The Register’s Simon Sharwood looked at the downside of this business model – junk data.

Even the most well intentioned users makes mistakes with thing like addresses and that’s before you get mischief makers or competitors putting in false information.

There’s another aspect too, what one person thinks is relevant may not be to other users or to the people running the service, Simon cites the dozens of “mom’s kitchens” on Foursquare.

For those who’ve added their mom’s house, that’s relevant and maybe even funny to them.

All of this illustrates the downside to the free, User Generated Content (UGC) model; you have to accept what the users give you.

Which means it isn’t free – it has to be collated, processed and the noise has to be filtered out.

At worst, somebody has to make the decision what is relevant and what has to go. This isn’t easy and, as Google found with their Name Wars, can upset a lot of users if it isn’t handled well.

Nothing in life is truly free and with data becoming increasingly important to business it’s worthwhile considering the quality of that free or cheap stuff you get from the net.

There’s some interesting perspectives on where social networking is going and how people are going to make money from it.

Personally, I think too many of the big players like Bebo and MySpace are too fixated on the old broadcast media model of top down content where they control everything.

Particularly fascinating is how dismissive many of the attendees are of YouTube and Facebook. The funny thing is there were five people around me with laptops on and all of them visited their Facebook pages during the morning seminar.

The icing on the cake was on the bus home. The girl in front of me had her MacBook open and she was editing her Facebook page.

It seems to me the big established media companies are struggling with their investments in the social media space. 

More on this later.