|
7 March 2008
|
|
4 Responses to “Is user-generated content out?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. |
Experientia news
In three years...
Three years ago we founded Experientia. It has been a very exciting ride since. In three years ...
Three years ago we founded Experientia. It has been a very exciting ride since. In three years ...
First European Regional UPA Conference
The Usability Professionals' Association is proud to announce the first European Regional UPA ...
The Usability Professionals' Association is proud to announce the first European Regional UPA ...
Experientia email problem resolved
Experientia just resolved its email breakdown with its provider and we are now back to ...
Experientia just resolved its email breakdown with its provider and we are now back to ...
World Usability Day on 8 November in Turin, Italy
This year’s World Usability Day (WUD), a global series of events organised by the Usability ...
This year’s World Usability Day (WUD), a global series of events organised by the Usability ...
Putting people first
is powered by WordPress
is powered by WordPress



I think Newsweek’s thinly veiled derision of user-generated content has less to do with factual accuracy, and more to do with gadfly amateurs (and even unpaid experts) who challenge their credibility and have imposed a level of accountability some aren’t comfortable with.
Perhaps it help if Newsweek made the distinction between experts versus professionals in this article. An expert, by definition, knows what they are talking about. The professional, on the other hand, is paid to generate content. You can combine the two. But then you run the risk of getting a skewed perspective of someone with a skin in the game who might have an incentive to deceive or make omissions.
Beal’s quote: “People are beginning to recognize that the world is too dangerous a place for faulty information”. The same could be about magazines and consumer strategists who typically cater to someone or something other than their audience. Read this line from her company’s website and you might get an idea of what I mean; “We put the consumer at the center of your world, so you can strike at the center of theirs. Proximity is power. We’ll take you there.”
Questionable judgement and motivations have undermined my trust more than bad advice. The value of additional, or [any] outside perspective is often omitted in the professionals’ coverage of user-generated content. We’re just seeing the beginning, not the end.
Yes, I made some typos. “Perhaps it would help” and “The same could be said about”. Maybe if I had a better editing tool than a comment box, I could compete with pros.
I agree with the implications of your post. I would rather have the advice of an expert, because inferior information is problematic no matter what the source.
The upside of user-generated content is the heightened level of scrutiny it places on all who generate it. In my opinion it actually aids in improving information literacy by exposing people to mere exisitence of another point of view.
Health Information is a perfect example of how egregious the pros and experts can be. Look at the recent decision by Pfizer to pull the deceptive Lipitor ads featuring Dr. Jarvik.
Usa Today
SourceWatch
What other choices do we have when the pros and experts are in on the deception?
[...] link via Putting People First addthis_url = [...]