The Chart Is a Lonely Hunter: The Narrative Eros of the Infographic | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Kodak Moment—Unleashed from Scarcity, Editing Becomes More Important
The Scholarly Kitchen • February 9, 2012
Making good choices. As digital technology breaks down the physical barriers that once limited our creative output, the need for good editing skills is imperative. Check out this reflection on the burden of abundance.
Kent Anderson explores scarcity and abundance in the context of photography, and then considers some parallels in scholarly communication. In the era of film photography, the supply of photos was limited by the physical difficulties in producing them—film had to be loaded into the camera by hand, accidental exposures were common, only a limited number of exposures were available for use at a given time, etc. As a result, the supply of photos was relatively scarce. In the digital era, these constraints on supply have disappeared: a digital camera can store hundreds of photos, mistakes or frivolous photos can be easily deleted, and so on. Because of this, the supply of photos is now relatively abundant. But that doesn't mean we want to share all of this abundance with others; instead, the burden of editing increases as we filter down this abundance of photos to identify the subset that are of highest quality and reflect how we wish to present ourselves to others. Anderson draws a parallel between this and similar trends in scholarly communication, where digital technologies and new publishing models such as Open Access have expanded the opportunity to share scholarly work. But this new abundance in scholarly communication reinforces the need for reliable, trusted editing that identifies high quality work, while filtering out work that does not meet minimum standards. In an age of digital abundance, the value of editing has only increased. ( Lavoie)
Cutting Through the Clutter—Curation and the New 3 Rs of Content
Change the Game • February 5, 2012
Searching for the signal. In an age of Too Much Information, business consultant Jim Love invokes the challenge posed by Sturgeon's Law: "90% of everything is crap." The problem is finding the 10% that's worthwhile, and our automated filtering mechanisms are not yet up to the task.
Using "curation" for what I would call filtering, the 3 Rs of content curation are "reduced, relevant and reliable." Jim Love points out that not only is 90% of everything crap, but there's a whole lot more of it now than when Sturgeon coined the phrase. He is optimistic that content filters that have a rudimentary understanding of the material and are able to learn from your behavior will be able to filter out most of what you don't want, much like spam filters now filter our e-mail. And he has a couple of examples where these seem to help.
Maybe this is true now in limited domains, but my guess is that no matter how imperfect our current methods of curation are, general purpose content filters are still more dream than reality. ( Hickey)
Above the Fold Quiz
According to an item in this week's News and Views section, what are two converging trends driving foundational shifts in libraries of the 21st century?
| | | |||
OCLC Research Library Partnership Briefing OCLC Research Library Partnership Session at the EMEA Regional Council Meeting OCLC Research SHARES Meeting Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives and Musems Webinar #sm4LAMs Libraries Rebound: Embracing Mission and Maximizing Impact
| ||||
| | |