Chief Economist of Google Invents a Search Tool for Advertising
December 21, 2009
Most companies don’t have a chief economist. Google has a chief economist. The economist is Hal R. Varian.
Dr. Varian has good paper.
Dr. Varian worked on a Google team which includes other Google wizards. The invention is “search tool advertising”. Definitely clear. In prose any patent attorney would be proud to claim, US2009/0299816 says:
A content item is presented to at least one user via a first medium, where the content item identifies a target concept. The first medium can be, for instance, radio, television, print advertisements, or the Internet. The number of requests at a search tool for the target concept are measured subsequent to the presentation of the content item in the first medium. The difference (e.g, increase or decrease) in use of a second medium, e.g., the Internet, subsequent to the presentation of the content item in the first medium can be measured, which can be used to modify a value associated with a subsequent presentation of the content item using the first medium.
Speaks volumes, doesn’t it?
The diagrams are abstract. The claims, all 30 of them, make clear that the Google is moving forward with the use of semi autonomous agents to assemble content. Although focused on advertising, the “assembly” plumbing can be seen elsewhere in Google’s open source information. (You think I am going to list these co-occurrences in a free Web log? Wrong.)
Several points strike me of interest:
- The invention applies to text and other media; for example, television or radio
- Metrics make the little method hum; that is, data from the system feed back and inform subsequent decisions the semi autonomous agents make
- The use of the word “publisher” makes clear that the “digital Gutenberg” is alive and kicking. See [0030].
Stephen E. Arnold, December 21, 2009
Oyez, oyez, this is a freebie. I want to disclose this fact to the Economic Adjustment Office. Google competitors will have to make some adjustments due to Google economics. Where better to report and seek succor?
Ambient Makes a Reappearance
December 21, 2009
Every few moon cycles, search ideas morph and surface with fresh lipstick. There was the nomadic search and there was ambient information. Ambient is back, and the idea is to take the information from RSS, Twitter, geolocation, and updates to Web pages and snap the Lego blocks together. Great idea, and it is one that outfits like Bright Planet, Deep Web Technologies, Fetch Technologies, Jack Be, Kapow, and a number of intelligence service systems are doing. Sure, some of the outfits are farther along (intel services); others have nifty technology (Fetch Technologies); and others shave updated established content acquisition systems (Bright Planet).
If you want to read more about ambient search, navigate to “Beyond Real-time Search: The Dawning Of Ambient Streams” by Edo Segal. The write up in interesting and contains a Venn diagram to pinpoint the opportunity for those who want to know about one of the “next big things”.
The Google is slogging away in this space, and it has been since it bought a Seattle start up and hired Dr. Ramanathan Guha. Other Google wizards are coding their souls’ insights to make information more timely, smart, useful, and “federated”.
For me, the most interesting comment in the write up was:
The challenges we face in terms of making real progress stems from the fact that the overarching goal is one that requires a multi-disciplinary approach across a myriad of data sets. While there are many companies executing in each of the quadrants few are in a position to access the full scope of data and therefore the ability to create the Holy Grail of filters is limited.
That’s an interest area of the Google. I don’t think it will carry humans beyond search. Moving beyond search requires a leap frog play and a willingness to leave behind the popular notion of intentional information retrieval.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 22, 2009
I disclose this is a freebie, designed to provide some context for what appears to be a break through insight. For reporting what seems to be new but is actually not new, I am monitored by the Bureau of Industry and Security. Keep industry safe from learning about the past is my motto.
SharePoint Sunday and Its Holiday Sparkles
December 21, 2009
If you read this Web log, you know that on Sunday I catch up with the tips and tricks the goslings and I have explored when we explore the n-dimensional fractal world of SharePoint. Image source: http://www.fractal-recursions.com/files/fractal-04120304.html
First, you will want to navigate to SharePoint Automation. “Creating a SharePoint 2010 Enterprise Search Service Application using PowerShell” provides information about:
the most difficult PowerShell task you’ll undertake when scripting your SharePoint 2010 install, specifically the search application is the most difficult which is why I’ve chosen to explain it first as I expect it to be one of the most needed and one of the least understood.
You will want to snag both the explanation and the code snippets. Otherwise, you will be a busy beaver getting the default search system to work without quite a bit of manual fiddling. Useful post.
Second, read “Adding Search Refinements in SharePoint 2010.” The defaults for the baked in search in SharePoint 2010 is guaranteed in my opinion to lead to Yellow Sticky Note-itis. A very expensive disease that can consume an employee’s energy. Although brief, the screen shots and the comments will save you lots of time.
