Content Creation
I frequently have poorly developed ideas. If you'd like proof, look at my Twitter stream. I argue that virtually everyone has this same issue. With the simplicity of modern content management systems, we've created two issues for ourselves: speed to market with lack of editing and a self-generated need for frequency. We have a need for instant social media gratification.
Issues with speed to market are self-explanatory. Long gone are the days of proper attribution to a factually-based concept. If you have an opinion, put it out there in 10 seconds on Twitter or in 60 seconds through your CMS. Whether you have a personal blog or are a major publisher, if you later come to the realization that you had misinformation, it's too late. And, depending on your sphere of influence, that can be catastrophic.
The need for brands and users to maintain popularity through frequent exposure comes out of our society's content obsession, which led to the content marketing trend. Case in point, I recently received an email newsletter from a local car dealership. My first question was, of course, why I was receiving the flyer; I knew I hadn't signed up for it. My second question was why a car dealership was sending me content on what kind of rice I should eat, along with recipes. The Internet is overrun with poorly developed and aggregated content, due to the thoughtlessness and discontinuity content demands can cause. The scary part is that we, as consumers, are now okay with yet another "top 10" list created by someone with no authority on the topic.
Authority
I'm not sure that anyone can argue that local car dealerships should be providing nutritional advice. Over the past few years, evidence of authority has continued to become less important. When accompanying content on a third-party site, it's oftentimes reserved for the bio section, which is usually fewer than 300 characters.
With Medium, a more concerning concept will be tested, as best put by Joshua Benton at Harvard's Nieman Lab. When a Medium post is made, there will be no biography of the author provided. In fact, you can't find content by author name. Instead, you discover content by thematic collection. When you click on the understated author line, you're taken to the author's Twitter account. It's "Synergy!" for The Obvious Corporation, as Benton said, but frightening. Remember my confession about my Twitter account? Maybe that's a "me problem" (although I assure you it's not, based on other streams I've read). Regardless, what's more emphasized than the bio? The number of followers, which underscores the idea that popularity trumps credibility.
Reputation
With such an emphasis placed on popularity and influence, it seems necessary to reiterate that reputation management is a business. It involves strategy, which means it can be manipulated through SEO, additional content, paid tools and other tactical actions. So, we need to ask ourselves what the number of Twitter followers, a Klout score or the number of Compliments on About.me truly represents. Is it evidence of authority? Doubtful. Is it evidence of a quality content producer? Possibly. Is it evidence of strategic reputation management? Most definitely.
Objectivity
As should already be obvious, I have opinions on the subject of content creation, distribution and attribution. Regardless of my opinion, the future of our use of, and innovation and evolution in, the online content marketplace is something I hope that we, as both content creators and consumers, make conscious decisions about for the sake of our own intellect.