<ul><li>Meredith Farkas </li></ul><ul><li>Norwich University </li></ul><ul><li>Readex Digital Institute 2007 </li></ul>Pow...
Web 1.0: Democratized access to information
Web 2.0: Democratized participation
What is social software? My definition: To be defined as social software, a tool must meet at least two of the following c...
User contributions to the web <ul><li>Content </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Photos </li></ul></ul...
Cultural heritage materials online <ul><li>Too much stuff to process by experts </li></ul><ul><li>Insufficient metadata ma...
Tags <ul><li>User-created descriptive metadata </li></ul><ul><li>A tag is usually a single word, but multiple tags can be ...
Many ways to describe... dog brooklyn ice cream factory Ice Cream NY corgi summer girl ice cream LaSalle puppy bad owner H...
Where the tags are
 
 
 
 
Why tags? <ul><li>Lets people make sense of content using their own vocabulary (cinema? movies? film? motion picture?) </l...
Why not? <ul><li>No control </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Multiple terms to describe a single concept </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>N...
Improving tagging
Improving tagging
Personalization <ul><li>People want to collect like items for research, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>People want to remind thems...
Social software features for digital collections <ul><li>Comments </li></ul><ul><li>Tagging </li></ul><ul><li>Personal ann...
Examples: Commenting
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Examples: Tagging
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Personal collections
 
 
 
 
 
Examples: Recommendations
 
Social Networking Features <ul><li>Friending - follow other people’s tags or annotated bibliographies </li></ul><ul><li>Gr...
 
 
 
 
Why do any of this? <ul><li>Allows the user to interact with the resources in a more personal way </li></ul><ul><li>The st...
Issues <ul><li>Moderation </li></ul><ul><li>Differentiating between user content and institutional data </li></ul><ul><li>...
Thanks! <ul><li>Meredith Farkas </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/ </li...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Power to the People: User-generated content in digital collections

3,830 views
3,728 views

Published on

Talk for Readex Digital Institute 2007.

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,830
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
32
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
149
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Power to the People: User-generated content in digital collections

  1. 1. <ul><li>Meredith Farkas </li></ul><ul><li>Norwich University </li></ul><ul><li>Readex Digital Institute 2007 </li></ul>Power to the People User-generated content in digital collections
  2. 2. Web 1.0: Democratized access to information
  3. 3. Web 2.0: Democratized participation
  4. 4. What is social software? My definition: To be defined as social software, a tool must meet at least two of the following conditions: 1. It allows people to communicate, collaborate and build community online 2. It can be syndicated, shared, reused or remixed, or it facilitates syndication 3. It allows people to easily learn from and capitalize on the behavior or knowledge of others
  5. 5. User contributions to the web <ul><li>Content </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Blogs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Photos </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Online community contributions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wikis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Audio and video </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Annotations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Comments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Tags </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ratings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Custom collections </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Cultural heritage materials online <ul><li>Too much stuff to process by experts </li></ul><ul><li>Insufficient metadata makes things un-findable </li></ul><ul><li>Issues of re-findability </li></ul><ul><li>Goal of museums and related institutions - foster connection to historical materials </li></ul><ul><li>Traditional linear exhibits do not translate well online, reflects a single way of looking at/collecting items. </li></ul>
  7. 7. Tags <ul><li>User-created descriptive metadata </li></ul><ul><li>A tag is usually a single word, but multiple tags can be assigned to a specific item </li></ul><ul><li>Brings similar content together </li></ul><ul><li>Makes content more findable </li></ul><ul><li>Folksonomy - system of organizing items through tagging </li></ul>
  8. 8. Many ways to describe... dog brooklyn ice cream factory Ice Cream NY corgi summer girl ice cream LaSalle puppy bad owner How will people search for this?
  9. 9. Where the tags are
  10. 14. Why tags? <ul><li>Lets people make sense of content using their own vocabulary (cinema? movies? film? motion picture?) </li></ul><ul><li>Helps people to re-find content </li></ul><ul><li>Helps people to discover content </li></ul><ul><li>Good solutions for situations where content can’t be formally cataloged </li></ul>
  11. 15. Why not? <ul><li>No control </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Multiple terms to describe a single concept </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No disambiguation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>People can use plural or singular, use dashes or underscores to connect words, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Different levels of specificity </li></ul></ul><ul><li>People tag selfishly (to_read, chapter1, EN101, etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>“ Tagging bulldozes the cost of classification and piles it on the price of discovery.” (Ian Davis of Talis) </li></ul>
  12. 16. Improving tagging
  13. 17. Improving tagging
  14. 18. Personalization <ul><li>People want to collect like items for research, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>People want to remind themselves why they collected each item </li></ul><ul><li>People want to search the collections they’re interested in </li></ul><ul><li>People want recommendations based on their interests </li></ul>
  15. 19. Social software features for digital collections <ul><li>Comments </li></ul><ul><li>Tagging </li></ul><ul><li>Personal annotations </li></ul><ul><li>Personal collections </li></ul><ul><li>Social networking </li></ul>
  16. 20. Examples: Commenting
  17. 29. Examples: Tagging
  18. 38. Personal collections
  19. 44. Examples: Recommendations
  20. 46. Social Networking Features <ul><li>Friending - follow other people’s tags or annotated bibliographies </li></ul><ul><li>Groups - collect items in a single pot </li></ul><ul><li>Profiles - who are these people? </li></ul><ul><li>Discussions - discussion boards on relevant topics </li></ul>
  21. 51. Why do any of this? <ul><li>Allows the user to interact with the resources in a more personal way </li></ul><ul><li>The stories people tell about historical items are as important as any other characteristic </li></ul><ul><li>Tags make items more findable </li></ul><ul><li>Let your users make your materials more findable </li></ul><ul><li>Building community makes your site more sticky </li></ul>
  22. 52. Issues <ul><li>Moderation </li></ul><ul><li>Differentiating between user content and institutional data </li></ul><ul><li>Making it easy to contribute </li></ul><ul><li>Making it appealing to contribute </li></ul><ul><li>No more silos! Making content portable and shareable </li></ul><ul><li>If you build it, will they come? Evaluate your population </li></ul>
  23. 53. Thanks! <ul><li>Meredith Farkas </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>meredith.wolfwater.com/wordpress/ </li></ul><ul><li>Slides and links at http://meredithfarkas.wetpaint.com </li></ul>

×