Curation & Copyright

Another week in the books, another tool added to the Web 2.0 toolbox. I signed up to try several tools this week: Pearltrees, Diigo, Wakelet, Pinterest (okay, I was already signed up for Pinterest) but as in previous weeks, this was just barely scratching the surface of what is out there. I did not immediately take to Diigo or Wakelet; perhaps I didn’t give them enough time to win me over. Waklet’s interface seemed rigid to me and the process for adding items to a collection was clunky and limited. Diigo I think has potential with the ability to search tags and the suite of tools available to add content through the Google Chrome browser extension was impressive, but the interface was cluttered making it difficult to use. I’m sure given more than a few days of playing with these tools their better features would shine and their limitations would feel, well, less limiting.

As I mentioned in my last post, there are tons of tools out there that are trying to solve the problem of information glut. I think two quotes from Wakelet’s about page sum up the current predicament rather well:

"The web is filled with disconnected pieces of information and it’s growing all the time."

"Perfectly good content gets buried in no time at all."

It is impossible to keep pace with the amount of information generated online every day; heck, even every minute presents an insurmountable mountain of stuff that we may never even see. Social bookmarking and digital content curation tools are two ways that we can harness the power of social networking to tackle this problem. Even with these tools, there is no way to see everything, but we have a better chance of seeing the right things, the things that are important to us.

What I found interesting from the article on Diigo use in an online graduate-level class was the sort of trickle-down effect of the curated content (Im & Dennen, 2013). The knowledge didn’t just stay within that group of students but rather spread to others that were connected to those students and presumably to others connected beyond that. The act of collecting, aggregating and cultivating the disconnected pieces of information on the Internet greatly extends the reach of this information as it piggybacks on the network of connections between users.

The other issue we dealt with this week was intellectual property and copyright. Kirby Ferguson had a very convincing argument for why he believes everything is a remix and there is no doubt that both the volume of content available on the Internet and the ease of appropriating it has significantly complicated these ideas. Social media is built on a foundation of sharing, so I was curious about the fate of this continuous stream of content. Do we still own it or are we giving up our rights to it when we click post? Turns out, buried in those terms of service agreements that 99.9% of people blindly accept without so much as a second thought, you still own the content you post on social media; but...by using the service you are granting Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or whoever pretty much carte blanche to use your content without compensation.

In her article titled "User Data on the Social Web: Authorship, Agency, and Appropriation," Jessica Reyman (2013) draws an important distinction between content and data and while you may own your content, social media companies make a fierce claim over ownership of your data. Some may ask what’s the difference? Data includes a wide range of information like status updates, friends and groups you belong to, the things you like, your browsing history and information (metadata) embedded in the material you upload. Most of this stuff is invisible to the end user and that’s the point Reyman is making. People may not be fully cognizant of what data they are implicitly agreeing to give up and more importantly, how that data will be used. This data appropriation by social media companies is viewed as an acceptable cost for the privilege of using the platform.

Reyman cites examples of how Facebook mis-appropriated this data in ways that were unexpected and certainly not welcomed by users and resulted in considerable outrage. The problem I see as social media continues to grow is that users are unable to give their informed consent to these data use practices. Technical settings in many of these applications give the appearance that users are in control of their data, but are they really? Do they know and understand the implications of turning a setting on or off? I would say that most people don’t and the majority of people trust that the default settings will be adequate and provide them with an appropriate level of security and protection. But whose interests are those default settings designed for? The user or the company?

In many ways, the Internet is still the Wild West, with new technologies emerging every day that require us to renegotiate how we interact with this evolving medium. Social media is the current trend in this evolution and with it comes valid concerns over the ownership and use of our content and data. As digital citizens, we need to be aware of these issues and be active voices in the discussion to ensure a fair and balanced distribution of rights.


References:

Im, T. & Dennen, V. P. (2013). Building a collaborative knowledge base in Diigo: How links, tags, and comments support learning. In T. Bastiens, & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (ELEARN) (pp. 794-797). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Reyman, J. (2013). User data on the social web: Authorship, agency, and appropriation. College English, 75(5), 513-533.

Pearltrees: One answer to the question: What to do with all this content?

The tools we are exploring this week are all about digital curation. This got me thinking about what it means to curate and what purpose it serves. What popped into my head was the good old top 10 list. Top 10 lists have been a staple of late night comedy shows and is one of the bits that David Letterman is most well known for from his days as the host of the Late Show. But they show up lots of places covering all manner of subjects from the mundane to the bizarre. Everyone loves a good top 10 list. Why? Because top 10 lists allow us to avoid weeding through all the mediocre and sub-par contenders and skip right to the best of the best, the creme de la creme.

Curation represents value added. The investment of time and effort to cultivate not just a random assortment of things but a carefully filtered collection of relevant material.

