The web 2.0 movement may have introduced the idea of user generated content however this content in and of itself is only worth marginally as much as other forms of content. Just as design by committee results with watered down concepts with little impact, crowd sourced content does the same just on a much larger level. In my opinion user submitted content is not the democracy that so many people believe it to be, I would consider it to be more of an anarchy. Without a creative visionary (dictator) to at least foster and lead the environment it is sure to fail.
WHY A DICTATOR?
While dictatorships may not be the most successful method of governance, they have been extremely successful within companies and publications. For example consider how Steve Jobs runs Apple. While he may be known for pushing his employees too far, he also is known for creating some of the most revolutionary products ever designed. Why is this? It is because he meticulously oversees every aspect of the project. In the case of publications you could consider the editor to be the dictator. Applying the idea of an editor to any online publication is exactly the same. By maintaining the overall message of the site through closely watched control a sites content maintains its quality and relevance to the overall topic.
EXAMPLES OF THE SHORTCOMINGS OF USER SUBMITTED CONTENT
I can think of three reasons why a focused dictator (not overbearing or corrupt) is important and why social sites will fail if left to their own devices.
Monetization
Every effort that people devote time towards has to generate value at some point. That value doesn’t specifically have to be money but monetization is a great example of how community-based sites are failing to meet the advertising potential of their editor controlled peers. Anyone who follows the tech industry is very aware of the fact that sites like facebook, myspace, and YouTube have struggled to generate substantial advertising dollars. Take this article on epicenter blog for example, which states that YouTube may begin employing even more annoying ads in an attempt to reach its users.
Another problem these sites face in regards to monetization is the content that they share. Advertisers who are unwilling to risk the possibility of a tarnished brand name are afraid to place their ads next to content that is potentially risqué. No advertiser of wholesome family products will ever want to be advertising next to some college kid’s “shaming” photos.
Group Think
Users of social news sites know this all to well. Content submitted that becomes popular creates trends which in turn create countless spoofs, parodies, copies and even blatant rip offs. This is limited to social news sites either, I wrote earlier how this same thing happens with web design inspiration sites. The droves of similar content to these sites outpace the original content and in turn hide the true gems hidden within the sites that would probably benefit a site to showcase.
Vocal Minorities
Vocal groups of minority users tend to gain popularity within these types of sites. If these users are not properly addressed they have a way of making a non-issue a huge problem. These users typically are upset about features or services that do not relate to the core audience, and if given there own way would probably sabotage the site. A great example of this can be found in this article by the founder of colourLovers who learned this lesson both in volunteer run organizations and on the web. A similar example in the physical world would be the early reviews of the macbook air circulating the web. The complaints being made at the time were contradictory to the goal of the device, and if listened to could have hindered the success the device found.
Creativity comes from vision, and unfocused submissions / writing does not create vision. Editors just may be finding their role expand as the web is surely in need of their services. I would love to hear an editor’s opinion or one of someone who runs a completely community run site. If that is you, or you just want to let me know your opinion on the subject, please post it below.
July 10th, 2008 at 9:34 am
Is it irony that I got to this page from a link from a Web 2.0 Social Media News site (DesignFloat)?
July 10th, 2008 at 11:17 am
While Web 2.0 is certainly not pure democracy, it is anything but an anarchy. In fact you could make the case that dictators have never lost their supreme voices, but now the crowd over which they lord now has microphones, recording all sorts of chatter, some of which is nothing more, as you say, than group think and sound-offs. You probably shouldn’t equate dictatorship with “creative vision” (unless you happen to a fascist). Creative vision and focus are of course increasingly important with the explosion of content. Editors and publishers have always had to shape content, and seldom have they or do they work in isolation. They must hold communal values or they would not be able to collaborate with one another or appeal to their markets, regardless of the management styles they prefer.
July 10th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Dictator brings the context of negativity, however I am not using it in that way. I am just saying that shaping these communities must be a necessity and there is a benefit to be had from maintaining control.
I am not saying to sensor content, just that in the long run we may see the traditional content is more sustainable. If not closely controlled user submitted content can easily become endless spam. Someone at some level must monitor these things…
July 11th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
You know, it’s amazing how you’ve been able to put into writing what I’ve been feeling for some time now. All the hoopla about “Facebook strategies” and social network this and that is — in my very biased opinion — nearly pointless without some effort to reign in the random and frequently uninsightful commentary and contributions of the masses.
Go ahead and give me a dope-slap, but in my experience, the type of “dictatorship” you’re alluding to seems quite reasonable and, I dare say, even desirable.
Now if we could only find a better word to replace “dictator” and make it sound more palatable. How about Czar?
Keep up the good work!
WebGyver’s latest post: Free T-shirt for Computer Geeks
July 16th, 2008 at 11:18 am
Except for of course wikipedia =D
August 3rd, 2008 at 6:21 am
Thanks !