The online version of the "Knowledge@Wharton" publication has another entry to add to the debate about user-generated content and how it impacts traditional publishing business models.

For starters, I agree with how the the article disagees with Newsweek magazine's recent "Revenge of the Experts" cover story in which the magazine argues that the "pendulum" is swinging away from the influence of the user-generated crowd (blogs, social media, eBay even) and back to content edited by professionals. Here's the money quote:

Experts at Wharton disagree on where the Internet content pendulum sits and whether it's worth fretting over the short-term swings between professional and amateur content. Wharton marketing professor Peter Fader and Wharton legal studies and business ethics professor Kevin Werbach say fears about user-generated content are misplaced. "It's absurd to say the pendulum is swinging back to professional content. User-generated content has just been born," says Fader. There is little evidence to suggest that it takes market share from the professional variety, he adds.

Great to see Kevin Werbach of the SuperNova conferences (and a leading thinker on the Web), quoted in the article and putting the whole Amateur vs. Professional in its rightful context.

Despite hand wringing over professional and amateur content, the reality is that consumers will use and appreciate both.

I agree with their conclusion as well: Both have their place.