Overwhelmed by a conversation about being overwhelmed.
I have a column in Tweetdeck devoted to all mentions of “curation”. Added shortly before I started searching for a working definition of curation, it was the perfect solution to the problem of keeping up with all the latest murmurings on a topic that continues to fascinate me. Content on the subject was being published at a digestible pace, and it seemed we all had time to reflect, analyze and, if we cared to do so, publish our own thoughts, either in comments or on our blogs. Of course, there has always been noise—automated, RSS-fed or query-driven bots aren’t easy to filter out, and this is the path that many feel will lead to success in social media. Nor are the digital brown-nosers, retweeting verbatim the words of their chosen gurus, without adding anything at all of value. But even with these annoyances, the curation conversation stream, it seems in retrospect, was relatively clear, lively and exciting.
This week, I realized that I’m no longer able to follow and participate as easily as just a few months ago. Indeed, since my first curation-related post on June 11th of this year, 3,996 additional posts, whose titles contain the phrase “curation”, have been published on blogs across the social web.

From this Neil Perkin piece, we get a quote by Google CEO Eric Schmidt:
“Between the dawn of civilisation and 2003, five exabytes of information were created. In the last two days, five exabytes of information have been created, and that rate is accelerating”.
“Exaflood” is a term coined by Brett Swanson, and it’s an interesting way to imagine what we’re up against, from both the infrastructural and intellectual perspectives.

A familiar feeling sets in—that of being overwhelmed by possibilities.
Ask anyone that truly knows me: I have too many ideas for my own good. These ideas are just as often great as they are a distraction from other ideas, more worthy of my devotion. But singular devotion has never been fully possible for me, the way that you’ll meet someone every so often that tells you they knew they wanted to be a firefighter since they were 6 years old—and followed through with this dream to its fruition. Maybe this condition is merely symptomatic of my lifelong struggle with Attention Deficit Disorder, but I don’t think that’s the whole story. I’m probably just more predisposed to being overwhelmed in this way, and my ADD exacerbates it to the point that I spread myself far too thin, putting in a little work here, a little development there, some planning for this and that, while ultimately getting nowhere with anything. My two biggest achievements thus far in life (degree from UT and Social Media Manager job at Bazaarvoice) came through a willing, conscious effort to maintain a sustained focus that is uncomfortably contrary to my nature.
That itch feels familiar... (A panel from "Calliope", written by Neil Gaiman and illustrated by Kelley Jones & Malcolm Jones III)
In Neil Gaiman’s story, “Calliope”, his Sandman character casts a deeply-debilitating spell on a human villain: that of an unyielding, constant barrage of good ideas. Without the ability to execute on them, our villain feels bludgeoned by them. To a far lesser extent, I can identify. Before seeing a thought through to its resolution or transformation into something of value, I tend to encounter another “shiny” thought and pursue it with the intellectual excitement I once had for the thought I now abandon. People without ADD encounter this, too. In a sense, social media has led us here, to a place where we all feel overwhelmed to various degrees. Perhaps others don’t become quite as overwhelmed, but none of us possess the mental resources to categorize and process the swirling mix of ideas that spins around us nearly every time we interact via social media. It’s impossible.
One of the reasons we create, more than in any other time in history, is because we have been given access through technology to millions upon millions of others—a potential audience that didn’t and couldn’t exist before the Web and social media. So now that our creative endeavors don’t have to remain our little secret; now that we can almost guarantee that our work will be seen, we are driven to create it at a feverish tempo, and driven to share it with as many people as we’re able. Similarly, now that we have access to this fire hose of information that contains, somewhere in the stream, the stuff we’re really after, we become fixated. After awhile, we become overwhelmed.
Curation maximizes cognitive efficiency.
Our typical style of consumption:
- We turn on the fire hose (Twitter, Alltop, whatever)
- We adjust the signal (try to create streams more suited to our tastes, make columns in our Twitter clients)
- We simultaneously absorb and refine—but it’s still too much
The ultimate promise of curation:
- We are delivered only the content that meets our predefined criteria (and it’s enough to digest without being overwhelmed)
We’re not there yet.
