Read more of this story at Slashdot.
Feeds
359696 items (189 unread) in 18 feeds
News_Media
(44 unread)
-
Newsvine (8 unread)
-
Propeller
-
Reddit (11 unread)
-
SEM
(62 unread)
-
WebProNews (62 unread)
Social_Networking
(3 unread)
-
Mashable
(3 unread)
Technology
(80 unread)
-
Ars Technica
-
Boing Boing (7 unread)
-
Digg (12 unread)
-
-
Engadget (4 unread)
-
Gizmodo (14 unread)
-
Read/WriteWeb
-
Slashdot (3 unread)
-
Tech Blog
-
TechCrunch
-
Techmeme
-
Wired Technology
Slashdot
-
User-Generated Content Vs. Experts
Posted: March 8th, 2008, 9:13am by Soulskill
Jay points out a Newsweek piece which suggests that the era of user-generated content is going to change in favor of fact-checking and more rigorous standards. The author points to Google's Knol and the "people-powered" search engine Mahalo as examples of the demand for more accurate information sharing. Quoting: "User-generated sites like Wikipedia, for all the stuff they get right, still find themselves in frequent dust-ups over inaccuracies, while community-posting boards like Craigslist have never been able to keep out scammers and frauds. Beyond performance, a series of miniscandals has called the whole "bring your own content" ethic into question. Last summer researchers in Palo Alto, Calif., uncovered secret elitism at Wikipedia when they found that 1 percent of the reference site's users make more than 50 percent of its edits. Perhaps more notoriously, four years ago a computer glitch revealed that Amazon.com's customer-written book reviews are often written by the book's author or a shill for the publisher. 'The wisdom of the crowds has peaked,' says Calacanis. 'Web 3.0 is taking what we've built in Web 2.0--the wisdom of the crowds--and putting an editorial layer on it of truly talented, compensated people to make the product more trusted and refined.'"