User-Generated Content
Refers to the increasingly widespread capability for "users" to generate and share their own content, using collaborative publishing platforms like You Tube, rather than consume production from the mass media.
It is used mostly in the field of media, while Crowdsourcing is used as a specific strategy to create innovation and value in commercial projects.
See the related entry on the User-Generated Ecosystem
Critics suggest the whole concept has a corporate bias and propose the alternative of Community-Curated Works
Discussion
a critique of the concept of User
1.
By Scott Carp at http://www.blogherald.com/2006/12/27/death-of-the-user/
"In most cases “users” in Media 2.0 are defined as the “people formerly known as the audience” or the “users” of Web 2.0 applications, including social networking sites like MySpace. The problem is that “users” are defined in opposition to “publishers” — as if people who create “blogs” are still in some lesser, “other” category, below and apart from traditional publishers like, uh, Yahoo.
Well, no. There is a revolution in media because people who create blogs and MySpace pages ARE publishers, and more importantly, they are now on equal footing with the “big,” “traditional” publishers. There has been a leveling of the playing field that renders largely meaningless the distinction between “users” and “publishers” — we’re all publishers now, and we’re all competing for the finite pie of attention. The problem is that the discourse on trends in online media still clings to the language of “us” and “them,” when it is all about the breakdown of that distinction.
Despite my objection to his use of “users,” Fred’s observation about trends in page views is an important one — smaller publishers, i.e. NOT USERS, do likely account for an increasing percentage of all page views. But I think it’s essential to recognize that the difference here is one of SCALE, not KIND. Traditional publishers who use cumbersome, out-dated multi-million dollar content management systems to publish on the web are also “users” of these over-priced systems, but they are publishers first.
It’s time we start adjusting our taxonomy to recognize that the tools do not define the activity or the output or the people doing it. There are large publishers and small publishers. There are people who publish for friends and family, and people who publish for professional colleagues, and people who publish for a (relatively) broad consumer audience. The revolution is that ANYONE can publish to the network and that anyone can leverage the power of the network.
That said, there is one respect in which some publishers are still “users” — when you publish to a platform like MySpace or YouTube, you cede control over the monetization of your publication. As I discussed in my last column, making money is certainly not the objective of everyone who publishes online. But regardless of financial motives, we are all seeking our share of attention — and anyone who publishes anything online is competing for their share.
So it’s time to throw off the mantle of “user” and be proud publishers — otherwise we’re going to get “used.”
2.
User:
“Treat me as a person, not some user, consumer, addict, shallow person defined by your brand or some other form of low life.” — Rishad Tobaccowala
The problem is that the discourse on trends in online media still clings to the language of “us” publishers and “them,” users when it is all about the breakdown of that distinction.
— Death of the User
“User” is software-speak from a block diagram. I’m not just someone who you let create an account on your website." (http://brianna.modernthings.org/article/123/an-alternative-term-for-user-generated-content)
3.
"Using ‘content’ as a noun to describe written and other works of authorship is worth avoiding. That usage adopts a specific attitude towards those works: that they are an interchangeable commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it treats the works themselves with disrespect."
— Richard Stallman [1]
Ten Conditions for successfull UGC
From the OhMyNews CEO at http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=&no=347268&rel_no=1&back_url= :
"Credibility
To deliver correct and non-manipulated facts. Reporters should possess clear motives on contents before the audience.
To be free from copy-right infringements. Contents must be produced by reporters by themselves and not copied from somewhere else without permission.
Responsibility
To create contents with considerations on the needs of the audience and news sources and not only based on the own needs of reporters.
To contribute to improving the quality of the media, which reporters work with, by taking account of the nature of the media (platforms).
Influence
To produce contents recommendable to others. Stories should be worthwhile sharing with others rather than personal diaries.
To ensure the attention of the critical mass who are able to build public opinions. The media (platforms) should become supporters in securing a good number of the audience for valuable contents.
To make repercussions not only in the cyber world but also in real life.
To generate positive impact on the public spheres. Contents helping to resolve issues would be more desirable than simple criticism and raising issues only.
Sustainability
To win recognitions as useful contents among the audience and utilize the recognitions as a foundation for sustainable production of contents.
More desirably, to become marketable and contribute to establishing good and sound business models for the media." (http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?menu=&no=347268&rel_no=1&back_url=)
More Information
Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-generated_content
Overview of 2006 UGC developments in the Guardian, at http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/page/0,,1939196,00.html
John Batelle introduces the different logic of packaged media vs. conversational media, at http://battellemedia.com/archives/003160.php
See the related concept of Crowdsourcing