Comments on Content-ment: Content Curation versus Content Aggregation: A Vel...

@Nicholas, Thanks for reading! I would say that ...

2010-08-25T13:51:22.182-05:00

@Nicholas,

Thanks for reading! I would say that your comments are spot-on. It is far from new, but more sophisticated and packing more potential impact in the end.

This was an interesting post and I learned a lot -...

2010-08-24T22:22:29.540-05:00

This was an interesting post and I learned a lot - thanks. However, isn't online content curation really just the digital equivalent of what a print magazine editor does every day of his or her life - create an editorial strategy and then gather material from a variety of sources – writers, news wires, other media platforms – to deliver against that reader-focused strategy? Unless I'm wildly off base here or missing something, content curation hardly seems like a new concept to me.
From a 30,000-foot view, I do believe, however, that the successful content creators of the future are going to combine professional editorial content with selected aggregated and "curated" content and socially generated material. Many of the aggregated content sites we're seeing right now are pretty cold and soul-less experiences because of the lack of a core editorial focus.
The same holds true for community. Communities are built on participation and participation is built on passion. Passion is specific not general. Therefore, the more specific and focused your content, the more robust your community will be.
You can read more opinion here:
http://tinyurl.com/2e3p42k

Thanks for your comment, Deb! You bring up a inte...

2010-02-01T23:04:17.577-06:00

Thanks for your comment, Deb!

You bring up a interesting point.

Without the context or framework of a larger content strategy, both curation and aggregation can fall flat. Why are we collecting this content? For whom? A strong editorial curation component will keep the context in mind. Does "Vintage Comedy" mean the Marx Brothers or the Blues Brothers? Both are probably relevant to their communities of fans, but serve decidedly different contexts.

With all of the talk of curation, this is one of the most significant points: editorial. The role of the editor in this scenario should be to serve a given community within the context that brings that group together.

The hypothetical situation of "Vintage Comedies" is an apt one. This plays out every day, and the curatorial editors have a lot on the line. They run the very real risk of their community members finding them irrelevant. However, as the unsatisfied walk away, others may be introduced to the community and find exactly what they are seeking.

Where all of this gets interesting is in places like the Netflix recommendation engine or the Pandora music service. People like films or songs for reasons other than the ones easily tagged or categorized.

I really enjoyed this post, Clinton. You captured ...

2010-02-01T09:55:45.132-06:00

I really enjoyed this post, Clinton. You captured exactly the essence of curation, how to do it the right way, and how to showcase (and communicate) the value.

What I'm currently wrestling with is the whole idea of context vs community. Going to a museum instills a sense of community, in that I as a consumer am experiencing the same things millions of other people have experienced, through the collection, positioning, and selection of "content." However, accessing content via an application or digital interface is perceived as more intimate, customized, and personal. The community aspect of curation is important, but so is the contextual, "mind-reading" element. If I access a movie collection titled "Vintage Comedies" and I see stuff that, in my reality, is neither vintage nor a comedy, I'm going to place less trust in my curators and the value of the curation, in my mind, will go down. And if I'm paying for content, I'll probably be frustrated and annoyed.

Any thoughts on how to reconcile (or start to, at least) this community vs context issue? I can't seem to get myself to a meaningful position on this...

Thanks!

Deb Gelman

Thanks for reading, Gabi. You are quite right to ...

2009-11-17T20:26:09.276-06:00

Thanks for reading, Gabi.

You are quite right to point out that curation versus aggregation applies to more than visual content.

The key is in your second paragraph. Recognizing that they are two distinct activities requiring separate strategies is a victory in itself.

It sounds like your version of culling uses a bit of both, to good effect.

Thanks again for your comment!
clinton

Thanks for stating this so clearly Clinton! Obvi...

2009-11-16T16:11:05.661-06:00

Thanks for stating this so clearly Clinton!

Obviously this distinction applies to much more than visual content. At IssueLab (where we archive nonprofit research on social issues) we often find ourselves straddling these two kinds of activity and have ended up both curating AND aggregating.

The good news is that we recognize these as separate kinds of activities that build on the same raw material but require different strategies and approaches.

So our bimonthly "CloseUps" are curated, whereas our collection as a whole is aggregated. Both of these activities are much needed by the nonprofit sector and we will continue to do both. (We also offer site users ways to curate their own research collections while giving search engines ways to better cull research collections based on more accurate metadata - assigned by humans.)

Hmmmm, is culling curating or aggregating? :)

Gabi Fitz
IssueLab
http://www.issuelab.org