Third, organizations may have file types unknown to the SharePoint 2010 filters. If you have file types that end up in the exception bin or that kill SharePoint 2010 content processing outright, you will want to read “ SharePoint Full Text Crawl of Custom File Types.” There is quite a bit of confusion about connectors. Even when you think you have a stable connector, an errant bit can generate an instant migraine. The connector vendor will look into the problem and deliver a fix in most cases. The problem is that your migraine persists until the connector behaves. This write up explains a connector problem and then points to fix in “Adventures in SPWonderland”. This is not a full solution, but it will get you in gear.
These examples make clear the simplicity and engineering attention to detail in SharePoint 2010. Imagine what the Microsoft Fast enterprise search solution will deliver. Google must be shaking in its pointy little boots, the ones with the silver bells on them.
Google and Bing: The November Horse Race Results
December 21, 2009
Through the complex route of Yahoo, I read Barry Levine’s “Google Is Galloping Way Ahead as Bing Moves Up.” I live in Kentucky, so the horse analogy is interesting. The search market is not a horse race. The search market is an interesting manifestation of information usage.
Guess what you can buy for dinner here. Which search engine logo will be mounted on the wall?
Without substantive change in human behavior, there is little likelihood that Google will lose its lead any time soon. The analogies to horses abound in the Newsfactor story. I like metaphors. I enjoyed “They Shoot Horses Don’t They”, and I like to window shop at the boucheries chevalines.
For me the key point in the write up was:
The competition, said Information Technology Intelligence Corp.’s Laura DiDio, is like “everyone being way behind Secretariat in the 1973 Belmont Stakes,” where the legendary racehorse “looked like he was racing against himself.” In the race for second place, DiDio added, the “momentum goes to Bing.” She noted that Microsoft’s entry into search has gained two percent since May, Yahoo’s has dropped from 20.5 percent, and Google appears to be stabilizing in its way-out-front position. Measured as query volume, Bing had the largest growth of the top search engines in November, with a six percent increase in volume. Yahoo’s dropped two percent, and Google’s edged up one percent. comScore’s stats include partner and cross-channel searches, but not searches for mapping, local directory, or user-generated video sites. The actual number of searches was about 9.5 billion for Google, 2.5 billion for Yahoo, 1.5 billion for Bing, 548 million for Ask, and 401 million for AOL.
The question for me is which of these nags will end up on the grill?
Stephen E. Arnold, December 19, 2009
I wish to disclose a free write up to the USDA, an entity focused on making sure I eat beef, chicken, and the other white meat, not losers of horse races.
Google and TV
December 20, 2009
Short honk: With NBC in the Comcast camp, network television is disrupted. Two different outfits have spoken with me about Google’s technical capabilities in “television”. That information is buried amidst Google’s technical math speak. I can direct the two or three readers of this Web log to the image below and ask a few questions, which I don’t plan on answering. I wrote briefly about Fast Flip and neglected to put in a link that explains the number of Google partners for the service. You can get the details in eBrand’s “Google Adds 50 New Media Partners To “Fast Flip” Online News Project.” Note the “mobile version” link.
Now let’s do some of that B school and law school hypothetical stuff. Here’s an image from Google News, December 19, 2009, about 1 pm Eastern:
Notice the three “red” blobs. In my opinion, those are metaphorical drops of blood from the wounds that Google is about to inflict on the TV satraps.
Now the media survivability questions:
- What happens if Google generates a list of links to current videos that match a user’s history and other data?
- What happens when the post 1994 crowd uses mobile devices as their primary means of obtaining video content?
- Who can monetize these services?
- Have you seen Google TV?
If you don’t know the answers to these questions, you may want to do some Google technical paper reading. The “Sergey and Larry eat pizza” non fiction studies of Google may not nail the correct answers these questions.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 21, 2009
I wish to report to the Federal Bureau of Prisons, where some crazed and now unemployed media mavens may end up unless they plan for a new career, that this post is a free, public-service questionnaire.
A Google Yelp Analysis Misses a Big One
December 20, 2009
Googzilla has had enough of this social network stuff. A misfire with Orkut left Googzilla uncertain. With interest in things social rising, the Mountain View math club is on the move. Real time search results now appear in Google results lists. Yesterday, the pundits and poobahs were alight with rumors of Googzilla’s gobbling Yelp.com, a restaurant review service on steroids. My goslings tell me that Yelp is more than restaurant reviews. I believe them. I just don’t use the site because Yelp does not do a bang up job on eateries in the high tech capital of Kentucky where I live.
Silicon Alley Insider ran an interesting with-it, video story called “Google Wants To Buy Yelp For These 6 Reasons” in the pure Google format; that is, a with it person just talking to a digital video camera. The idea is that serialized information is really useful. Even better, talking is easy for some poobahs. Best of all, a goof up can be reshot or, better yet, deleted. Most video indexing sucks, so few know exactly what is going on with this new method of presenting information without the hassle of real words and sentences. Stalin would have loved the medium in my opinion. Revisionism made easy.