That much is obvious. But I’m seeing some promising, if scattered, developments that indicate we’re well on our way.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I see something shiny I simply must attend to.
Bonus! Ian’s latest recommended reading on content curation:
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Any Neil Gaiman reference gets a big thumbs up from me…
There is a difference between the Sandman character and the average social media user: at least he knew he was getting good ideas. There are tools, applications, etc. to filter the streams and try to limit to the pertinent stuff that we are looking for but, depending on your area of interest, you’ll probably still be overwhelmed.
Some areas like, say, Restoration literature, just do not naturally generate the same amount of content of, say: technology and Internet marketing news. So the area itself is a factor.
But I think you’re right. The only two answers are curation… or extreme segmentation.
Mark Dykeman´s last blog ..Maintaining Your Creative Edge When Life Takes Over
This is one of the most time-consuming parts of social media participation. In the current “social marketplace for ideas”, it has high value because we haven’t fully developed automated ways of doing this that come anywhere close to what a human can do.
In theory, though, this seems like the ideal opportunity for technology. There are certainly semantic analysis tools that are capable of doing the kind of analysis required, but they haven’t been made available to the general public. Companies like Radian 6, PostRank, etc., are doing the heavy lifting for brands, but (in my view) they remain short-sighted in terms of serving the individual content curator. Others like Popego have tried and not yet succeeded.
In short, many have tried to come up with ways to provide filtered, interesting information on a particular topic. What none (that I know of) are doing is providing a tool for you to implement your own rules regarding frequency, sources, etc.
In the meantime, this is one piece of the social media puzzle that can be easily outsourced to low-cost labor. It doesn’t take a genius, or a native English speaker, to find, say, “articles and posts about content curation that are longer than a couple of hundred words and include some original thought — not just links to other stuff”. Or “funny tweets about LinkedIn”. Or “news stories about e-book trends and statistics”. Google alerts and Twitter searches can’t filter that fine. Neither can Yahoo Pipes. But a $10/hr VA in India with a Master’s in English can.
It’s one of the best recommendations for outsourcing a piece of the social media puzzle. Define your rules and have someone who works while you’re asleep email you a pick-list every morning. Or better yet, have them just create bookmarks for you in delicious, and you can then choose which ones you want to share on other platforms.
You can get there, now — you just have to use a combination of people and technology…for now.
Scott Allen´s last blog ..What Google Really Thinks About Social Media
@Mark-
You identify the other extreme: A paucity of content about one’s interests. This can be equally, if not more, frustrating. And there are tools, to be sure. But none that really excite me.
@Scott-
I’m underwhelmed by semantic analysis, and I’ve seen a lot of it from many different vendors. Generally inaccurate to the point of being comical. Outsourcing is an interesting angle for this; I think you’re right and that it would work. But it will most likely take a lot of trial runs with different curators. Besides, that’s what interns are for
At the same time, I’m not sure there is a genuine, articulated market need for curation at this point–it doesn’t seem like many people or firms are willing to pay for even the best content or curation tools. This may be why vendors have been generally slow and unsuccessful at filling that space. Or they may well fill it, but profiting off it is a far more challenging enterprise.
What an insightful article. I love how you break down the value of curation, or is it the promise? Some might call it filtering but that’s different. One of the inherent values in social media is the curative nature of the environment. I get to choose who curates for me. I find the voices and filters that align to my purpose and they find me. We curate for each other.
Check out our recent blog post on the topic: http://clp.ly/11aqx
Thank you for your thoughtful approach on this fascinating topic.
@Mary-
Both the value AND the promise–also the risks. Finding the right curators is, as you mention, a big part of the process.
Best of luck doing so!
Ian Greenleigh´s last blog ..Curation- attention deficit and the exaflood