In the past ten years, as curate has exploded in popular culture and as a consumer buzz-word, art curators have felt residual effects. Those who value curating as an actual practice are generally loathe to see it harnessed by commercial culture, and conversely, feel sheepish about some deep-set pretensions this move has brought front and center. Simultaneously, curate has become a lightning-rod in the art world, inspiring countless journal articles and colloquia in which academics and professionals discuss issues around curating with a certain amount of anxiety.

Ain’t Miscuratin’ (DIS) [Via] (via frontofbook)

There’s good reason to worry. Often when I see terms like “curate” and “content” their use is far removed from my own concepts and definitions.

I hold content to be all media of value. Media that is informational or otherwise emotionally gratifying. To thoughtfully select a few pieces of content, consider their presentation and collectively present them as a whole is to curate. 

However, when I come across the terms in Mashable, or some other digital news outlet, ”content” seems to mean something similar to “coupon” and “curate” is being willed into meaning “direct mail.” That’s because no one would give honest money to a “content farm” or “link blogger.”

Art curators, librarians, journalists and professionals of all stripes need to take control of their collective identities before the growing hoard of digital hucksters cheapens your life’s work.

Short URL for this post: http://tmblr.co/Zvb3ZyDa9SHi