User generated content and the attention economy
Only a couple of weeks ago I talked about user generated content in the context of the so-called Web2.0. Now we have no less than John Udell explaining why he doesn't like the term 'user generated content' and Robert Scoble agreeing, adding that it is the 'screwing of the long tail':Why does Jon Udell dislike the term "user generated content?" For the same reason I did. When I spoke at Google's Zeitgeist conference last fall I heard all the CEOs and important people speaking of how they were going to make gigantic new profits: user generated content. What is User Generated Content? Well, when you blog. Or add photos to a photo sharing site. Or when you tag some info or Digg it. Or when you leave a comment on a forum. Or, post an ad to Craig's List.
You see, lots of people out there think that you're gonna do all the hard work and donate it to companies so they can put advertising next to it. Only you don't get to keep the money from that advertising, no no no. You don't understand your place in this world, do you?
No, they are gonna take all your content AND take all the money that the advertising generates.
I think they are both wrong. Scare quotes or not, 'user generated content' means exactly what it says: Content on a web site that was generated by users of that web site. And when people choose to use that web site they do so with their eyes open; it is a transaction they enter into willingly! They are trading their 'content' (pictures, words, tags, whatever) for a place to put it.
In this kind of transaction both parties win in a classic arbitrage agreement, a free market where people trade self-expression for a place to express it on!
Take what you are reading right now; I am paying LiveJournal for the rights to put it here (although you can also do so for free, but with fewer options). In other words, there is value in the right to express myself! And why does that have value?
Why do people create open source software? Paint anonymous graffiti with real artistic value? Play guitar at open mike nights? Write fanzines? Self-publish their own books?
Why? Because if we are creative we want to create. If we have something to say we want to be heard.
Some of us are good enough (or lucky enough) that people will pay us for that self-expression, but over time that is going to change as the Internet changes the market for self-expression from a corporate dominated near-monopoly to an attention economy: Because it is so easy for anyone to 'publish' their words, art, or music on the web the barriers to self-expression are lowered nearly to ground level. With the result that a meritocracy of content is created where only the good content gets 'attention', and the rest is largely ignored.
Few will pay in direct dollars to access this content, while those providing it will either pay good money or deal with a 'user generated content' provider for the privilege of providing it. Robert Scoble says this is 'unsustainable', but I say it is the only sustainable model in the Internet age. And, don't worry, the star content-providers will always stand out to the point they can make money from their self-expression somehow, even if they can't make quite as much as before due to all the free competition. However, the fact corporate giants won't be getting quite as big a cut makes up for some of that.
Me? I just want some of your attention. I want to be heard. And, like everyone else, I want to be appreciated. (Remember, money is still the sincerest form of flattery! Maybe I need to put up a PayPal link?)
Hopefully, if you have read this far, you do appreciate my self-expression. Otherwise I just wasted a crapload of your time with my blathering. But then, if you don't like it, you can always point your browser somewhere else...
You see, lots of people out there think that you're gonna do all the hard work and donate it to companies so they can put advertising next to it. Only you don't get to keep the money from that advertising, no no no. You don't understand your place in this world, do you?
No, they are gonna take all your content AND take all the money that the advertising generates.
I think they are both wrong. Scare quotes or not, 'user generated content' means exactly what it says: Content on a web site that was generated by users of that web site. And when people choose to use that web site they do so with their eyes open; it is a transaction they enter into willingly! They are trading their 'content' (pictures, words, tags, whatever) for a place to put it.
In this kind of transaction both parties win in a classic arbitrage agreement, a free market where people trade self-expression for a place to express it on!
Take what you are reading right now; I am paying LiveJournal for the rights to put it here (although you can also do so for free, but with fewer options). In other words, there is value in the right to express myself! And why does that have value?
Why do people create open source software? Paint anonymous graffiti with real artistic value? Play guitar at open mike nights? Write fanzines? Self-publish their own books?
Why? Because if we are creative we want to create. If we have something to say we want to be heard.
Some of us are good enough (or lucky enough) that people will pay us for that self-expression, but over time that is going to change as the Internet changes the market for self-expression from a corporate dominated near-monopoly to an attention economy: Because it is so easy for anyone to 'publish' their words, art, or music on the web the barriers to self-expression are lowered nearly to ground level. With the result that a meritocracy of content is created where only the good content gets 'attention', and the rest is largely ignored.
Few will pay in direct dollars to access this content, while those providing it will either pay good money or deal with a 'user generated content' provider for the privilege of providing it. Robert Scoble says this is 'unsustainable', but I say it is the only sustainable model in the Internet age. And, don't worry, the star content-providers will always stand out to the point they can make money from their self-expression somehow, even if they can't make quite as much as before due to all the free competition. However, the fact corporate giants won't be getting quite as big a cut makes up for some of that.
Me? I just want some of your attention. I want to be heard. And, like everyone else, I want to be appreciated. (Remember, money is still the sincerest form of flattery! Maybe I need to put up a PayPal link?)
Hopefully, if you have read this far, you do appreciate my self-expression. Otherwise I just wasted a crapload of your time with my blathering. But then, if you don't like it, you can always point your browser somewhere else...