These are two short posts with a number of great insights:
“There seems to be three forms of search emerging as Internet users try to deal with the tsunami of information and the increasingly effective techniques of spammers.
The first form of search is Google, and this will continue to be important, as much from habit, and as much as there isn’t much of a choice.
The second is tapping into your own socal network to find what you need. This is limited to the subjects that your social circle knows about and depending on its size, and the time of day, it might not yield much.
Also, there is a less trust in “peers” as a recent Edelman survey found, and more trust in “experts.”
The third way to search is by looking at content that has been curated by “experts.” You don’t have to be an accredited expert but you have to be passionate about your topic.”
“Curators derive a pleasure from their activities, and it is also a form of altruism to collect the best information, and that’s why the product of curation is usually well thought out and highly relevant.”
“Machines are good at aggregation, but aggregation is not curation.”
Aggregation Is Not Curation – There Is A Big Difference
“Curation is a person or persons, engaged in the act of choosing and presenting things related to a specific topic and context.”
“Curation is about choosing what’s in a collection. Aggregation is just collecting.”
“Curation, as a topic isn’t going to go away, it will be one of the most important subjects of 2011. Curation is about the “human web” while aggregation is about the “machine web.”"
Then ask yourself, “As a librarian, do I spend my time aggregating or curating. What’s better?”