In the video story, the Silicon Alley Insider talent races through six reasons why Google wants to buy Yelp.com. Since Google is not talking, I assumed that I would get the inside scoop on the Mountain View math club. What I heard were six reasons that a first year B school student could have cadged from a couple of hours watching CNBC. These reasons include adjacency, cultural “fit”, local content, and “killer apps on the mobile Web.”
The big reason Google wants Yelp.com is to get more money. Yep, Yelp.com traffic equals money. Amazing how the basics of B school get lost in the BS.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 20, 2009
A freebie. To which scintillating government agency do I report this depressing state of affairs. How about the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). This group should be able to relate to the reason Google wants to buy Yelp even if Silicon Valley Insider did not.
Convera 3Q 2009 Results
December 20, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who sent me a link to GuruFocus.com’s information about Convera’s third quarter 2009 10-K report. Interesting reading. You can find a summary on the GuruFocus Web site. You can access the full SEC filing here. The news is that Convera is getting smaller like a zip file. I did find one comment that was germane to my work:
As of October 31, 2009, Convera has 60 vertical search websites with 23 separate publishers under contract, with 50 of these vertical search sites in production and 10 of the websites in development awaiting launch. At October 31, 2008, Convera had 82 vertical search websites from 28 publishers under contract, of which 45 were in production and 37 were in development awaiting launch. Despite the overall increase in sites in production on a year over year basis, revenues generated by the sites have declined. This decline is due in part to the renegotiation of contract rates with a major customer as well as reduced ad rates. Our ad share levels have suffered as publisher’s online ad revenues have declined as a result of the current economic downturn.
I noted the “renogotiation”. And this metric is a keeper: 60 Web sites generated in the third quarter a comprehensive loss of $2,324,000 or about a negative $39,000 per Web site. That’s a fine payoff from the Convera vertical search business model. The fact that Convera made sales to publishers makes clear that its customers have a sixth sense for a deal. As I reflect over my general knowledge of Convera, the firm did not make scanning pay off, enterprise search pay off, or government contracting pay off. Little wonder search and content processing has to work hard to get the tune for R-E-S-P_E-C-T out of its sound track.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 21, 2009
Oyez, oyez, I wrote this for free. I want to report this to the SEC because it needs to know that Convera and the addled goose have near zero revenue in common. I am at a loss for words, just not a loss of money.
Quality Journalism Chases New Revenue Angles
December 20, 2009
I live in rural Kentucky so news doesn’t reach the goose pond as it does in a real city. I noticed in my hard copy Wall Street Journal, page W13 (?!) for December 19, 2009, an advertisement with the headline, “Engage journalists and bloggers with the perfect pitch.” There is also a news release on MarketWatch—part of the for fee service available on the Sony eBook reader—about this Dow Jones product. Paying for marketing collateral strikes me as an interesting approach. Charging Sony WSJ subscribers for a marketing pitch. That’s better than Google’s subsidizer model in my opinion.
Image source: http://farm1.static.flickr.com/242/446538765_bfa89f9875.jpg
With news of the London Evening Standard, owned by a certain high profile Russian business person (Alexander Lebedev, an alleged former KGB professional, I wondered about the combination of “journalists” and “bloggers”. Obviously media ownership and the economic crisis makes strange bedfellows. I thought “journalists” were a breed apart from “bloggers”. I am not even a blogger. I am an addled goose and marketing shill, flogging my studies chock full of patent references and the odd Latin or Greek phrase. This high quality journalism business is too sophisticated for mere waterfowl.
I plunged forward in the full page advertisement from the Wall Street Journal about the Wall Street Journal’s software. The product carries the name of Dow Jones, which is a unit of News Corp. As you know, the News Corp. stands for quality journalism and premium content. (I wrote about paying more for the Sony digital WSJ than the hard copy recently. I think the price difference was about $140. The paper edition was cheaper! I find that hard to grasp, but the addled goose was never a top notch economist like those employed by News Corp.)
The idea which I gleaned from a quick trip to http://www.dowjones.com/product-mrm.asp is:
a news-enabled media database and journalist/blogger contact management tool that helps communications professionals pinpoint and engage the right influencers and quickly evaluate the outcome of their media relations activities. Dow Jones links its global collection of traditional and social media with journalist and blogger contact, profile, beat and pitch data so that media relations professionals can easily understand what journalists and bloggers are writing about today and then easily correlate resulting media coverage to their efforts.
