My daily readings 04/23/2011

  • tags: curation

  • tags: curation

    • Using a browser extension, a user or a group of users can select tweets with a click to bundle them together. These bundles can then be viewed on’s website or embedded on any other site.
  • tags: Reddit Revenue Server

    • In other words, you don’t have to worry about us turning into some crappy paywall site. We’re not shooting to have all our of active members turn into paying subscribers. We’re not even trying to get half that. In fact, what we’d absolutely love is for about 2% of our eight million active users to subscribe to reddit gold. That would be an annual income stream of almost $5 million, which would solve all of our problems many times over.
  • tags: curation

    • So, over the past few months I’ve been talking to tons of entrepreneurs about the tools that curators actually need and I’ve identified seven things. First, who does curation? Bloggers, of course, but blogging is curation for Web 1.0. Look at this post here, I can link to Tweets, and point out good ones, right? That’s curation. Or I can order my links in a particular order. That’s curation. Or I can add my thoughts to those links, just like Techcrunch or VentureBeat do. That’s curation. Or I can do a video like Leo Laporte does and talk about those links. That’s curation. Or I can forward those links to you via email. That’s curation. The editor who sits in a big building at New York Times or your local newspaper that chooses what content you’ll see in your newspaper is a curator. So is the page designer who decides what story is at the top of the page.
    • A curator is an information chemist. He or she mixes atoms together in a way to build an info-molecule. Then adds value to that molecule.
    • The company isn’t really saying yet what that means, although I saw a few of the upcoming applications and services today that they’ll roll out over the next several weeks. At a high level they will look at social stream data for individuals – Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare and other services – to create an incredibly accurate Interest Graph for a person. That interest graph data can then be used, with the user’s permission, by third parties for content and ad personalization.
    • I saw my own Interest Graph based only on my Facebook and Twitter streams over the last several months and it’s scary-accurate. And one thing is clear – the conversational data from my Twitter stream shows much more accurate interest data. Facebook’s data is still more of “what I want the world to see.”
    • The key element of the next big thing is the increasing significance of the Interest Graph to complement the Social Graph. While Facebook, Twitter, and Google are already working on delivering relevant content, a slew of startups are focusing exclusively on it.

      Relevance is the only solution to the problem of information overload.

    • Quora’s newsfeed is an interesting showcase of what happens when you mix an Interest Graph with a Social Graph – and the result is the mysterious addictiveness so many have experienced, but found difficult to explain. An item pops up in your newsfeed not because you were following a user, but because you were following a related topic.

      This often leads to Personalized Serendipity – or Unexpected Relevance – which is why Quora gets many people hooked.

  • tags: curation

    • A lot of people were saying we needed curation. Not just in the sense of filtering : curating is not only about selecting, it’s also about highlighting and sharing content with analysis or comments that give it a specific – and most of the time subjective – meaning. Blogs had been focusing people’s energy on becoming writers or journalists. That’s good. But we felt we now needed to bring people’s energy on collectively creating this meaning out of all that produced content.
    • The idea behind Scoop.It is simple but more and more necessary in a world of digital abundance: with lots of content available out there, you’re probably better off giving your own twist, your witty comment or your smart sarcasm to an article or a video made by someone else rather than duplicate content or write yet-another-blog-post on something already covered a dozen times. And if the platform is designed to help you find the right content, it’s much easier.
    • Nothing is more addictive than being heard.
    • In fact, Pete at Newcurator got quite horked by all of these new self-proclaimed curators. He declares that if you need to ask yourself if you are a curator, then “you are (just) a filter.” Because, I guess, when you are a curator, you just know. How do you know? Pete says that you know because you have had many, many years of experience and you have deep expertise in the subject that you are curating. You are creating a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.
    • The main difference to me is that curation is more than filtering (whichever form you give it): curation is about giving context.

      A filter will select content. A collaborative filter, content based on what others and you did.

      A curator will not only do that but add context: comment, analysis, format, pictures, … Why they felt it was relevant, why they agree or disagree with that content.

      Look at how the same piece of news is titled differently by say CNN and Fox and Al Jazeera: it’s the same news but the context can be way different because each time, a human being – not an algorithm – gave his own twist to it.

      Interesting article here explaining the difference between curation and filtering in greater details:

    • Collaborative filtering tends to be limited to reducing the noise in a channel / filtering out less relevant content rather than organizing it in a meaningful way.

