Re: Digest for contentstrategy@googlegroups.com - 9 Messages in 1 Topic
Bud Parr
"curation" this week. Words cheapen, and of course the internet can
speed up that process. My own feeling is that "curator" came about
because people began to realize that "editor" wasn't quite the right
word for what many web editors do because they so often are not
actually editing (nb CJR's recent survey), but procuring or producing
content. Procurer doesn't sound so sexy, but curator, with it's high
brow connotation, does. Not sure why "producer" isn't used more
because it seems the more accurate term.
I imagine you know this, but MW Unabridged and Oxford Shorter seem to
agree - at the moment - that the word curator has nothing to do with
how the word is used right now.
Bud
Sonnet Media LLC
New York, NY
http://sonnetmedia.net
212 699-1859
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:37 PM,
<contentstra...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> Today's Topic Summary
>
> Group: http://groups.google.com/group/contentstrategy/topics
>
> Curation and Content Strategy [9 Updates]
>
> Topic: Curation and Content Strategy
>
> Amy Thibodeau <amy.th...@gmail.com> Jun 15 11:38AM -0700 ^
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm working on a blog article about the increasingly popularity of the buzz
> words "curation" and "curator" in relation to content creation online.
> Personally, I struggle with the term and that could be in part because of my
> background in museums; I have a very specific idea of what a curator is and
> does and it doesn't mesh with how I understand the online world. The term
> also seems like a bit of jargon without a lot of meaning behind it.
>
> On the other hand, as a content strategist in Phoenix recently pointed out
> to me on Twitter (she is @sara_ann_marie), curation implies putting content
> together to make meaning not just collection; I like this idea.
>
> For those of you who have a couple of spare minutes - any thoughts on what
> you think about the increased prominence of 'curation' to describe what we
> do online? Does the word work? Do clients understand it? Is there a better
> alternative? Is this all just a bunch of marketing jargon that doesn't mean
> much?
>
> Any feedback you have would be very much appreciated.
>
> Best,
>
> Amy
> http://contentini.com
> @amythibodeau
>
>
>
> "Alexa D. O'Brien" <alexa...@gmail.com> Jun 15 02:40PM -0400 ^
>
> Read Erin Scime's blog :
> http://www.dopedata.com/2009/12/08/the-content-strategist-as-digital-curator/
>
> best,
>
> alexa o'brien
> content strategist
> huge inc
>
>
> --
> alexa...@gmail.com
> www.alexaobrien.com
>
>
>
> Hilary Marsh <hilarym...@gmail.com> Jun 15 01:42PM -0500 ^
>
> Hi Amy,
>
> As someone working for an organization (and not an agency), "curation" is a
> great way to describe the strategic content work we do. Setting priorities
> for what content a user sees first -- and resetting them almost daily, as
> new content is created by a multitude of publishers -- is not a one-time
> effort. Promoting information and adding the context that the organization
> often forgets are the two main eleements of value we add.
>
> Let me know if you need more info.
>
> Best,
>
> Hilary
>
>
>
>
> Amy Thibodeau <amy.th...@gmail.com> Jun 15 11:53AM -0700 ^
>
> Thanks for the link Alexa - will do.
>
>
>
>
> Colleen Jones <jones...@gmail.com> Jun 15 02:56PM -0400 ^
>
> Hi Amy,
>
> I didn't like the term at first for content or design because it reminded me
> of dead butterflies in glass cases. It seemed static, cold, and not that
> interactive. However, I'm comfortable with the term now. Compared to
> aggregation, curation is a fresh, warm human element.
>
> I've used the term with clients, and, with a little explanation, they catch
> on to it pretty quickly--to my surprise.
>
> Colleen
>
>
> COLLEEN JONES
> Principal, Content Science
> Chair, CHI*Atlanta - Organizer, Atlanta Content Strategy
> E: jones...@gmail.com l col...@content-science.com
> T: @leenjones
> P: 770-296-0121
>
>
>
>
>
> Ruth Kaufman <ruth.k...@gmail.com> Jun 15 11:54AM -0700 ^
>
> I don't mind the term curation, but I see your point about how its meaning
> gets somewhat diluted as it moves from the museum to general online context.
> When I have used it with clients, they have had no issue understanding it.
> I've used it for marketing content as well as technical support content.
> Tech support people are usually allergic to jargon, and yet they didn't
> object to this term, so in my opinion, it's pretty safe to keep working with
> it.
>
> I think this term is, itself, an alternative to more general terms like
> relevant, manually selected, and personalized content (not to say that it
> means the same thing.) We needed a term to describe content that has some
> editorial thought behind it beyond parametric searches, and implying more
> than the manual process of compiling content with some editorial though
> behind it. Curation also implies the order in which the content is
> presented, beyond automated sequences such as date and relevance. It implies
> some amount of storytelling, and the skills behind the process to think in
> terms of storytelling -- i.e., not parametric.
