One of the things I was taught as an elementary school student in Illinois was that America differed from Europe in that it was founded as, and has remained, a classless society. These days, if politicians such as Barack Obama or Bernie Sanders bring up the disparities among the classes in America, they are accused by their political opponents of conjuring up class consciousness in order to foment class warfare. Unfortunately, of course, Obama and Sanders are right, and my schoolteachers were wrong. And while class disparity manifests in all sectors of society, for those who seek careers in literature, class differences have a huge impact on who gets hired and who gets published. This, in turn has a real effect on the portrayal of class in literature, and in media depictions of the writer’s life.
In the past few years, countless essays, articles, charts, graphs, and surveys have been published making the case for greater gender and ethnic diversity in the literary world, that our literature might present back to us a truer accounting of the society in which we actually live. There remains a long way to go but we have slowly come to understand that by publishing more writers of color, by increasing the number of women’s bylines, by being more inclusive, we will increase the quality of our collective storytelling.
But very little has been explicitly articulated about the exclusion of the great American underclass, that perpetually poor group on the bottom tier of society that includes all races/genders/creeds. And as we winnow out opportunities for art about poverty, we lose so much potential for change.
I'm still not convinced that curation is all that new or different than blogging or other online publishing activities. (Blogging is not dead.) Nor am I convinced it is the most important thing you can do in terms of marketing. (And just because "everyone is doing it" doesn't sway me either; like momma always said about if so & so jumped off a bridge...) But I don't think curation can be overlooked much longer. Curation needs to be evaluated for several major factors:
a) can it fit within your scope (Do you have the time & skill set? Can you do this in house or should you hire?)
b) purpose (to maintain existing clients/customers, to reach new ones?)
b) where would it fit? (Not all curation sites are the same; some are more suitable for products, brands, B2B or B2C reach, demographics, etc.)
I'm still not convinced that curation is all that new or different than blogging or other online publishing activities. (Blogging is not dead.) Nor am I convinced it is the most important thing you can do in terms of marketing. (And just because "everyone is doing it" doesn't sway me either; like momma always said about if so & so jumped off a bridge...) But I don't think curation can be overlooked much longer. Curation needs to be evaluated for several major factors:
a) can it fit within your scope (Do you have the time & skill set? Can you do this in house or should you hire?)
b) purpose (to maintain existing clients/customers, to reach new ones?)
b) where would it fit? (Not all curation sites are the same; some are more suitable for products, brands, B2B or B2C reach, demographics, etc.)
While B2B marketers are beginning to adopt B2C best practices when it comes to e-commerce, B2B marketers have traditionally invested more of their budgets into content marketing than their B2C counterparts, making it interesting to see how both sides measure up in this rapidly-growing area. There are many more similarities than one might expect.