<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: User-Generated Content &#038; the J.Lo Syndrome</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:59:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Scott Abel</title>
		<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-1206</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Abel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2007 12:42:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-1206</guid>
		<description>Great post. I think you're right on target.

Thanks for sharing your ideas and generating some much needed conversation on user-generated content.

Scott</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post. I think you&#8217;re right on target.</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing your ideas and generating some much needed conversation on user-generated content.</p>
<p>Scott</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gdiesh</title>
		<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-951</link>
		<dc:creator>gdiesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2007 08:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-951</guid>
		<description>Yes, I think it is exciting to have the ability to contribute and yes, the inevitable move towards UGC probably started way back when Tim Berners-Lee visualized the internet.

Question is, now that we have the power to talk back, talk to and contribute, what are we going to add to the world? Seems most of us are happy adding a bunch of smilies, avatars and hearts?

;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I think it is exciting to have the ability to contribute and yes, the inevitable move towards UGC probably started way back when Tim Berners-Lee visualized the internet.</p>
<p>Question is, now that we have the power to talk back, talk to and contribute, what are we going to add to the world? Seems most of us are happy adding a bunch of smilies, avatars and hearts?</p>
<p> <img src='http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Elliott</title>
		<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-945</link>
		<dc:creator>Elliott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Mar 2007 07:48:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-945</guid>
		<description>interesting article here gagan.  i must comment on the part where you speak of how so much is going on in the world around us and we are stuck weeding through the UGC - please also consider that UGC is also one of our last hopes in raising awareness regarding various issues that are getting buried by mainstream news.  

for example "video responses" on youtube are becoming a popular form of protest or alternative point of view to certain videos posted on the site.  sure many are just of people shouting in a webcam, but there are others out there making impactful videos that speak of issues that need to be addressed.  

and finally take for example that the whole reason the web evolved to where it is now is because at the core of it was UGC itself.  forums, as well as those crappy basic html pages with no styling have been around a long time and imo these information systems have led to great advances in fields such as medical technology, history or even hobbies such as basket weaving.  sure for many years we were weeding through the crap but the best content always had a way of rising to the top.  the only difference now is higher bandwidth and more advanced Content Management Systems. 

 these are all just my humble opinions of course.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>interesting article here gagan.  i must comment on the part where you speak of how so much is going on in the world around us and we are stuck weeding through the UGC - please also consider that UGC is also one of our last hopes in raising awareness regarding various issues that are getting buried by mainstream news.  </p>
<p>for example &#8220;video responses&#8221; on youtube are becoming a popular form of protest or alternative point of view to certain videos posted on the site.  sure many are just of people shouting in a webcam, but there are others out there making impactful videos that speak of issues that need to be addressed.  </p>
<p>and finally take for example that the whole reason the web evolved to where it is now is because at the core of it was UGC itself.  forums, as well as those crappy basic html pages with no styling have been around a long time and imo these information systems have led to great advances in fields such as medical technology, history or even hobbies such as basket weaving.  sure for many years we were weeding through the crap but the best content always had a way of rising to the top.  the only difference now is higher bandwidth and more advanced Content Management Systems. </p>
<p> these are all just my humble opinions of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gdiesh</title>
		<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-943</link>
		<dc:creator>gdiesh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-943</guid>
		<description>Hi Marissa: 
I think there is a lot of good UGC out there. The problem is that it is buried deep beneath all that poorly made, pointless material. I have faith that the system has a way of correcting itself, and we will see some cleaning up in the near future! Liked that Media 3.0 article btw.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Marissa:<br />
I think there is a lot of good UGC out there. The problem is that it is buried deep beneath all that poorly made, pointless material. I have faith that the system has a way of correcting itself, and we will see some cleaning up in the near future! Liked that Media 3.0 article btw.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marissa</title>
		<link>http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-942</link>
		<dc:creator>Marissa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.designstamp.com/opinion/user-generated-content-the-jlo-syndrome.html#comment-942</guid>
		<description>Gagan,

Excellent post. It reminded me of one I read this morning, on Media 3.0 -- which talk a bit about that Dove spot that aired during the Oscars(&lt;a href="http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/2007/03/dove_taking_ugc.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;"Taking UGC Too Literally"&lt;/a&gt; ).

Personally, I'm not really sold on "user-generated content" either. From what I've seen, it's just a euphemism for "poorly produced."

I like your "J-LO" concept -- it made me laugh -- and I hope it pans out in this case.  

- Marissa</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gagan,</p>
<p>Excellent post. It reminded me of one I read this morning, on Media 3.0 &#8212; which talk a bit about that Dove spot that aired during the Oscars(<a href="http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/2007/03/dove_taking_ugc.html" rel="nofollow">&#8220;Taking UGC Too Literally&#8221;</a> ).</p>
<p>Personally, I&#8217;m not really sold on &#8220;user-generated content&#8221; either. From what I&#8217;ve seen, it&#8217;s just a euphemism for &#8220;poorly produced.&#8221;</p>
<p>I like your &#8220;J-LO&#8221; concept &#8212; it made me laugh &#8212; and I hope it pans out in this case.  </p>
<p>- Marissa</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
