'd like to listen to or harvest, b) provide all kinds of added-value & social media on-ramps/off-ramps as things are unraveling (Scoble's focus), c) ensure that what's archived is well preserved and relevant for someone who comes across it for the first time.
It's basically looking after the complete content lifecycle, not just what's interesting now.

By: Rex Hammock

Rex Hammock — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:36:50 +0000

Thanks. I wrote about Apture in this post: http://www.rexblog.com/2010/03/24/20644 . While I overused it there, I will be using it selectively in posts in the future to provide context (and curation) to items I write about. I think Apture points to the future where both "real-time" and "understanding" can be presented together.

By: Rex Hammock

Rex Hammock — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 12:28:59 +0000

Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I think if you read added to Robert's comment…and what I've written about contextual content elsewhere…you will discover that ours is an argument among team mates.