3 ms·
One downside to lowering the barrier of entry in all of these areas is the lack of any kind of quality control or content curation. Sure, anyone can publish the
by gpanders 6y ago
One downside to lowering the barrier of entry in all of these areas is the lack of any kind of quality control or content curation. Sure, anyone can publish their thoughts online for free, which I agree is a good thing for openness and freedom, but not everyone is equally qualified or competent. It becomes increasingly difficult to sift through the mountains of sub-standard garbage to find things worth consuming (NB I dislike the word “consuming” in this context, but I don’t know of a better catch-all term).
Now sure, the old gatekeepers weren’t perfect at this either and they published a lot of garbage too. But I think this is something that needs to be discussed as content creation becomes increasingly democratized.
- grey-area 6y agoCompletely agree as popularity != quality and curation without cornering the market does have a lot of value. When I said gatekeepers I was thinking of academic publishers vs sci hub for example, or non-fiction publishers who operate on selling big names rather than quality.