“My major hobby is teasing people who take themselves and the quality of their knowledge too seriously and those who don’t have the courage to sometimes say: I don’t know….” – Nassim Taleb
There’s a school of thought online that calls upon individuals to “fake it until you make it” and channel expert sources so that those unfamiliar with the original source will view the sharer as an expert in his or her own right.
For example, let’s say that you had never heard of Seth Godin, read any of his books, his blog, or encountered any of his ideas as attributed to him. If I were to read one of Godin’s books and regurgitate his ideas on this blog (without attribution) as a series on marketing, you’d think me to be quite the sprightly mind!
That very process, shrouded in happy buzzwords, is unfortunately quite common in blogging. Why is it allowed and even endorsed by many of the “thought leaders” in the blogosphere?
For three reasons:
- Paychecks tend to trump ethics online – The assumption is often that if you’re making a lot of money doing something, you must be doing the right things. (Those who start blogging with the hope of making money through it are often the quickest to subscribe to this ideology.)
- Fear of rejection is leveraged on multiple levels – When the emperor posts garmentless pics online, the child who speaks out is quickly blocked, unfollowed, and labeled as a troll by members of the emperor’s tribe. (Sorry, Mr. Godin, but lucre-chasers have built incredibly efficient tribes online.)
- We’re all too busy trying to go viral – In our attempts to “get the word out,” many of the checks and balances that would otherwise apply to our actions are tossed in favor of real-time output. (“I was in a rush” is actually accepted by many people as a valid excuse for failure! “It was done in the 11th hour” is the phrasing you’ll see most often.)
Your initial response to this might be, “Seth, these people are simply discovering ideas and sharing a perspective with willing readers. It’s a necessary part of The Conversation.”
If they gave proper attribution, I’d agree with you. But they don’t give attribution for the very same reason we like to take credit when a friend asks a question and we use Google to find a response: It’s satisfying to be considered a knowledgeable source.
We’ve become so enthralled with the idea of being viewed as sources that we’ve lost sight of what it is to have a conversation. We’re so desperate to be a part of this real time revolution that we forget to properly vet our sources and keep track of where we encounter ideas!
These failures don’t just hurt us personally. They create a culture that supports a network of “experts” intent on building up a following to prevent “negative social proof” (read: red flags) and monetize for personal gain.
Is building a network wrong? No. Is making money by providing customers with a needed product or service wrong? Absolutely not! However, we DO have a problem when individuals take shortcuts that slash at the heart of what makes a system work.
“Scraping” is a term used to describe the practice of stealing content and posting it as one’s own. It’s easy to recognize the such an action is wrong. However, things become more difficult when we look at the practice of idea scraping. That is, when content creators take ideas and channel them into “new” content by simply rewriting concepts.
Obviously, it would be great to have a simple punch list of ways to weed out all the rubbish. I don’t have such a list. What I do have is a suggestion as to how we might go about contributing to The Conversation in the future.
The Knowledge Cycle
Every conversation we have involves a transfer of knowledge. We might be talking about our favorite beverage or the role infrastructure plays in the future of the electric car. No matter the topic, we’re constantly exchanging knowledge that reveals hints about how that knowledge was gained.
You’re probably familiar with the type of knowledge that gives absolutely no hint as to where it came from. It often pops up in conversations with the prefix, “Well, you know they say…” to which the common response is, “WHO says?”
At this point, the knowledge provider typically withdraws from that part of the conversation or attempts to substantiate the remark with another source. That bit of knowledge, without attribution, is deemed worthless and thrown from the conversation.
Why then, when we encounter online versions of that same vague phrase, do we neglect to ask, “Who says?” Is it because the knowledge provider makes a lot of money or is very popular? Do we fail to ask because we are too busy with our own projects?
I believe we fail because our focus has shifted away from the knowledge we share in our conversations. We’re under so much pressure to participate in The Conversation that we lose sight of the knowledge cycle that provides content for us to discuss!
Here’s a simple illustration of a knowledge cycle:
The complete cycle isn’t entirely unfriendly to real time discussions. But it is complex enough that few individuals are capable of navigating it within the confines of our mutilated attention spans.
Instead of figuring out how to filter, moderate, and otherwise make sense of our conversations online, we typically resort to engaging through a truncated knowledge cycle as illustrated here:
By neglecting (what I consider to be) some of the most important parts of the knowledge cycle, we speed up our conversations. But at what cost? A quick jaunt through the blog roll of a typical social media blogger reveals a festering magma of inbred ideas. As attempts at conversation move farther from the source, ideas break down and thoughts crumble into feeble blurbs hoping for comments.