>
> When I worked at IBM (this is from 4-5 years ago), the web editorial board
> also described some content strategy work as "information brokering". There
> were, in fact, information brokering job functions in the company. My memory
> on this is fuzzy, but I believe they were more focused on the intranet at
> the time, scavenging the far reaches of intranet content (which was not
> centrally managed) for relevant content that would help people do their
> jobs, as you might expect. Then (also fuzzy memory), I think the term was
> carried over to what was needed for the public site, to help make sense of
> the endless content on ibm.com. I ramble, but hopefully this provides some
> context to the evolution of this idea of curation.
>
> Best,
> Ruth
>
>
>
>
> "J. Todd Bennett" <stetso...@gmail.com> Jun 15 03:27PM -0400 ^
>
> Amy:
>
> I was really turned on to the concept from Erin's article as well. I've
> always liked the term. It works for me.
>
> In a really great museum exhibit, the curator uses the best content at
> his/her disposal to tell a vivid, real story. I don't think of the dead
> butterflies as much as I do the combination of sensory experiences that
> comes from a carefully chosen and displayed collection of artifacts, written
> word, imagery, audio and video. When these come together in a museum exhibit
> to tell a story of a people or time or place it can be pretty compelling. I
> think the same is true of a website.
>
> I've used that language with clients and it's like a light bulb goes off in
> their heads. Not everyone will think of curation or museums the same way, so
> it's important to make your examples real to the people in the organization.
> I've been able to do this well with higher education clients, particularly
> the faculty who are often the sources of a lot of great content, but not
> necessarily the people you want curating it (or even creating it for that
> matter!)
>
> Todd
>
>
> J. Todd Bennett
> managing partner | decimal152
>
> www.decimal152.com
> www.twitter.com/jtoddb
>
>
>
> James Callan <scare...@gmail.com> Jun 15 01:19PM -0700 ^
>
> Hi, Amy:
>
> I get what you're saying. My sister-in-law, who's an architect, has a
> pet peeve about the term information architect. So far as she's
> concerned, IA is not architecture because it has nothing to do with
> buildings or (physical) structures. She feels like using
> "architecture" in a more figurative sense somehow diminishes her
> career.
>
> While I understand her point, I think she's wrong: I think information
> architecture is a fine term. It's a metaphorical extension of some of
> the ideas behind architecture, true, but that's pretty normal for
> language, and it doesn't diminish the work of "real" architects. And
> the term helps explain what the position does to someone who might not
> have heard it before.
>
> Curation strikes me the same way. Is it the same as museum curation?
> No. Is it close enough to be a natural analogy? Yes. Does it help
> clarify for people what that position does? Yes. Approved!
>
> James
>
>
>
>
> Amy Thibodeau <amy.th...@gmail.com> Jun 15 01:35PM -0700 ^
>
> Thanks for all the great feedback everyone - you've definitely given me
> something to think about and I can't say that I disagree with any of the
> points made. For me there's also a difference between the act of curation
> (pulling disparate ideas together, making meaning and creating opportunities
> for experience) and being a Curator (capital 'C'). In my experience in
> museums, curators (at large institutions) tend to wear one hat and they are
> often seen as arbitrators of culture and taste and, with a few exceptions,
> slightly out of touch with the average gallery visitor. It's often the
> educators and the publishing department that create real meaning and access
> for a general audience by compiling resources and points of access and
> engagement. I love museums and think the curatorial role is crucially
> important; but it tends to happen in a bit of an ivory tower and is driven
> by the academic interests of the person filling the role, which may not
> necessarily be what the community wants or needs.
>
> I think that my problem with the term, coloured by my background, is that it
> can be perceived as too grandiose, old-fashioned, bureaucratic and somewhat
> alienating. As I read your comments and sift through some of the information
> in the various links, I am definitely having second thoughts about it as
> this new appropriation of the term certainly brings with it a wider sense of
> scope and a responsibility to audience that is quite different to that of a
> formal curator role in a museum.
>
> Obviously I haven't properly formed my thoughts on this, but I really
> appreciate all the great points you've made. I'll let you know if and when I
> come up with anything cohesive on this!
>
> Best,
>
> Amy
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Content Strategy" group.
> To post to this group, send email to content...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> contentstrate...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/contentstrategy?hl=en.
>
Trevor Stafford
'Curator' was the product of the 'aggregation' frenzy a few years back, when RSS feeds were the supposed rage and publishers were scrambling to cram as many sources into their web pages as possible. We saw any number of portals, news sites and feed readers spring into being to help people display, sort and evaluate this content.
Turned out the Internet's giant hose needed a nozzle, so the notion of a feed curator was born. The idea at the time would be that curators would screen or hand-pick the best of whatever aggregated content was before them. No editorial responsibility and in most cases no original content production.
I think we've moved away from curation in large part, and, though I admit to using the term with clients, I suspect that it demeans the role that CS can and should play in an organization. It also limits the discipline and by extension our career opportunities.
As Bud says here, we're swinging back to more of a producer's position (executive producer in some cases), and well we should.