One of the obvious benefits of curation is organization. I admit I am not very organized when it comes to the things I find online. My Google Chrome bookmarks bar is overrun with things I’ve come across and thought, “Hmm, this is interesting, I should probably save this so I can get back to it again in the future.” And so it gets added to the long list of other finds. I tried to clean things up a bit by adding folders, but that just seems to add and additional layer to dig through to find what I’m looking for. The crux of the problem is that my current system relies on my ability to 1. remember that I saved something and 2. recall what I named the bookmark. These are big assumptions. Some websites incorporate an icon, which can makes it easier to identify what it is at a glance. But other bookmarks leave me scratching my head wondering, “Why did I need to hang on to this?”

There are many, many tools out there that aim to solve this problem of content management. Shirley Williams used Listly to curate a collection of 55 tools used to curate social web content (ironically, Listly is listed as #2, though I don’t think there is any ranking implied in the order). I decided to go with #15 on Shirley’s list and set out to see what Pearltrees had to offer.

When I first went to check out this digital curation tool, I thought it was named peartrees, so I was expecting to see a lot of pear icons. Only when I was signing up for an account did I notice the letter “L” in the name. After this discovery it made a lot more sense to me. Pearls of wisdom + Tree of knowledge = Pearltrees. I don’t know if this is what the creators had in mind, but I think it works.

Pearltrees lets you create collections of web pages, files, photos, videos, notes, etc. on any topic you’re interested in. Rather than try and explain it in words, I recommend you check out the quick introduction video here. The free version gives you 1GB of storage space, which seems adequate, since you are not really storing the content on your account but rather storing the link to the content hosted somewhere else on the Internet. Kind of like how the IT department always tells you that you shouldn’t save all of your files to you computer desktop, but shortcuts are perfectly fine!

The Good

An essential part of any good curated collection is presentation. Why go through the time and trouble of gathering all of these pearls from the four corners of the web if in the end it looks like crap. Pearltrees has a sleek user interface that is reminiscent of the album cover view in Apple’s iTunes with file tree navigation in the left panel and a tile grid of all the items in the main window. Customizable backgrounds to match the theme of each collection is a nice touch. In the free version, the program automatically assigns an image to each tile based on the content it holds; you can customize these images with a premium (paid subscription) account. You can drag and drop items making it easy to rearrange them in the desired order. And in an apparent nod to the early days of Apple’s graphical user interface, you can get rid of a pearl by dragging it to the trash can. Another nice feature of Pearltrees is that you are able to nest collections, that is you can have collections within collections. This allows you drill down into specific aspects of a larger topic while still keeping everything neatly organized.

But beyond the shiny interface, where Pearltrees really shines is in its sharing and collaboration capabilities. There are three icons at the top of a collection for “team-up” “share” and “related collections.”

Screenshot of sharing and collaboration features

Using an e-mail address or your Gmail or Yahoo contacts, you can invite members to collaborate on your collection. There are nine different ways to share a collection with others to view including Facebook, Twitter and my personal favorite, an auto-generated QR code. Here is the code for the collection I created on copyright. Apple devices running iOS 11 can read QR codes with the camera if enabled, otherwise a dedicated QR reader is necessary.

Copyright collection QR code

Finally, related collections allows you view the public collections of others that are similar to your own. There is much more content out there than any one person can cull through and this feature lets you take advantage of those value added efforts of others by either copying pearls to your collection, or adding entire collections that appeal to you and subscribing to receive real-time updates.

The Bad

One of the ways Pearltrees allows you to add items to your collection is by sending an email to add@pearltrees.com from the email account you signed up with. This has the potential to be a real time-saver as you can automatically file a pearl by designating the appropriate collection in the subject line using a hashtag. If you plan to use this feature you'll want to keep your collection titles short and intuitive. Unfortunately, the reality of this feature left something to be desired. In my test it took nearly 10 minutes from sending a simple text e-mail before receiving the reply that it had been added to my dropzone and was available to add to a collection. If you like to batch curate this may not be a problem, but if you prefer to organize in real-time the wait could be a problem.

The other issue that I ran into was the lack of annotation. In the free version you can comment on a pearl but these are stored external to the actual content. Only in the premium version can you actually edit the content of the pearl and add in annotations. This is where you can add extra value by highlighting what’s important and articulating why it’s being saved or perhaps only a piece of it is relevant to the collection topic. Unfortunately this feature (among others) will cost you $4.99/month ($4.49/month for teachers). This is perhaps the biggest downside of this tool; however, with a premium subscription you get the ability to create private collections as well as remove ads. With so many tools available these days for digital content curation, chances are you can find one that will let you annotate for free.

Overall, I liked what Pearltrees had to offer with its collaboration and related collections search features. The interface was intuitive and adding pearls was relatively painless. The lack of annotations in the free version were a strike against it as well as the recurring subscription costs for premium features. Have you tried Pearltrees? If so, feel free to share your experience by leaving a comment.