      As an illustration of the distinction between these two different facets of information organization one might look at a twitter list that is further filtered by hash tags as an example of collaborative filtering while a Pearltree such as this one: that consists of 25 people curating the news and releases related to Wikileaks show off social curation.

    • “Bookmarking” is the most casual action, it implies only the potential for interest. Curating requires both peristent and deep interest in the content
    • Social bookmarking is something you do primarily for yourself.

      Curation is something you do primarily for others (which means being extra careful about what you include, adding context, comments, etc…).

      Application design usually reflects a bias towards one of these perspectives

    • I would add that another primary difference between social bookmarking and content curation is that curation tools are designed to allow the curator(s) to organize the content in ways that tell a story whereas social bookmarking tools have not historically provided this capability.
    • Bookmarking is, initially, something you do for yourself: collect what’s useful, so you can retrieve it. Social bookmarking came along when people thought “what can be useful to me can also be to others”. Makes sense but still, me-centric content.

      Curation is also an act of collection. But, by definition (“museum curator”), it’s done primarily to show. It’s a way of expression. Curation tools therefore offer functions to select and store, but also to edit, personalize and share.

      The difference is the same as bewteen my music play list and the work of a DJ.

    • One interesting use I’ve made of the curation possibilities was in the context of an online course I’m giving. I’ve used tags to make collections of links that are relevant to the course and assignments. For instance,… lists a number of social tools from which students pick one to analyze in the course
      • I started in 2003 and have 4446 bookmarks and 758 tags on delicious. I don’t use them much anymore.

        I’ve seriously curtailed my social bookmarking in the past few years, mostly because:

        • I realized my onboard memory was usually bad enough that I wouldn’t actually recall the precise tags or bookmarked text I used for links, but good enough for me to recall words to input into Google to find stuff again. The key advantages of Google for retrieval are that it capitalizes on other people’s words, and indexes the whole pages.
        • In the ongoing battle to stay relevant, my experience online has become much more immediate, much more about flow and breadth than stocks and depth. I increasingly seek – and am able, amazingly – to connect to living, dynamic social objects (such as you people!), rather than static pages.
        • I now pick up links with a just-in-time rather than just-in-case stance. If a link has no immediate value to me, I don’t even bother keeping it. It will surface again if such is its destiny. If it does have value, I either tweet it if I feel my contacts will be interested (social caching), or come up with a relevant question on Quora and dump the link there.
    • The answer is that the concepts behind Delicious have given birth to an entire next generation of services and platforms – the early adopter crowd and soon a much broader general audience will eventually use – we have moved from the somewhat geeky and difficult to grasp concept of tags/bookmarks to a more accessible system of content curation.

      Tags were always the weak link of Delicious whereas curation services that let people give their own context and meaning to links are both much more nuanced and much more easily understood.

      Systems like Pearltrees which allow users to do this alone or with others are the heirs to the idea that Delicious created.

    • While its pretty easy to blame Yahoo for Delicious’ fading into obscurity, I wonder what the future was for any bookmarking service when the world is moving to a point where its almost easier to google for the link you vaguely remember. Delicious could have evolved but the evolution would have had to be towards some website that looked very little like Delicious today
    • While Digg may be in decline, Reddit, a very similar site, is not — it just had 1 billion page views this month.

      Occasionally, there is some more value in Twitter. I follow almost entirely people in tech, but 90 percent of their tweets are about what they ate for lunch. Annoying. Or they are echoing something they found on Reddit. I think that a hybridization of the two could be really successful – upvote/tag tweets you like, and they all get featured on some global frontpage and categorized by their tags.

    • Computerworld wrote an article about this topic today… and it endorses what Andrew Chen says above — by giving participants a custom home page, Facebook and Twitter have avoided the clique mentality at Digg and its clones. When my Diggs didn’t make front page, I simply gave up trying. At FB and Twitters, my only readers are my followers and friends, so I get better feedback and encouragement.
  • tags: curation

    • The reality is that we don’t always share the same interests as the people in our immediate social circle. Sometimes I develop a specific interest I want to learn more about, like heli-skiing or Ethiopian cuisine. If I suddenly develop a desire to drop 15,000 feet from a helicopter down a mountain of snow, I know my current social network won’t be able to offer much advice. But somewhere in the two billion users on the Internet today, it’s likely that I can learn about my new-found passion and find content related to that interest.
  • tags: curation

    • “Enliven the world with your passions,” invites the curation and sharing platform Pearltrees. If all of the above curation tools create lists, then Pearltrees attempts do something rather different.
      Pearltrees begins with a captivating Flash-based graphical interface. But Pearltrees’s branch-and-tree structure gives users a drill-down option that has them experiencing the material on their own unique journey. Mashable‘s Ben Parr explained Pearltrees this way: “Pearltrees is nothing less than a reinvention of how we organize the web. The service provides a completely unique and visual experience to saving your favorite websites, organizing what you find interesting, and even seeing what others are saying about specific web destinations.”

