From the article:
Throughout history the curator has performed an important role in making the best content available for human consumption.
A newspaper or magazine editor will select the most suitable writers, decide on topics for editions, edit articles, and even write their own commentary. Editors have a highly esteemed role.
Growing up in the 80s and 90s it would largely be the radio DJ which would determine what music we listen to. The radio would be how we would discover good music. If the music isn’t good we would switch off. It was in the curator’s best interests to find the best music available.
Curators were respected and rewarded accordingly.
In the modern era of the internet, the role of the curator has largely disappeared. We are inundated with a deluge of content of mixed quality. Generally the lowest common denominator rises to the top and quality suffers. Witness YouTube’s ‘Trending’ tab for an example any time of the day.
The Solution
Recently artists are beginning to be rewarded for their content, whether that is through ad monetisation, streaming payments, or direct payments (e.g. through Patreon). However, content providers haven’t provided a role for the curator.
Streaming music services like Spotify need to allow curators to create and share playlists. If someone listens to that playlist the curator should receive a small payment (similar to the artist). It must be possible for the curator to make a decent living, even become very successful in their role as curator.
Apple recognised this problem by attempting to create Radio stations. However this is a very narrow approach by employing only a small number of DJs to curate content. We must allow anyone to be a curator and let the market decide which are the best and reward them accordingly.
By financially supporting and incentivising curators I predict that consumers will have access to much better content, and as a result it will encourage talented content creators to continue creating excellent content rather than get lost in the lowest common denominator.
From the article:
Throughout history the curator has performed an important role in making the best content available for human consumption.
A newspaper or magazine editor will select the most suitable writers, decide on topics for editions, edit articles, and even write their own commentary. Editors have a highly esteemed role.
Growing up in the 80s and 90s it would largely be the radio DJ which would determine what music we listen to. The radio would be how we would discover good music. If the music isn’t good we would switch off. It was in the curator’s best interests to find the best music available.
Curators were respected and rewarded accordingly.
In the modern era of the internet, the role of the curator has largely disappeared. We are inundated with a deluge of content of mixed quality. Generally the lowest common denominator rises to the top and quality suffers. Witness YouTube’s ‘Trending’ tab for an example any time of the day.
The Solution
Recently artists are beginning to be rewarded for their content, whether that is through ad monetisation, streaming payments, or direct payments (e.g. through Patreon). However, content providers haven’t provided a role for the curator.
Streaming music services like Spotify need to allow curators to create and share playlists. If someone listens to that playlist the curator should receive a small payment (similar to the artist). It must be possible for the curator to make a decent living, even become very successful in their role as curator.
Apple recognised this problem by attempting to create Radio stations. However this is a very narrow approach by employing only a small number of DJs to curate content. We must allow anyone to be a curator and let the market decide which are the best and reward them accordingly.
By financially supporting and incentivising curators I predict that consumers will have access to much better content, and as a result it will encourage talented content creators to continue creating excellent content rather than get lost in the lowest common denominator.