More on the interaction object - and the platform as authority.

Nina Simon of Museum 2.0 has, as always, a really great post about the Future of Authority: Platform Power. In it, she argues that the past is about control, but the future is about expertise and authority. Check out this image:



"When you think of a platform for user-generated content, you may not think of that platform as having power. But the companies that run YouTube, Flickr, and other major Web 2.0 sites have lots of power. There are four main powers that platforms have:

1. the power to set the rules of behavior
2. the power to preserve and exploit user-generated content
3. the power to promote and feature preferred content
4. the power to define the types of interaction available to users

These powers comprise a set of controls which constitutes a real and valuable authority."

She then goes on to discuss each of these in the museum (as platform) context.

So what if we look at this in terms of, for example, the online community we want to set up for ASAE's technology audience?

We (meaning the Tech Council subcommittee charged with working this out) are in general agreement that the community has to be at least partially open. But Nina's example shows that the "authority", ASAE, can still have a lot of power within that space.

1. the power to set the rules of behavior

We can, and should have rules and guidelines governing acceptable behavior. Communities tend to be very self-policing, and while it makes sense to have some written disclaimers and rules about how to avoid anything that might violate anti-trust laws, for example, or jeopardize tax-exempt status, or exclude any comments that might be defamatory, etc etc, we can also feel pretty comfortable that our users are smart and will, on their own, point out (e.g. "flag as inappropriate") things that are unacceptable.

2. the power to preserve and exploit user-generated content

User-generated content is what it's all about, including discussion around official publications or association content. But as platform owner, ASAE can make it quite clear that it can promote itself with that content, and use it in a myriad of ways. As Nina says, users who upload a photo to Flickr or a video to YouTube know that those companies have some ownership rights over those materials.

3. the power to promote and feature preferred content

"One of the greatest powers retained by these platforms is the power to feature content that reflects the values of the platform. [...] This may be the most important platform power when it comes to museums because it is the one that allows the platform to present its values and model preferred behavior."
This one speaks for itself. ASAE can show its best foot forward, and promote itself as the community you want to be in by showcasing the most important discussions, the highest rated articles, whatever. We do this very consciously with YAP - we want people to see how awesome we are and we can select the most fantastic discussions to appear right on the landing page. We're lucky, we have a lot to choose from - but we want you, the random visitor, to see IMMMEDIATELY how much you could get out of it by participating.

4. the power to define the types of interaction available to users

Last but definitely not least. Here's the one that goes back to the object. "This power is so basic that it is often forgotten. On YouTube, you can share videos. On Craigslist, you can buy and sell stuff. On LibraryThing, you can tag and talk about books. Each Web 2.0 platform has a limited feature set and focuses on one or two basic actions that users can take. Museums don't need to offer every kind of interaction under the sun--we just have to pick the few interactions that most support the kind of behavior and content creation that we value. Again, there's a lot of power in the decision of whether visitors will be allowed to contact each other, rate artifacts, or make their own exhibits. As long as you create a platform that is consistent in its values and the interactions provided, you will be able to control the experience as you open up content authority." ASAE needs to define the social objects that are most important for the community to be built around, and that choice will make or break it. We'd love to have it all - but careful selection of core interactions will be key to making it work and giving it longevity. I really like that last phrase, I'll repeat it again:

As long as you create a platform that is consistent in its values and the interactions provided, you will be able to control the experience as you open up content authority.

What do you think? Do you agree that despite what one might fear as "loss of control" in setting up a social network, that there's actually a ton of authoritative power still there?