      Using a group function called Pearltrees teams, others in your group can create a Pearltree in a collaborative manner in real time. You can also share your team curation easily via Facebook and Twitter. 

      Pearltrees allows you to embed your ‘pearl’ in a site, but the unique nature of the results suggests that this team is working to create a new visual language for creating and sharing themes and collections. It’s a bold step and worth your exploration. 

    • these four offerings merit your exploration as early and thoughtful attempts to solve the data overload problem.
  • tags: curation

    • Among her key bullets in the presentation:

      -Exhibit your collection’s greatest assets

      -Position users as publishers in the workflow

      – Use analytics to drive content production

  • tags: curation collaboration organize share

  • tags: Curation Creation

    • As sociologist Robin Dunbar once theorized, we are limited to the number of meaningful relationships we can manage as human beings. That number is estimated between 130 – 150. The average number of friends maintained on Facebook today is 130. Coincidence? I don’t think so. The numbers are consistent across other social networks. Today, MySpace users connect with an average number of 107 individuals and on Twitter, the number is 77 (today). I believe these numbers are only going to grow.
  • tags: Curation

    • Then, the web came along and blew that up. Kaboom! Now content has gone from being scarce to being ubiquitous. Bloggers make content. Flickr photographers make content. Facebook posts are content. Tumblr publishers make content. Content isn’t King because it isn’t scarce. It’s everywhere, it’s overwhelming, and it’s gone from quality to noise
    • Devices: Everything makes media now. Cell phones, laptops, digital cameras, iPads, web cams, as well as location aware software like Foursquare, Gowalla, Yelp and a zillion others. The combination of where we are, what we like, what we’re doing and what we’re saying all creates micro-media. Content is being exuded out of our digital pores.

      Bandwidth: 3G is here, 4G is around the corner. Wifi is slowly but surely being pushed out and shared, though it’s currently strangled by passwords and firewalls. But just watching the ‘check in’ phenomena of Foursquare is a clue about how quickly content creation is becoming an everyday part of what we do.

      Sociology: People like sharing. They like sharing bite size info about what they’re doing, where they are, who they’re with, what they’re buying. They massive influx of consumer created crowd content shifts content from scarcity to abundance, and then to an overwhelming fire-hose of undifferentiated data.

    • Advertising: We’re standing at the end of an era. “Mass Media”, the ability to reach large segments of the population with a single message is essentially over. For advertisers, the need to find content in context, and to have that context be appropriate for their message and their brand is critical. So, Curation replaces Creation as the coin of the realm for advertiser-safe environments. No longer can advertisers simply default to big destination sites. The audience is too diffuse and the need to filter and organize quality crowd-created content is too critical.
    • Seth Godin wrote a post on The Domino Project about tweeting in class. He references my talk at HBS where the professor asked his students to tweet out their class notes. Seth says:
    • 1) Curating for yourself. You’re curating content about a topic in order to showcase your authority and express what you like. You publish the curated content daily or continuously via Twitter or on the web. Some news media professionals have taken to curating social media in real-time in order to enhance their story telling or as a part of it.

      2) Curating for others. You’re curating for a team (internal or external) who is mostly consuming the content. You’re saving them a lot of time. They are not lazy, but they may not have the time to configure news radars themselves. They prefer to consume the news, rather than be consumed by it. A few years ago, Robin Good rightfully called this process Newsmastering.

      3) Crowdsourced curation. All on-board. Everybody curates the same topic. A number of users can add or remove content, as well as suggest new sources and keywords for that content. The challenge for this method is that content trickles-in lightly if there aren’t enough users that are actively curating, and you end-up with a partial view of the topic, unless a single user ends-up pulling more weight than others.

