Content might be free, but information needs expertise.

Byline: David Tebbutt

Content might be free, but information needs expertise

Some people argue that, because information is free and widely available through the internet, no one need bother with information professionals any more. They may well be the same people who think that all music and software should be free.

The flaw in their argument is that while masses of information on the internet are indeed freely available, the recipient has to be able to discriminate between good information and bad information.

Most of the time, this is not a particularly tricky problem, but sometimes it is. I was with a computer whizz the other day who was roundly slagging off Wikipedia for its widespread errors A- I don't suppose it occurred to him to put them right. The truth is that some Wikipedia stuff is probably incorrect, either through malice or ignorance, but that doesn't invalidate it as a fine starting point for research. And, by looking at the edit history, you can get a good idea of what's going on and who's grinding which axe.

Of course, what this means is that more investigation than just a quick visit to Wikipedia is needed. Before the poor enquirer knows it, they are up to their eyeballs in time-consuming searching and filtering. It's meat and drink for information professionals but a pain in the backside for most people.

I wonder if there's a service role that responds to questions like 'give me a profile of the most promising solar energy start-ups in the last year'. I'm guessing that the cost of the seeker's time would more than compensate for the cost of the information professional's. A net gain to the organisation.