Laura Creekmore
past [web content producer, not the TV kind of producer] and THAT
title never felt right to me. I've even been guilty of giving the
title to OTHERS, still not liking it. I did have trouble divorcing it
from my understanding of a TV producer.
I do like curator, for the editorial and nurturing implications, but I
agree that not all content strategists may take a curatorial role.
Many content managers do, though.
Laura Creekmore
la...@creekmoreconsulting.com
615.500.4131
On Jun 15, 5:44 pm, Trevor Stafford <copywry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can answer the producer vs curator question.
>
> 'Curator' was the product of the 'aggregation' frenzy a few years back, when
> RSS feeds were the supposed rage and publishers were scrambling to cram as
> many sources into their web pages as possible. We saw any number of portals,
> news sites and feed readers spring into being to help people display, sort
> and evaluate this content.
>
> Turned out the Internet's giant hose needed a nozzle, so the notion of a
> feed curator was born. The idea at the time would be that curators would
> screen or hand-pick the best of whatever aggregated content was before them.
> No editorial responsibility and in most cases no original content
> production.
>
> I think we've moved away from curation in large part, and, though I admit to
> using the term with clients, I suspect that it demeans the role that CS can
> and should play in an organization. It also limits the discipline and by
> extension our career opportunities.
>
> As Bud says here, we're swinging back to more of a producer's position
> (executive producer in some cases), and well we should.
>
> > Funny, Amy - I was just having a similar conversation about the word
> > "curation" this week. Words cheapen, and of course the internet can
> > speed up that process. My own feeling is that "curator" came about
> > because people began to realize that "editor" wasn't quite the right
> > word for what many web editors do because they so often are not
> > actually editing (nb CJR's recent survey), but procuring or producing
> > content. Procurer doesn't sound so sexy, but curator, with it's high
> > brow connotation, does. Not sure why "producer" isn't used more
> > because it seems the more accurate term.
>
> > I imagine you know this, but MW Unabridged and Oxford Shorter seem to
> > agree - at the moment - that the word curator has nothing to do with
> > how the word is used right now.
>
> > Bud
>
> > Sonnet Media LLC
> > New York, NY
> >http://sonnetmedia.net
> > 212 699-1859
>
> > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:37 PM,
> > > Today's Topic Summary
>
> > > Group:http://groups.google.com/group/contentstrategy/topics
>
> > > Curation and Content Strategy [9 Updates]
>
> > > Topic: Curation and Content Strategy
>
> > > Read Erin Scime's blog :
>
> > > best,
>
> > > alexa o'brien
> > > content strategist
> > > huge inc
>
> > > --
> > >www.alexaobrien.com
>
> > > Hilary Marsh <hilarymarsh...@gmail.com> Jun 15 01:42PM -0500 ^
> > > Hi Amy,
>
> > > As someone working for an organization (and not an agency), "curation" is
> > a
> > > great way to describe the strategic content work we do. Setting
> > priorities
> > > for what content a user sees first -- and resetting them almost daily, as
> > > new content is created by a multitude of publishers -- is not a one-time
> > > effort. Promoting information and adding the context that the
> > organization
> > > often forgets are the two main eleements of value we add.
>
> > > Let me know if you need more info.
>
> > > Best,
>
> > > Hilary
>
> > > Thanks for the link Alexa - will do.
>
> > > Hi Amy,
>
> > > I didn't like the term at first for content or design because it reminded
> > me
> > > of dead butterflies in glass cases. It seemed static, cold, and not that
> > > interactive. However, I'm comfortable with the term now. Compared to
> > > aggregation, curation is a fresh, warm human element.
>
> > > I've used the term with clients, and, with a little explanation, they
> > catch
> > > on to it pretty quickly--to my surprise.
>
> > > Colleen
>
> > > COLLEEN JONES
> > > Principal, Content Science
> > > Chair, CHI*Atlanta - Organizer, Atlanta Content Strategy
> > > T: @leenjones
> > > P: 770-296-0121
>
> > > Ruth Kaufman <ruth.kauf...@gmail.com> Jun 15 11:54AM -0700 ^
> > > Hi, Amy:
>
> > > I get what you're saying. My sister-in-law, who's an architect, has a
> > > pet peeve about the term information architect. So far as she's
> > > concerned, IA is not architecture because it has nothing to do with
> > > buildings or (physical) structures. She feels like using
> > > "architecture" in a more figurative sense somehow diminishes her
> > > career.
>
> > > While I understand her point, I think she's wrong: I think information
> > > architecture is a fine term. It's a metaphorical extension of some of
> > > the ideas behind architecture, true, but that's pretty normal for
> > > language, and it doesn't diminish the work of "real" architects. And
> > > the term helps explain what the position does to someone who might not
> > > have heard it before.
>
> > > Curation strikes me the same way. Is it the same as museum curation?
> > > No. Is it close enough to be a natural analogy? Yes. Does it help
> > > clarify for people what that position does? Yes. Approved!
>
> > > James
>
> > > Amy Thibodeau
>
>
> read more »