I guess bloggers could be curators. It seems like it is hard to determine because the original curators had to sift through libraries or catalogs to find what they thought would be important and what could add content and generate interest. Today, Google seems like the ultimate curator. You type into Google what you want to find, and it sorts the information for you. However, this is also a false sense of the actual word curator because curators would find the most interesting or topic forming information. Google however, sorts information based on the amount of tags that a page has or by how many times the page was visited. Because of this, people often just use the top source in Google and don’t take the time to go through the information.
Bloggers could be curators depending on how much time they take to actually read through articles and images before they post them. If a blogger wants to post an interesting article about global warming. If they searched on Google ‘articles about global warming’ a billion articles would come up. However, if they went to a library or were able to find an article that was published in a scientific journal, and post that, it would make them more of a curator. They would first go through the information and pull out what they think is the best, and then give this information to their blog readers. Based on this, if a curator does the information searching process correctly, they could successfully make themselves into a curator blogger. However, if a blogger becomes lazy and finds articles and photos the quick and honestly more convenient way, then their blog will no longer be a proper curator blog.
Examples of this could be like buzz feed, where the posts are not meant to be serious and random things are not thought about and posted all the time. Versus a blog about American Literature where the blogger is well versed in knowledge on the subject and tells readers parts of books to read based off of information.