Curation of Online Sources: A Rebirth for the Formality of Libraries

The internet needs the formal organization of libraries in order to be a relevant source of information.  Google's search engine displays results based on an algorithm hierarchy such as how much time searchers spend on a site.  Apparently, the more time spent on a page, the more relevant it is to what a person is searching for.  Another perspective is that the more confusing a site is the more time a person may take navigating its page(s).  The tens of millions of search results indicates that Google is not in the business of winnowing thus not in the business of relevance.  Relevance is not millions of sources.  Relevance requires narrowing.  There is not enough time in a person's lifetime to go through tens of millions of sources.

Based on:

• Age Range 16 - 90
• 365 days a year
• 16 hours a day searching sources
• 5 minutes a source
• 5,185,920 

That is the number of sources capable of being looked at in a lifetime.  Obviously, this calculation is built on an abundant of assumptions, but the point is that search engine users have a finite time to spend on looking for sources.  Internet users are overwhelmed by the shear volume of results so the tendency is to choose the top search engine results  because we are taught that placement is equal to quality - first place is better than second place etc.  In essence, it is fatigue that underpins the Google search results because the selection of sources on the first page in the top position is what keeps that source on the first page in the top position.  Not relevance, but convenience.  Because the behavioral trend lacks a solution on a large scale, sources have sought to manipulate the results through search engine optimization (SEO).

Curation in the hands of companies such as the Huffington Post are self interested transactions.  The Huffington Post is a business in the business of people moving from source to source.  The click through fee is motivation to continue offering sources that pay the most money per click through.  The solution is to create a library system or library like options as aggregators.  Libraries work on relevance not popularity.  The library is organized by subject matter and obscure sources have as much right to discovery as does a so called popular source.  The Library of Congress is one such template.  Censorship is not a threat to the internet from a library aggregator because censorship already exists based on search engine algorithms.  A library catalog provides a level of parity between sources - parity that cannot be bought.  Libraries, at its essence, is about knowledge transfer.  Libraries facilitate the accessibility of knowledge.  

The internet is not about accessibility, but about popularity and if history has taught people anything it is about the danger of popular or dominant voices and/or positions.  Libraries are not without fault on some censorship issues in the past because of local citizenry, but libraries are also the one group that has done the most for First Amendment rights and discourse.  By creating a trusted online curator using the library template, people have a greater opportunity of being exposed to alternative perspectives and/or information.  Funding must be public via non-profits or government funds as it benefits the community be it local, national, or global.  It is time for the internet to grow up and become its full potential.  And a librarian is the best tool.