The fix? Support the authors who create content that reflects a full knowledge cycle.
If you read an article written by an author with full-cycle experience in the topic at hand, you’ll often note (if you pay attention) portions of the article that point back to the cycle. The author who is truly interested in contributing to The Conversation and not just channeling it to create an air of expertise will include most of the following:
- References to topic inspiration – Even the phrase “I’ve been stewing over this for quite some time” gives the reader an idea of where the author is coming up with things. (Referencing an idea source is often done when it can serve doubly as a bit of name dropping. ex: I was chatting with Barack Obama over breakfast yesterday…)
- Research attribution – If an author spent time researching a topic (even if that research is entirely experiential) you’ll see acknowledgement of those sources. It takes only a few seconds to link to sources or include a list of resources at the bottom of an article. You, dear reader, need not accept laziness (or 11th hour changes) as an excuse for missing attribution.
- Place in a big picture – Tertiary discussions of a topic typically fixate on where things fit into a big picture or where a specific part of the original discussion needs fleshing out. If you’re dealing with a source, it’s likely that you’ll see a bit of both in the article.
- Action steps – Check for action steps as to how the knowledge might be put into action. If the article is of an evaluative nature, the action steps might be suggested revisions to previous steps. If the author is pulling ideas out of thin air, the readers deserve to know. There’s nothing wrong with brainstorming. Just admit to your readers when brainstorming is the only thing taking place.
- Analysis – This is the part where personal perspective and experience really comes into play. A source article will have an intangible feeling of continuity that comes from a single voice expressing a cohesive thought. Scraped concepts will often seem disjointed to the careful reader and lack additional references and links to full cycle concepts.
With a bit of thoughtful consideration on your part, most shortcutting thought-scrapers will quickly reveal themselves.
What’s the point of all this? Simply that we don’t need to build “Questions to ask your [insert field here] expert to make sure you have a real expert” surveys in order to determine who among us is an expert. Surveys can be learned, tests gamed, and people guilt-tripped into giving recommendations they would otherwise avoid.
One of the beautifully transformative aspects of internet culture is its willingness to accept people on the strength of their ideas. Let’s keep that alive and make it thrive by accepting that we are seldom the source. To be an expert is to relinquish one’s fascination with learning and what is the point of a worldwide conversation if we cannot learn from each other?
When he said,
“Ah, but a man’s reach should exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?”
I think Robert Browning meant to encourage us to dream big and put all our efforts into the moment we have right now. I don’t think he meant that we should pretend to be something we’re not in the hope of a reward.
I think I’ll do best if I focus on what I truly grasp, admit when I’m unsure, and let you determine the reach of my thoughts. I’m content to let heaven worry about itself.
What about you?
.
.
Resources & Further Reading:
“You can call me a lot of things but please, don’t call me an expert.” – Edward Boches
“The Professional Learning Cycle” – University of Tasmania
“Business Knowledge Life Cycle” – Drools
“Libraries Stuck in the Middle: Reactive vs. Proactive Responses to the Science Journal Crisis” – ISTL
Truth isn’t all about joy and beauty. It has an unsavory side that often conjures images of loneliness, perspiration, and pain. Here’s a bit of the latter:
Want to know where I find all the images I use on my blog? Here’s the scoop:
The leaf looks nice. It’s alone and is a bright color. That brings up thoughts of cool fall days and times of transition. I click on it and 
I like the image even more in a large size. Perfect! But before I can move ahead, I have to make sure I’m allowed to use the image in my article. (Compfight does a good job filtering for licenses but it’s still best to check for yourself.)
I’m allowed to use the image as I wish so long as I give credit to the artist. That works for me!
The internet is not going to die if you feed it less frequently. There’s a lot to be said for developing good writing habits. However, you don’t need to publish everything you write in order to experience the creative benefits of putting your thoughts into writing.
Do you want more comments on your blog? Let’s assume you already know how valuable comments are to your blogging experience. But how do you get more of them? Here are 31 ways to increase comments on your blog. Some are concepts I use regularly on my own blogs. Others I know about from watching other bloggers. (Note that I don’t necessarily endorse all methods. You have to decide what is right for you.)