<http://schema.org/articleBody>
"Big Think is a new network that as officially launched today, with some pretty big backers, including Peter Thiel.  At first glance it appears to be a YouTube for the mature crowd: go to the site and you're immediately met with video clips from industry experts, analysts and other notables of some sort, such as Mitt Romney speaking on the issue of using the state of Iowa as the bellwether it has become.  \nA YouTube for smart people.  Is that very intriguing to you?  \nWith a reported funding amount somewhere in the low 7 figures, somebody thinks it's a great idea.  And I think that a network such as Big Think could actually have a lot of success.  It's quite similar to Newsvine in its mature appeal and seriousness about the content found throughout the site.  I think it will attract a very similar crowd.  But what Big Think has done is gathered professionally produced video content ripe with commentary from analysts and connoisseurs across an array of topics in order to get the ball rolling on a worldwide discussion of anything and everything under the sun.  It's up to you as a user to finish the discussion.  What you're left with is a weighted crowd-sourcing model.  \n\nCheck out any given topic and you're presented with a video of an expert, along with additional videos from other experts below.  Everyone else's responses are shown even further down the screen, and even these can be riddled with written commentary from the experts.  I know the site is rather new, but I did have quite a time finding commentary from a regular user.  Any user, however can create an idea as well.  \nSimilar to Digg, users have the opportunity to rank responses and ideas, and the most popular will rise to the top.  In submitting an idea, I found additional similarities to the likes of Newsvine and Digg: your content is nicely organized according to your topic.  Is it timeless or current? Is it a meta topic or a physical topic?  This rather involved method of categorizing the content that's submitted to the site is more than helpful for searchability\u2014its leading format makes it easier for users to comprehend the usage and organization of the site itself.  \nAnd by that I mean that the demographic I envision using this site is in the Baby Boomer realm or a bit younger.  Those that like to watch Hardball in the evenings and frequently visit CNN on their television or computer.  Those that have an opinion and often voice it to an unresponsive television set, or their poor spouse sitting beside them on the sofa.  What Big Think has done is take a mainstream approach to a citizen journalism site in order to encourage submissions from users.  It's a similar tactic that many of the traditional print media companies used in gaining participation from readers for the political interviews that were published on their websites.  I think it's the type of push from the media that will get a more mature demographic further involved with the creation and dispersement of content across the Internet.  \nBut the question remains: how integrated will Big Think be for actual Internet use?  Its videos cannot be embed, and while you can send them to a friend or bookmark them on Facebook, there doesn't appear to be any plans for further integration with existing social networks, or the development of its own network for more individualistic purposes, such as taking the media outside of the Big Think network for expansion or promotional purposes.  I'd be very interested to see how Big Think will take its next steps."^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://mashable.com/2008/01/07/big-think/>