Steven Hodson has an awesomesauce post on how bloggers are becoming news anchors in their own way. While he uses the term "gatekeepers", Frederic of The Last Podcast prefers "filters (but not gatekeepers)". Why the change in terms? Frederic notes:
However, our readers can get their information from a million different sources, so I don’t think we are gatekeepers the way the old TV news anchors were - we don’t (and can’t) prevent any information from getting out - at least not as individuals. Unless, of course, our readers start solely relying on us for their information - but that is hopefully never going to happen and would really be antithetical to what the net is all about.
While this is completely up for different interpretations, I’d agree with Frederic’s term. Yet, they both make valid points in their articles about how bloggers are becoming information filters, hubs, or aggregators in their own ways. However, it’s not just limited to bloggers.
How You May Be An Information Filter
If you use any type of social media to share information, you’re contributing to the filtering process.
If you blog, you’re contributing to the filtering process, while also adding to what could be noise for some.
Self-Conscious Filters Suck
Being of aware of this can make you self-conscious of the information you may be sharing. This becomes increasingly noticeable as more followers or people start paying attention to you. Don’t be. If you like it and feel it should be shared, just share it. This is why they are following you in the first place. Don’t alter your habits because of the increase in attention.
As with Twitter messages, someone can always unsubscribe from you if they don’t like it. That’s not to say go ahead and spam the world. You’ll just be better off sharing with your audience what you filter for yourself.
What are other ways to be information filter, hub, or human aggregator? What are techniques you’re using to help your audience find the best content out there? How are you reducing the noise for your followers?
Popularity: 4% [?]
