[fr] Je suis trop efficace avec un moteur de recherche pour être très emballée par les divers outils qui visent à organiser la masse de contenu à disposition sur le web, en temps réel ou non.
In Paris, I had a sudden flash of insight (during a conversation with somebody, as often). Most services designed to help with content curation don’t immediately appeal to me because I’m not their target audience: I’m too good at using search.
I was trying to figure out why, although I liked the idea behind PearlTrees and SmallRivers (I tried them out both briefly), part of me kept thinking they weren’t really adding anything that we couldn’t already do. Well, maybe not that exactly, but I couldn’t really see the point. For example: “PearlTrees, it’s just bookmarking with pretty visual and social stuff, right?” or “SmallRivers, we already have hyperlinks, don’t we?” — I know this is unfair to both services, and they go beyond that, but somehow, for me, it just didn’t seem worth the effort.
And that’s the key bit: not worth the effort. When I need to find something I’ve seen before, I search for it. I understand how a search engine works (well, way more than your average user, let’s say) and am pretty good at using it. I gave up using bookmarks years ago (today, I barely use delicious anymore — just look at my posting frequency there). I stick things in Evernote and Tumblr because I can search for them easily afterwards. I don’t file my e-mail, or even tag it very well in gmail — I just search when I need a mail. I don’t organize files much on my hard drive either, save for some big drawers like “client xyz”, business, personal, admin — and those are horribly messy.
I search for stuff. And to be honest, now that I’ve discovered Google Web History, I’m not sure what else I could ever ask for. It embodies an old old fantasy of mine: being able to restrict a fulltext search to pages I’ve visited in a certain timeframe. “Damn, where did I put this?” becomes a non-issue when you can use Google search over a subset of the web which contains all the pages you’ve ever loaded up in your browser. (Yeah, privacy issues, certainly.)
What about the social dimension of these curation tools? Well, I’m a blogger. I blog. When I want to share, I put stuff in my blog, or Tumblr. I’m actually starting to like PearlTrees for that, because it is a nice way of collecting and ordering links — but really, I’m not the kind of person who has a lot of patience for that kind of activity. Some people spend time keeping their bookmarks, e-mails, or files in order. I don’t — there are way too many more interesting things for me to spend my time on. So I keep things in a mess, and when I need something out of them, I search.
I think I’m just not a content curator, aside from my low-energy activities like tweeting, tumblring, and blogging.
It doesn’t mean there is no need for content curation, of the live stream or more perennial content like “proper” web pages. But just like some people are bloggers and some aren’t, I think some people are curators and some aren’t.
- Content Curation: Pearltrees, SmallRivers [en] (2009)
- Where Does Tumblr Fit in? [en] (2010)
- Google Alerts Trick to Monitor Website Health [en] (2011)
- Feedly: More Than a Newsreader, Maybe Your Search Engine of Tomorrow? [en] (2009)
- 13.07.2000 – 13.07.2004 [en] (2004)
- Inbox to Zero in no Time [en] (2008)
- Idea: Working as a Freelance Researcher [en] (2010)
- Delicious! A Great Bookmarks Manager [en] (2004)
- Google Identity Dilemma [en] (2009)
- Lijit Feedback [en] (2007)
2 thoughts on “Content Curation: Why I'm Not Your Target Audience [en]”
While you can search for filenames, it seems to me that (at a certain point), you have to have stuff organized into folders because otherwise the filenames are either generic:
Example: screenshot1.jpg, screenshot2.jpg
Or way too long:
I actually don’t have that many files. And I do use some (reasonable) amount of folders, but I don’t worry if my files aren’t perfectly sorted out in those folders. Plus… search is not only on filenames nowadays, thankfully! Longer filenames are better because they contain more meta-data.