Ever wonder about the whether collective intelligence is really all that bright? You’re not alone. While many have embraced Crowdsourcing, the concept is still fraught with controversy and concerns – and with good reason. It’s far easier to fail at a crowdsourcing venture than to succeed at one.
If you peek at the stream of comments following a Youtube video… well, it’s a frightening experience and certainly makes you wonder about how smart the crowds really are. Posts
generally include profanities, and/or comments as astute as “lol hella funny!!! u r cool”. And YouTube, for all its success, has original user-generated content that is, to put it mildly, largely less than engaging.
Anyone who has ever worked in an office can understand that everyone’s contribution is not equal and that meetings where a group is involved can often devolve into utter unproductiveness with inconsequential concerns taking up crucial time. (Meetings I have attended have produced the following useful suggestions: “I would like it if everyone said ‘hello’ to each other when they come into work” and “It’d be great if someone would announce that there are leftover muffins after a meeting”…).
Consensus does not always equal correctness. A commenter, Charles Knight, summed up his concerns about the advice provided on “Yahoo! Answers and MSN’s Live QnA ‘let the world answer’” by stating that people come up with:
how shall I put it, "varied results". Here is a recent question on Yahoo! Answers: "My 4 week old puppy just bit me. Should it be put to sleep?" The result of the "answers" is currently a tie. Poor puppy!
Indeed, you don’t have to look farther than certain trials or elections to be baffled at the decisions crowds make.
Clearly, there are many pitfalls involved with crowdsourcing. This article attempts to address some key issues.
2 Comments
