Too much content!

February 20, 2006 in Peter Oliver, ideas, search, web 2.0

Jeez people. We are not all information processing machines. We aren’t always looking for every angle on every story.

Sites like Memeorandum and TailTank apparently disagree. Like fast-food franchises, they stuff us with tons of everything to keep us happy.

What happened to fine dining?

Now, before I get jumped by fans of both, I understand that these sites use algorithms in order to select the most trusted source for a piece of news. But they still get overloaded when an A-list blogger breaks a decent piece of news.

So what is stopping them from updating with a higher benchmark? Raising the required number of links and trackbacks so that only the most important events make it to the front page would not only make the quality of the content higher, but would also make the site a more valuable database of searchable information and the authority on many subjects.

It’s not like they couldn’t still have a section dedicated to rapid updates. Those interested in getting every piece of news could still get it. Or better yet…

Why not be a Denny’s?

As a blog/news tracker, give your users a sliding scale. A simple choice of Only Big News – Decent News – Minor Happenings would be a step in the right direction. A ten step scale from “Most to Least Updates” would be the best solution. It would serve everyone better. More market = more money. (Usually)

Allow people to get the amount of information they want. Don’t impose – allow.

Make the mass amounts of information digestable. Make them USABLE.

Digg does this with the front page stories by allowing users to vote on content. Del.icio.us uses the number of people who have bookmarked something as the test for popularity/authority. These are manual measurements, but they serve the same purpose as a higher benchmark for links to a blog posting on Meme/TailRank would. And Digg/Delicious just happen to be two of the most succesful web 2.0 sites around. Maybe they are doing something right.