through the screen doors of discretion

Posts tagged with 'curation'.


Miss our webinar on Tumblr engagement? No worries! We’ve got it here. 

In this recording, Kenyatta Cheese, Co-Founder of Everybody at Once, and Jenn Deering Davis, Co-Founder of Union Metrics, talk about Tumblr, brands and how (and why) to foster engagement on the platform. They also discuss what goes into a successful Tumblr campaign, how to measure engagement, improve your content— and more.


Curious about the presenters? 

Kenyatta is part of Everybody at Once, a company working on audience development and social strategy for media, entertainment, and sports. You may have seen his work on the very popular Doctor Who Tumblr for BBC America.

Jenn is co-founder and Chief Customer Officer of Union Metrics, the company that makes Tumblr’s preferred analytics application. Jenn holds a PhD in Organizational Communication & Technology from UT Austin.


Get a chance to watch and listen? What did you think?

Kenyatta is hella smart. This is full of beautiful points and ooh, the reblog tree. I have been talking about creating long conversations for the past few years, partly because I work with groups that have a content archive and it’s more interesting (even in news) to think about content having a *contexted* future life beyond that day, that hour, that initial posting. Worth a listen and watch to the whole thing. 

(via kenyatta)

      Just North of Something Important: Official position


Other people have disagreed with the standards proposed i.e. The Curator’s Code because who cares about giving credit, lighten up already, sometimes making many good points in the process about the link economy etc. To which I would maybe just add that the impression I got is that looking at issues of credit and attribution is only the first step and there will be efforts made to move on to some of the many other issues that obviously exist, which are probably more important anyway:

  • What is an ethically-aggregated link (summary + link + joke), and what is rewriting (“hey, is this something they came up with, I can’t tell?”)?
  • What duty do headline writers have to the original article not to misrepresent what they’re saying?
  • Under what circumstances should you be expected to add additional info to a story you’re linking to, and if you do, what additional rights do you gain?
  • What does good aggregation look like, because there is such a thing, and it is great!
  • When is it OK to just throw something up there to get hits even though it has nothing to do with your other content or core mission?

This is important, I think, because web media is still in its infancy and fighting for legitimacy; indeed, the general drift of online publications’ strategies these days seems to be toward the greater respectability of longform, magazine-y, Awl-ish reported and/or original content. Print outlets steal from each other all the time, sure, so it’s not like we need to get crazy here, but I mean we can all agree that shitty aggregation is just tacky and unpleasant and cheapens us all, right? There will always be tasteless media, but the problem on the web is that the tasteless publications are in the same class as the tasteful ones; sometimes they’re subsidiaries of the tasteful ones, carried in the sidebar or as related links at the bottom of stories. That makes us all look like penny-ante crap merchants, and fuck it,I expect a fawning PBS documentary on all of us when we’re 75. Either the shitty aggregation needs to stop or we need to make it clear that the shitty aggregators - the see-what-sticksers, the firehosers, the desperate timesers - are a whole different thing, very much not-us. Because without the prestige, all we’re left with is $12 a post and a distressingly intimate knowledge of the contours of our own apartments.

      Google News gets a new human touch, launching publisher-curated Editors’ Picks as a standing section - Megan Garber


via Nieman Journalism Lab

When Google News launched in 2002, it did so with some declarations: “This page was generated entirely by computer algorithms without human editors.” And: “No humans were harmed or even used in the creation of this page.”

That core approach — computerized curation, algorithmic authority, NoMo sapiens — has served Google News well in the nearly-a-decade it’s been around, providing users with the multifaceted view of human events that is the news site’s hallmark. (Not to mention a reach that, Google News claims, sends over 1 billion clicks a month to news publishers worldwide.)

But the thing about humans is that, occasionally, they’re helpful to have around. Especially when it comes to the increasingly difficult task that is keeping track of the world as it twists and turns. Which is why, starting today, Google News is introducing a new section to its U.S. edition: Editors’ Picks, a display of original content that journalists (human ones!) have selected as editorial highlights from their publications.

Yet another algorithm-based curation tool goes toward human curation, like Techmeme, and Tumblr Explore.

It’s almost like, um, human curation is trending.