Corvillus

This is an interesting Newsweek piece discussing the advent of user contributed content on the Internet from sites such as Digg and Wikipedia. The article claims that user controlled websites such as Digg and Wikipedia cause users to become part of the mob mentality rather than allowing for individual expression, ultimately leading to lowest common denominator content. I’m not sure I agree with this statement. I will agree that for the majority of the users on these sites, that is the case, but only because they don’t actively contribute to the site (and no, front page digging does not count as active contribution because at that point the impact you have on the site is minimal; once a site hits the front page, it’s downhill from there, regardless of the digg count).

The reality of the situation is that the individuals that actively contribute to the sites (on Digg this would be the news submitters and the upcoming story diggers) do have their views heard. They aren’t part of the mob mentality themselves, rather, they ultimately control what the mob will do. You could say they lead the mob. So no, I don’t think that at the top level, the wisdom of the crowds equals the lowest common denominator in content selection. What actually happens is that the people who take the initiative decide what the lowest common denominator will be.

When you think about it, this is no different than any other form of media. On TV, the TV stations, television show writers, news reporters, and news editors decide what the lowest common denominator will be. In the newspaper, the reporters and editors make this decision. In film, the producers make this decision. In music, the record labels make this decision. Ultimately, it’s whoever provides the content that decides what will be popular with the crowds, not the other way around. User controlled websites are a step in the right direction though, because they provide the users with the tools they need to take this control themselves, but I honestly can’t say it surprises me that the vast majority chooses not to use them.

In conclusion, the lowest common denominator is a product of the individual expression of the content providers rather than the wisdom of the crowds who consume it. As such, content of these websites deliver a reflection of the individuals who power it, not the lowest common denominator. Claiming these websites are inferior to traditional media because of this is simply not valid, because traditional media works exactly the same way, there just happens to be a higher barrier of entry in order to be a contributor.

In response to: Levy: Poking a Stick Into The ‘Hive Mind’ - Newsweek Steven Levy - MSNBC.com [via Digg]