Great article from Beth Kanter where she skillfully reworks a graphic that compares the attributes of "good" curation with those of "bad" curation. It's a really useful graphic for reminding us of what we're striving for, and what we're trying to avoid!
Beth also succinctly outlines the ongoing discussion about the value of curation and quotes both Robin Good and Guillaume DeCugis to illuminate the issue. The question about whether curation has a value or is simply the "theft" and republishing of other's material is a lively one.
I have to agree with Robin Good ( well, little surprise there!) when he draws the distinction between the value that is provided by those with good good curation skills versus those with a less well developed approach:
"You should NOT mix-up republishing, self-expression and easy-content-sharing with curation, because they are in fact at opposite extremes of the same spectrum."
I agree. I think curation is really only of value when we can use it to join the dots for audiences, by broadening the story that we're sharing and explaining exactly why we think a particular piece of content is worth sharing in the context of a specific audience's needs. Otherwise it's just reposting anything and everything that crosses our virtual desk - and I don't see any purpose or additional value in that.