The Professor's Notes

I had a conversation with my brother yesterday that was about as instructive in what we learned about the conversation as it was in what we learned in the conversation.  He mentioned that Leo Laporte backed up a bit on his assertion that the iPad was predominantly a content consumption device, and acknowledged that it is being used for content creation as well.

Well, as an iPad user and an observer of tech, I was a bit surprised by this.  I have seen many iPads showing up around campus, and in other places, and almost exclusively I have seen it used as a reader (PDFs for class, books, and such) and as a device to view movies and shows.  Actually, I have seen less “video” than text on the screens of those around me.  I would venture to say that for most people the use of the iPad remains consumption.

I mentioned that, and my brother challenged me, arguing that he, and his colleagues, are using the iPad quite regularly for note taking and email.  I had to agree, but then…. we learned.

See, for me the operational definition of “content creation” is something that is substantive.  I have a definition that looks at the degree, or dare I say it, quantity, of the “content” being created.  I never viewed writing emails, taking notes, or editing existing slideshows as real “content creation.”  And I certainly don’t view arranging photographs into a slideshow as a “content creation” event.  The creation of the content in that case was during the translation from the photographer’s eye to the sensor in the camera.

So things came down to “Operational Definitions.”  In research we are often faced with the need to not just have a  simple definition but one that we can use to clearly differentiate between things, and more specifically, to transfer from a qualitative assessment to a measurable response.  For instance, we often talk about “small businesses” but without an “operational definition” we open ourselves up to a wide range of mis-communications.  For instance a small business can be measured as:

• a level of revenue (less than 1 million a year?)
• a level of profit (less than 1 million a year?  Notice that the same dollar figure leads to two very different thresholds)
• a number of employees (less than 5? 50? 500?)

So then, we are now faced with the question, how do we define “Content creation”?

Is it simply “creating a document of some sort and any size, so that something that did not exist, now does?”

Or does it require a greater degree of creativity and involvement in the process?

So readers:  I was wondering how you would define “Content Creation” and what amount of additional creativity do you believe needs to be brought to the process?  Please–comment here so others can see your thoughts!

Okay, it’s time for me to come clean. I am a lousy facebook stalker.

I know, I should be doing all sorts of things techie, and you might think I am “all over the net.” But I am not. In fact, I not only don’t like the invasion of privacy that is so often the net, I actively choose to not invade other’s privacy as well.

So let me share my little rule book with you.

1. I view twitter as I do the ocean. I can’t take it all in, even with the people I follow. I will read any and all messages sent @ me, and also the direct messages. I will try, when I am on, to scan the twitter feed of people I follow, but just as I can’t catch every wave when I am at the beach, I can’t read every tweet that flows my way.

2. I don’t chase down people’s comments and statements on “the Facebook.” My family will tell you that. When asked by my kids or even my wife “did you see ____ on Facebook?” My answer invariably is “No.” They have learned–if you want to be sure I see something on Facebook, you might want to let me know through some other means (say, an @ comment or DM on Twitter–or an email!)

3. If a platform is not meant to be a social communication platform, I DEFINITELY don’t go there often. This includes Flickr, and PicasaWeb, and Youtube. I view these sites as places to go and see the creations of others, and perhaps be inspired. I certainly don’t go there for conversation. If you thought I had been reading your conversations there, i am sorry. It wasn’t me.

4. Honestly, I only put things on these sites that I want to have out there, and am willing to share with the world.

5. I have no expectation that the world will care, or even visit anything I write, or photograph, or post. If no one visits, then that is fine. I am not hurt.

6. If I create something for someone (think–water polo videos, or slideshows) I will point out that it is available.

7. Finally, I believe protecting other’s privacy is so important that I actually think long and hard before posting things that include other people in them, and often will ensure (double, and triple check the privacy settings) that I have shared certain things only with those people. Generally these are family photographs, or photographs from events, and I will share those with “family and friends.”

So there are my “not so short” rules that I live by when it comes to social media.

Now, dear reader, let me ask you: are you more or less open with your life and sharing your thoughts with the world now that we are in the era of “social”?

Or more importantly–do you really know just how much you are sharing, and how much “anyone” can actually see?

Let me know YOUR thoughts (in the comments, or in twitter! But remember to @ me, or I might not see it. LOL)