Category: 

What is User Generated Content?

User generated content, such as viral videos, are often shared between coworkers.
Article Details
  • Written By: Tricia Ellis-Christensen
  • Edited By: O. Wallace
  • Last Modified Date: 14 November 2014
  • Copyright Protected:
    2003-2014
    Conjecture Corporation
  • Print this Article
Free Widgets for your Site/Blog
Peruvians eat more than 60 million guinea pigs a year.  more...

December 21 ,  1933 :  Dried blood serum was first produced.  more...

User generated content (UGC) is material on websites, and occasionally other media sources, that is produced by the users of the website. This is different than, for example, a website designed by a company that puts forth material produced by professionals. In UGC, it is the amateur, in most cases, who contributes the content.

Content created by users has become tremendously popular, and some of the most frequently visited sites on the Internet are primarily user generated. This is the case with sites like Wikipedia, where anyone can write an article with sufficient expertise. Other users may evaluate the content, suggest changes, or even make changes. Some material on the site carries warnings that an author is now espousing opinion, or that certain statements are not verifiable or have been called into question by other users.

No author is paid for contributions to Wikipedia, which makes this type of user generated content distinct from other types. For example, blog sites, where users can blog about any topic they want to, may carry ads, which if clicked on, mean a share of profits for the bloggers. The percentage of profits varies from site to site.

Ad

Other times, bloggers may simply be paid a percentage of the profit for having ads on their site, and are paid by the number of people visiting the site. So there is particular impetus to have blogs that will be read by others. This often translates to better blogs being read by a high number of people. Excellence in writing can have its rewards.

Similar to Wikipedia is the popular YouTube, which has thousands and thousands of examples of user generated content. It should be stated that not all content on YouTube is user generated, however, since it may infringe on copyrights by using songs or video clips that are protected by copyright laws. It may use previously recorded professional material, as with scoring, or in video remixes. Some professionally-produced content is also created and distributed through the site.

Occasionally, a company will authorize the use of its images or music for use on UGC sites, but other companies do not authorize this. When content that contains unapproved music or images is uploaded, it is usually found and removed from the site.

One of the challenges with user generated content is that it may be inaccurate or espouse opinions or beliefs that others find offensive. People who rely on UCG sites for information might get the wrong answers and not think to confirm the information since often the printed, or uploaded, word is treated as true simply because it is written. Writers can presume authority or expertise where they have none, and the reader may not always be able to discern the false from the true.

At least for the purpose of research, UGC should be double-checked against more recognized sources, such as encyclopedias or dictionaries. This can help eliminate perpetuating untrue material. Often, however, the users themselves are quick to make corrections when material is incorrect.

Ad

More from Wisegeek

You might also Like

Discuss this Article

umbra21
Post 3

For a while I heard rumors someone was going to start a website similar to Facebook or Digg, which would provide a button on websites so that you could vote on how truthful you found each article. You could also explain why the author was right or wrong.

They were going to record stuff about each user so that they knew how much weight to put on your opinion. It was supposed to make user created content more accurate, or at least make it easier to see whether it was considered accurate. I don't know if they ever went forward with it though.

irontoenail
Post 2

People who contribute to an online user generated content website should make sure to read the fine print before they do so.

If you have talent as a writer, there are sites that will pay you for your work. Many of those sites only pay a pittance, or pay you only with exposure. In that case, you might be better off with a blog, which at least you can put ads on yourself.

Your user created content might not be yours after you publish it. The rights might go to the website permanently without you even realizing it. Always check the fine print and consider that what you write and publish on the internet could be around forever, making money for someone else.

browncoat
Post 1

Wikipedia is supposed to be almost as accurate in general as a normal encyclopedia. They compared it to the Encyclopedia Britannica I think.

Yes, you need to check the sources provided at the bottom to make sure someone hasn't just put down their opinion. Sometimes people play pranks on particular pages, so you need to be aware of that possibility as well. But, most of the time, Wikipedia is very accurate as a secondary source.

And it is fantastic for finding online, primary sources, like science papers or whatever, when you are writing an essay.

Post your comments

Post Anonymously

Login

username
password
forgot password?

Register

username
password
confirm
email