      4) Social curation. Twitter! Facebook! When your friends are sharing content in their stream and you’re consuming that stream, you’re in essence the recipient of their content curation. This can be taken a step further if you only follow their Twitter Favorites or Google Reader starred items, as this content represents the cream of the content crop. This is a bit like the next evolution of bookmarking systems.

    • Digital curation is sitting at the intersection of two larger topics: Content Marketing and the Future of News. We resisted creating a portal on Curation only, because curation has to be part of something else. You can find a lot of curated articles on the curation topic both in the Future of News portal, and the Content Marketing portal.

      And if you’re solely interested in that topic, just pick-up the two Connections and add them to your Personal News Page, and they’ll be mashed-up as a single topic that you can consume via email or on the web. Curation + Personalization.

    • 2) Several companies offering social readers that rank your social content by popularity of sharing and liking are calling themselves Curation services. Sharing and Liking is not curation. Sharing and Liking allows us to see the signal from the noise, but its loose interpretation of what curation is about.
    • Remember, keep in the back of your mind that research about those 20,000 elite users who tend to use higher end client apps – the apps Bill Gross has been busily acquiring. (All the monitoring is done on other platforms – these are less valuable).
    • You see, Twitter’s assumption was that no owner of a client app would stand up to them. Most of the client owners were young guys, just product guys, not commercial people. It’s one thing to deal with those guys, another to say to a company backed by Jim Breyer of Accel Partners, “no more client apps”.
    • Mike – Your analysis here seems flawed. While TweetDeck might certainly have a high percentage of power users/content creators, the overwhelming majority of the content consumers are not using TweetDeck. If Twitter shut off access to the TweetDeck client, do you seriously think that the Twitterati would continue publishing to an audience that is a fraction of what is available at Twitter? The masses of content consumers are not going to leave Twitter for TweetDeck/UberMedia, especially since they do not have the infrastructure in place to handle such a large community.

      If Twitter shuts down TweetDeck and/or UberMedia’s access, they will have a serious PR issue on their hands, but that would blow over albeit with some longterm vocal whining by influential people. That’s the only reason that Twitter will buy TweetDeck. If Twitter weren’t so flush with capital right now, they wouldn’t even be considering this acquisition. $50 million to avoid a PR problem might make sense, but believing that TweetDeck holds as much power as you imply is a fairy tale.

    • NO, they don’t need to buy Tweetdeck. Its easier for Twitter to create an exact replica of Tweetdeck, our team can do it in 30 days (Tweetdeck is a simple Adobe AIR application). Then after Twitter creates its Tweetdeck replica it shuts off the hose to Tweetdeck. Now those 20% of users can wait for Tweetdeck/Uber to build a new Twitter or hook up to some other service and hope and pray that all those power users can get there followers to move over as well. Good luck on that Uber.

      Good try TC on trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.

  • tags: Curation

    • We largely invest in consumer web services with a large number of engaged users where the users create the content. Services like this can become messy and hard to navigate. There is always a signal to noise issue.

      I’m a big fan of curation in these services. Twitter has lists. Etsy has favorites. Tumblr has tag pages. These are all variations of curation in services that have a lot of noise in them.

      • What are the existing solutions for signal to noise issue? 1) Search (Users has right intent)2) Vertical crowd source. Hacker news3) Q&A Quora, stackoverflow 4) Organize: List in twitter , favorite in Etsy. List in diigo.  
    • If you are interested in curating a page on Kickstarter, this feature will be made available to everyone soon.

      If you are building a marketplace or a social platform, make sure to build curation into your model. It will make the service easier for everyone to navigate, particularly new users.

    • Art stored randomly in a room is a warehouse. That same art curated and distilled becomes a gallery.

      That’s the power of curation. It make things more digestible. You spend your time appreciating the art instead of combing through it. You may miss a few pieces as a result, but the overall experience is much less time consuming and far more enjoyable.





