14 of 16 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you?
In a presentation at Web 2.0 New York, Scott Porad of Pet Holdings talked about user-generated content (UGC) and how anybody creating content needs to be thinking about UGC’s impact.
Porad mentioned that filtering is the key to implementing successful user-generated content. Submissions on his sites are reviewed by a team of 15 or so initial “web-cultured” reviewers. Then they go into a secondary review area where site members then make the final call. One click by readers and the post goes back to the initial reviewers. Two percent of submissions are filtered out completely.
These voting mechanisms on content also act as a reward and encourage more participation when users know their submissions are appreciated.
Another notable point in Porad’s talk was the Amazon “did you find this review useful” feature. Amazon has this type of question on each review in their customer feedback section. I recently read a review on Amazon that stated:
This product will stop working after a year unless you pay them a $20 annual fee. Need more than 2GB of storage? Another 2GB costs you $10 a year. There are other products that record to your computer’s hard drive, and can even upload the captured images or video to the FTP site of your choice (most ISPs give you several GB for free). This product is just a bad idea, in my opinion.
Reading this and then seeing that 14 out of 16 people found it useful adds context to the products description and instills trust amongst customers.
This review stood out and helped me make a definite decision. User-generated content combined with good filtering adds an invaluable tool and resource to any site.