iCurrent was purchased by the Washington Post yesterday. In a nutshell, it’s a news aggregator that is able to be personalized. I honestly had not had any experience with it until I read about the purchase. In the past it has been reviewed by cnet

iCurrent contains no magical thinking or head-slappy reconceptualizations of news. It’s just an aggregation service done well, with useful and clear features for users, and a straightforward sharing mechanism.

So why am I giving this any time here at Content Mission? Because when I tried it I honestly thought it produced more of what the web is known for these days which is low quality content. Granted I put in Internet marketing and other areas that can be rife with spam and junk but the article I was given as something of interest and importance to me based on my preferences read like this with typos

In Google’s eyes ever Website has a equal shot a ranking high in search engine results and there is no charge.

Improper grammar like

Google uses dozens of factors to determine rankings and there system is always changing.

And the classic “What does this even mean?” sentence like

Don’t the wrong message anybody can do SEO (Search Engine Optimization) but it takes a huge amount of time and its very difficult.

This ‘article’ came from the Examiner site which is low grade content farm (are there any high level ones, really?). No matter what the rest of the story is regarding why the Washington Post bought iCurrent or how they intend to use it, it already looks to be a subpar addition to a traditionally reliable news outlet.

Welcome to the world of content farm ‘journalism’ and my favorite term for its output: craptent.