    • I was speaking to the relationship between curation and data, being comparable to design and technology. Just a passing thought. Terms with many meanings lead to confusion, what is useful is to apply to context to solidify the concepts and terminology.
    • As I explained at the time (… what we’re looking for here is a solution to the Context, Audience and Information Overload problems which arose as the consumers of media also became its producers (hat tip: Clay Shirky).
    • What that means is that we’ll have to embrace a new world where, what matters most finds you, and you simply won’t be able to ‘keep up’ with everything in your neighborhood, workplace, field of expertise, or hobbies.
      • How to get info1) Email, IM, RSS. 2) Search with intent 3) Discover in social network. Vertical community.What matters most finds you? 
    • What’s exciting about Curation – and why I stand by embryonic – is that we haven’t even come close to solving the content question. And even as we poke around at it -the number of devices that tweet, blog, post, check in, instagram, and video are just going to explode.
      • How can we enable to generate information on our platform in a meaningful way?
    • FB is “somewhat curated” where Google is generation behind.
    • Completely agree. My take is that because of the content explosion, in at least some corners of the web we’ll see a resurgence of the “middle-men” who’ll do this curation – travel agents for trip planning, headhunters for finding jobs, etc – in a new avatar.
      • The middle man issue.1) Information is very limited and web is not advanced. People who control information has power.  Chained middle man.2) The world become flat with web. Remove middle man3) Information overload. Do we need middle man again? 
    • They’ll have tools to smartly aggregate content / deals from around the web but provide the incredibly important layer of human judgment on top to personalize this for your specific need.
    • My sense is we’re entering a new age of the professional curator on the web
      • Trust? 
      • Professional curator?  Middle man again?
    • Or, for each of your interests, have ‘automatic curation’ software be able to work effectively with the ‘meaning’ of both your interest and all the content on the Internet and, then, direct focused content to each of your focused, personal interests. In this way, make the “message” conform again to the “medium”, this time the medium of the Internet, and, thus, take a big bite out of the “message” of old ‘one size fits millions’ of the “medium” of old media.

      The challenge is how to do that. But I can 100% absolutely assure you that no one anywhere in US venture capital, north, south, east, or west, gives even as much as a weak little hollow hoot about either doing it or how to do it. Instead, they first want to play with the UI/UX and second look at ComScore numbers. The ‘how to do that’ is ignored. This fact, however, is close to inevitable: If many VCs could evaluate the “how to do that”, then too many entrepreneurs would already know “how to do that” and the opportunity would be gone.

      • Curate items in my library automatically? Building meaningful list automatically for me? Like Read it later do?
    • Curation implies some level of expertise by the curator. The problem is that, if everybody is becoming a “curator” suddenly, regardless of their expertise level, you end-up with an abundance of poorly curated services. The Wikipedia curation works because there’s a rigorous process for that. If everybody is now a “curator”, we’ll lose the real benefits of curation.

      I’m for controlled curation by experts, not curation by the masses. Then it’s user-generated content, and it should be called as such.

    • i don’t totally agree. curated pages that are highly liked or favorited are
      often better than those created by so called experts
    • Conversation and Curation are uniquely human expressions – so i’m not sure that seeing good curation’s best result is being ‘picked up’ by paid media.

      It may be that lots of new curators get paid with an economic unit i call (for lack of a better word) joy. It feels good to share what you know – and payback is a ‘thank you’ or a comment.

      • Expert barge/Thanks as reward.  
    • I was about to comment something similar, but you explained it so well. In a time where there is entirely too much valuable relevant information to digest, individuals must rely on various trusted sources (publications, bloggers, friends, industry leaders). It would indeed be silly to assume that my trusted sources will be the same as almost anyone else’s.
    • I think of UGC as content created by a user…curation is content picked by a user (not generated)…and aggregation is just a system for collecting a bunch of content (so to me good curation involves simple tools for aggregation and then filtering, picking, and sharing the best from that aggregation).
    • I agree that curation is all of the above Steve, not just filtering. I didn’t imply just filtering.
      Curation is a before, a during and an after task. The maintenance is as important as the creation, organization, selection and filtering. And you might add promotion and user-engagement. As a curator, I want users to be engaged with the content I’m curating in order to improve on it or on my methods.
    • I think it only feels hyped because you are connected to the world that cares so deeply about it…i would bet the average person on the street doesn’t know what it is…and if explained to them, I bet they would think it sounds great! (classic example in this realm I think is delicious – and there are still millions of Facebook users that have no idea something like delicious exists)
    • yup. the curating for your mom is a great example



