A business has to get data first. Though there are two general paths one can take: generate the data or acquire the data from an outside source. Generating data can be an expensive task, especially if the business covers an undeveloped topic. Acquiring data typically comes from two different sources: other businesses or the consumers themselves (the collective intelligence).
The hardest part of data collection and processing is knowing how accurate it is. If you were told your friend liked orange juice, but in reality they had allergies, the resulting situation could be catastrophic. Trying prove generated data to be accurate can be one of the factors why generation can be so expensive. On the other hand, this is where Harnessing the Collective Intelligence can really shine. It was established in my previous post that the collective intelligence generally brings more to a business than its own staff. Users implementing and criticising their own data frees the business' hands and allows them to focus on what to do with the data.
But before the business can act, it must address the concern of "who actually owns all the data?" While a business who generated their own data could claim it as all as theirs, one that relied on a collective intelligence may find this to be a stickier problem. Depending on the End User Licence Agreement, a user may take down their information at any time, or it will continue to be stored within the business databases even after deleting their account. There are some instances where the data belongs to nobody in particular, and the business simply organises it for easier use.
Once a business has organised their data, recognised its source and what they can or can't do with it, it must then decide how to utilise the data, whether it be shared to other businesses, analysed to provide better products. What the business decides to do with the data depends on whether it aims to be a supplier, consumer or even a combination of the two.
One such business that works with its data is YouTube. The video streaming website has been around for years because it understands just how vital information can be. To start with, YouTube gathers users' view history, likes, dislikes and favourites. With this data, YouTube can cater to advertisers and users alike. Advertisements can be attributed to the right videos and users receive advertisements and recommended videos more relevant to their own interests. User activity can be an indicator to what's currently popular and how often each channel updates. Furthermore, if a YouTube user is popular and active enough, YouTube can reward the user by offering them a partnership.
But who owns what data? Grant Cowell summarised it up as "the user will always have the ownership of their content, but by signing up and using the website, they grant YouTube to do whatever it wants with the videos." Implicitly, users are putting their trust in YouTube to not do anything nefarious with their videos and data. But YouTube is required by law to monitor the videos it distributes. If a user uploads content that is offensive or infringes copyright, YouTube may remove it in order to protect itself and its users. Being granted the freedom to do what they want implies to users that YouTube expects them to obey the rules. This circle of trust between YouTube and its users allows the site to prosper whilst dealing with the technicalities of data ownership.
References:
Albion Research Ltd. (2012), Why should I be considering Data Mining?, Retrieved March 17, 2012
YouTube (2012), Advertising with YouTube, Retrieved March 17, 2012
Grant Cowell (2011), Who owns your YouTube video? You, Youtube, or Someone Else Entirely? Retrieved March 17, 2012
I really like your post, this post definitely explains "knowledge is power". And that case you gave us is a great example. However,as you said data is an important resource, users will pay a number of attention to that, as youtube, every users can post a video, what problem we face is copyright,as the limited of youtube is not severe. Therefore, when we meet this issue, how should we prevent that and protect our authority?
ReplyDeleteYoutube relies on not just members of its community, but even just people visiting their website. If someone discovers their/someone's work used without permission, they may file a report which has the video reviewed. Users who had their videos taken down can appeal the decision. If they are able to cite adequate reasoning and proof of their own content, the video may be re-uploaded. Although a bit of a simplification, if a user doesn't like that sort of system, there are many alternatives to Youtube.
DeleteIf there's a controversy over who actually holds the copyright to the content of a video, that's a whole different can of worms.
Did that answer your question?
Wow Courts, I enjoyed reading this blog :)
ReplyDeleteI posted my blog for 'Intel Inside' about Facebook, but YouTube is pretty similar in regards to its data and advertisements aimed at certain users.
As a frequent user of YouTube myself, uploading, liking and favouriting videos, I see exactly what you mean when it comes to the data being matched to my interests. It is a great resource for almost ANYTHING!
Do you have a YouTube channel?
I'm glad I entertained you!
DeleteApplications which utilise a Web 2.0 pattern tend to overlap with their features. But an interesting case I heard was how users like to access YouTube through Facebook. The two could integrate one another in order to get the most out of their data mining.
Sadly no, I don't have a YouTube channel, I'm more a consumer than a producer when it comes to videos!