Comments on: Curation nation

By: The Curate and the Curator : Incisive.nu

The Curate and the Curator : Incisive.nu — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 23:14:23 +0000

[...] for a moment, the relationship is quite clear. Here’s Kristina Halvorson, from the Brain Traffic blog post about curation: As content strategists, it is in fact our job to sort through the wasteland of [...]

By: Curation 2: Curating the Deck Chairs on the Titanic : Incisive.nu

Curation 2: Curating the Deck Chairs on the Titanic : Incisive.nu — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 20:11:51 +0000

[...] Brain Traffic curation post comments ↩ [...]

By: Content & Curation: An Epic Poem : Incisive.nu

Content & Curation: An Epic Poem : Incisive.nu — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:19:19 +0000

[...] “Curation nation” at the Brain Traffic blog [...]

By: Greg Swan

Greg Swan — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 09:00:04 +0000

Have you checked out AOL's Seed? They're going to crowd source content and then curate what they get into their content properties. Oh, and from my understanding, sell advertorial w/o disclaimers throughout. If this is the future of crowd sourcing and/or curation, I think I'm going to puke.

By: Greg Swan

Greg Swan — Thu, 01 Jul 2010 08:57:53 +0000

I think the gurus are now calling themselves ninjas (note: also lame)

By: Secret Diary

Secret Diary — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 07:09:42 +0000

Content curation is not a new concept. Content curation is about internet traffic generation. What Scoble was talking about on his blog is a very easy, simple and very useful idea. It can be applied to any industry or trade website or blog. The perfect example of content curation is what Guy Kawasaki of http://AllTop.com does. For example, I blog about Personal Development / Self-Help, etc. As content Curator, every week or anytime I feel like it, I use Copernic Agent Professional software Copernic Summarizer software and search for specific keyword to find great / helpful articles on the web. Those who have written about those subjects may not have titled them correctly or their site has low traffic or not optimized for the search engines, etc. So, I copy the link of the specific article, use TweetDeck or HootSuite or TinyUrl to shrink the url, write a small intro paragraph, post it on my blog, then tag it. And because my blog is linked to my Google Profile and Buzz, the item blogged automatically goes on my Google Buzz page. As time goes on, on, on... I gain traffic on that article for doing not much but I've helped content owner to gain traffic to their site. And I also help my site visitors (who may not know the right keywords to use to dig out the info they want from the search engines) to find / read great contents. It’s a good idea. It can be applied to so many types of themed blogs / sites. Remember, the more pages / content you create, frequently, on your blog, the higher you rank on Google, etc. Simples. To learn more, Google “Content Curator”, and Google: “Content Curation”

By: @TheGirlPie

@TheGirlPie — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 11:17:21 +0000

Oh Kristina, what a smart/fun post;
good points and great voice.
My take on the whole curation sitch?
"What she said."

Thanks,
~GirlPie

By: Kristina Halvorson

Kristina Halvorson — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:44:15 +0000

Huh. I still don't know why someone can't lay claim to the title “writer” even if they're not doing a good job.

By: Kristina Halvorson

Kristina Halvorson — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 22:43:49 +0000

Hm. I don't really see it like that. I think no one really wants to be responsible for the care and feeding of content, in general, which is what content strategists everywhere are working to change.

The bottom line, I guess, is that it doesn't really matter what we call it, as long as we're doing it. Anyhow, people call themselves all different kinds of things without really knowing what they're doing. See: “I'm a social media guru!” Heh.

By: spxdcz

spxdcz — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 21:33:26 +0000

I (respectfully) disagree.

The modern use of the word 'curator' is applied to those who filter/select/edit/aggregate/choose/collect/whatever-but-not-curate content, not the content owners. That's going to be a very difficult thing to change. Web apps are now beginning to use the labeling 'Curated by' and 'Curator' in their text, in the context of people who can easily select and re-publish *others'* content (see: Pinterest).

These people cannot be - and, anecdotally, have no intention of being - owners of or responsible for the original content. 'Curators' are the middle-men, the filters.

We can't now change who 'curator' refers to. Few people think that the original content owner/creator is the 'curator'. So by perpetuating this term, are we not confusing the situation? If the 'curator' is, in the traditional sense, the person who 'cares for' the lifecycle of the content, yet the term is referring to someone who has neither the technology nor the ownership nor the inclination to do so, we aren't putting the onus on anyone. We are just muddying the waters with mixed terms and definitions.