    • to Steven – Pandora does better curation of new music for my tastes than my human buddies and band mates can do.
      Curation is really the perfect word for the service they’re doing – I haven’t thought of it before today when this discussion sparked attention to the concept, but it feels like an exact match. And here you go – curation with no human bottleneck.
    • Does Pandora curation or recommendations?
    • Here we’re talking ‘curation’ as essentially collecting together. Even humans don’t do this very well, that is, very ‘meaningfully’: Last time I was at the National Gallery of Art on the Mall (thank you Mr. Mellon), I saw ‘curation’ moslty just by date, within that by geographical region, within that by artist. Gee, maybe a computer could do such ‘curation’! :-)!!
    • Next, a direct attack on ‘curation’ as humans would do it is both not promising (just as you said, “write a song, or paint a picture, or carve a sculpture”) and not necessary for good results. Instead, it’s enough to be able to have software that can work effectively with ‘meaning’ as humans mean it. And even there it is not necessary to take a direct attack, i.e., achieve ‘real artificial intelligence’.
    • Awesome thread. My friend Charlie Crystle shared the link. I currently run what used to be for Kodak (now We have 12 petabytes of highly personalized images in cloud and the problem of curation is one I have thought about at length as it relates to the overwhelming volume of photos being taken (by you and others). I have some some random contributions to this thinking:

      How I think about curation (some definitions which have some important nuance):

      * You have a really big set of thing (Y).
      * You have a person (X).
      * The subset of Y that delivers optimal happiness/joy/etc. for X (call is C) is the curated set.

      What that simple frame, here are some adds:

      * Finding C small sets is easy. Finding C against volume is the challenge.
      * C must be indidivdalized to the X.
      * C changes for X based on time, intent, location, etc. It’s not absolute.
      * The distributions of C’s tends to be very flat for large sets. So you get a lot of room to deliver something that will be perceived to be ‘wow’, even if it’s not the true global maxima.
      * What X thinks is the optimal C might not actually deliver the optimal happiness. Algorithms that can figure this out feel like ‘magic’.

      Victor Cho

    • Asking people to curate is worthwhile, but accept that most people will have a limited amount of time available to do so. Recognize that the actions people are *already* taking are meaningful to them, and so should be meaningful to you as well.

      Maybe you can’t always make recommendations, but you can expose connections as a way to supplement and enhance the manual curation. Make use of the data exhaust.

    • That said, I think Kickstarter can retain its focus on individual projects while adding a little more of the Wikipedia-esque “wow, I don’t remember how I got here, but I’m glad I did” feeling to browsing.
    • “curated by your actions on Twitter — you don’t know that you’re “curating” when you @reply, but that’s exactly what you’re doing.”

      Call that ‘passive curation’? You’re actively curating through actions intended for something else. You took that as a signal and can apply it with curation in mind.

      Active curation is a problem if you want participation; many people simply won’t click the button, or some other explicit way of curating. But the superusers will (god bless ’em), which will raise the quality of their own curated content, at least.

      So passive curation can be a useful way to effectively curate, albeit not as effectively as explicit curative actions. The key is to understand the available signals and how to apply them in a meaningful way.

    • My favorite example of social curation to date is Quora. I think that they have really cracked the code on how to implement a curation model that scales.
    • Since inception, the web has seen three major waves in the evolution of relevance: portal, search, and social. These waves manifest typically by the examples of Yahoo, Google, and Facebook/Twitter, and otherwise known as Web 1.0, Web 2.0 and the real-time/social/next/3.0/whatever web.
      • The Social Web – Facebook/Twitter – In the emergent social web, discovery has taken on passive characteristics, resulting in a model of consumption that occurs without search, and often without intent.

        Consider the patterns of content discovery and consumption prevalent on Facebook or Twitter. Discovery is based on the stream paradigm, where relevance is determined implicitly along three dimensions:

        • Time (real-time = conversational)
        • Social group (work or friends or school, etc.)
        • Social proximity (1st, 2nd, 3rd degrees)
    • Networks will expand along these dimensions, as users tend to follow or focus more of their attention to those streams that present the greatest relevance (think Twitter and Facebook lists). The social web enables users to iterate through a group of curators who provide relevant content by way of social proximity and temporality. It has replaced intent with context, and so while wading through the stream, we are left with a feeling of serendipitous discovery, as we stumble blindly into content that we don’t even know that we want.
    • The technology to facilitate easier curation has come a long way recently. Taking aggregated content and adding an active, ongoing editorial component to arrive at a curated nirvana of sorts has been happening on the web for over a decade.
    • Most importantly, they both require a strategy. Why is this content being put together? Who will use it? How will they use it? Are they getting it somewhere else right now? What are the staffing impacts? What are the potential outcomes?
  • tags: socialmedia Curation

  • tags: realtime Curation

  • tags: Topic Curation

  • tags: Topic Curation

  • tags: Curation

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: