Peter Day is one of the few journalists who, if I come across something by them by chance, I have to sit up and take notice (the others include the BBC’s John Simpson, Evan Davis, Mark Urban and Charles Wheeler).
Why? Because they are all experts in their fields and each can take a deep and insightful analysis of a subject and make it fascinating and entertaining or informative, or both.Aside from doing the excellent Radio 4 business programme In Business, Peter Day writes an occasional column on BBC News Online called Work In Progress about business issues. The following article is typical of his great work and a valuable lesson on the importance of managing consumers’ expectations.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/business/4702995.stm
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Monday, September 04, 2006
How good is your new e-pal's advice?
On the face of it Yahoo! Answers sounds like a great idea — use "the wisdom of crowds" (or rather the wisdom of knowledgeable individuals in the crowd) to give you advice.
It's being hailed as the latest example of "social search" — or "folksonomy" — which allows people to share information and collaborate through the Web. Which is great, especially as, famously, "information wants to be free".
But there's a hidden assumption in the good news view to this — that the info and advice given will be worth having, that it'll be correct and of equal value.
But how do you know whose advice is best? And what if the PC-buying advice someone on the other side of the world gave you is rubbish? Or the apple pie recipe is vile, or a bad taste prank? Look at Wikipedia’s experience with inaccurate entries.
That's why brands, and especially trusted media brands, still have a role to play as risk reducers — trusted sources of advice you have comeback with if they get it wrong.
Until the crowd is as smart as the expert, and you can tell which part of it is best informed, disintermediation by folksonomy will have to wait if you’re looking for good, reliable advice.
It's being hailed as the latest example of "social search" — or "folksonomy" — which allows people to share information and collaborate through the Web. Which is great, especially as, famously, "information wants to be free".
But there's a hidden assumption in the good news view to this — that the info and advice given will be worth having, that it'll be correct and of equal value.
But how do you know whose advice is best? And what if the PC-buying advice someone on the other side of the world gave you is rubbish? Or the apple pie recipe is vile, or a bad taste prank? Look at Wikipedia’s experience with inaccurate entries.
That's why brands, and especially trusted media brands, still have a role to play as risk reducers — trusted sources of advice you have comeback with if they get it wrong.
Until the crowd is as smart as the expert, and you can tell which part of it is best informed, disintermediation by folksonomy will have to wait if you’re looking for good, reliable advice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)