I as skimmed the marketing information for this product, I got the impression that this product allows a person with a story idea or a marketer to develop a mailing list and crank out a bunch of targeted emails. I don’t know about you, but I thought this sounded a bit like a spamming program or spamming system.
According to FinChannel.com:
The launch marks the further expansion of Dow Jones’s workflow solutions for communications professionals. The company’s media monitoring and media evaluation tools are used by Global Fortune 2000 companies, public relations agencies, government and nonprofits to research campaigns faster and more thoroughly, stay ahead of breaking news, monitor social media conversations, detect issues earlier, measure campaign effectiveness and easily share campaign results with executives and employees.
Here’s what the software can do, according to the Dow Jones Web site:
Craft highly relevant and personalized pitches, increasing the likelihood that your story will be covered… Understand at a glance what journalists and bloggers are covering today and how best to contact them … Fine tune your contact list to those most likely to be interested … Find the right editorial opportunity for your story … Email a personalized pitch that will get results.
In order to buy the product, Dow Jones provides a “contact me” button. You can also download a free eBook. I found that interesting because books are subject to considerable scrutiny these days. I suppose a book that is about buying a product from Dow Jones is different from the content provided in the newspaper. I think marketing collateral is “free” and okay to use.
You can download a fact sheet and learn about other Dow Jones marketing programs like Insight, which I don’t fully understand because I didn’t bother to download the brochures on these topics. I must admit that I did not visit the “Knowledge Center”. The addled goose has a tough enough time understanding a commercial spam system, thank you very much.
I do understand one thing. Not a single word about the cost of this system. Other thoughts:
- I wonder if those spams urging me, a subscriber to the hard copy newspaper, to take out another subscription were generated by this system?
- Who makes the determination about journalists in the database?
- Who makes the determination about bloggers in the database?
- What are the rules for removing a person or entity from the database?
- What are the tracking mechanisms in place for licensees; that is, what does Dow Jones collect about the users of its software?
- How does the email blast get around spam filters?
Interesting stuff. Right up there with the free Evening Standard and the Washington Post’s running stories from Web logs as hard content.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 20, 2009
Okay, okay, another disclosure. A freebie. Who is the oversight authority today? I will report the non paid status of this article to none other than the Council on Environmental Quality. Keep information pure, I say.
RatBook: UK Bad Guy Goodies
December 19, 2009
Short honk: It is not often that I come across a new information service that intrigues me. I have done a tiny bit of work in the UK. I don’t know too much about people who participate in crimes, but the Rat Book makes it easy to get some information. If you want to know about criminals in the UK, navigate to the RatBook.com.
The firm told me:
Our website exposes convicted criminals across the UK, currently containing over 14,000 criminal profiles (updated daily), consisting of Paedophiles, Perverts, Rapists, Murderers, Abusers, Terrorists, and other Violent Criminals. Criminals can be searched based on their location, and the crimes they have committed, all through our easy to use Rat Map.
My query for “Russian” generated and interesting list of hits. Some of the content was dated, which is not unusual for information generated by a government entity and made available to a non-governmental service. Might be useful.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 19, 2009
Oyez, oyez, a freebie. I am now reporting this fact to the Court of International Trade. My hunch is that some of the bad people may move to and fro.
Search Vendor Naming: Avoid This Problem
December 19, 2009
I don’t want to make a big quack about the importance of branding, but picking a name for a search or content processing company is important. My Overflight service returned a document with the title “Brainware Has Launched Its graphic Design Site.” I track Brainware, the content scanning and eDiscovery company. When I looked at the news story I discovered that the Brainware in the article is the Indian firm with the same name as Brainware, the information retrieval company. Brainware India describes itself this way:
Brainware is a leading IT solutions company. Since its inception it is providing services in the sphere of IT education, Web and Multimedia including graphic web design, website programming solutions, brochure design and flash design. The company provides a wide-ranging education atmosphere to individuals and enterprises, offering training that are adapted to the varied needs of audiences with diverse backgrounds.
Brainware the search and content processing company says this:
Brainware, Inc. is an innovative provider of intelligent data capture and enterprise search solutions that help Global 2000 companies eliminate costly manual data entry, rapidly process large volumes of documents and retrieve data from across the enterprise. Our solutions were built from the ground up to manage unstructured data without templates, exact definitions, taxonomies or indexing.
My thought is that life is sufficiently complicated without having to figure out which Brainware is which.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 19, 2009
Oyez, oyez, my addled goose brain wears thin with the task of reporting whether I am paid or not paid for Web log posts. I wish to disclose that I paid people today; no one paid me. Which US agency controls this aspect of my blogging life? I know. I shall forthwith report to the Court of International Trade. I feel better already by disclosing that this is a freebie.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
