Content with Intent Delivers Search and Sales Impact
March 28, 2011
Millions of content creators on the Internet must now tighten their output or face obscurity. As a result of a recent change in Google’s quality grading, writers and bloggers are scrambling. Luckily, something can be done. Stephen E Arnold, ArnoldIT.com, will be one of the speakers at “Google Changes the Rules” on March 30, 2011, in Manhattan at iBreakfast. The “content with intent” tag line is one that Mr. Arnold has used since his work on the Threat Open Source Intelligence Gateway, funded by an interesting government entity in the fall of 2001. He has refined the system and method for a number of clients worldwide. To see an example of the technique, navigate to Google, run the query “taxodiary” or “inteltrax” and follow the links. Your product or company can achieve similar sales and marketing impact in as little as one month. Unlike SEO, the content with intent method persists. Run a query on Google.com for “ssnblog”. This demo site has not been updated since April 30, 2011 and the content continues to be easily findable. Keep in mind that the Web sites for each of these examples is one way to access the information. The method touches hundreds of findability services, including real time and social systems.
Most SEO delivers an expensive, often problematic, failure for clients with unrealistic expectations for an expensive, low traffic Web site. Source: http://www.lifepurposediscoverysystem.com/blog/uploaded_images/fear-of-failure-768216.gif
This shift ArnoldIT’s “content with intent” approach manifest is an innovation driven by a high volume of lower quality online content and increasingly heavy handed SEO tactics.
Stephen E Arnold’s “content with intent” method works in a manner similar to a series of bursts, a digital MIRV. Source: http://www.rolfkenneth.no/NWO_review_Sutton_Soviet.html
In what appears to be increasingly desperate attempts to generate traffic to a Web site, search engine optimization experts have forced Google and other search systems like Blekko.com to take action. Going forward, search vendors will, like a strict teacher, to scrutinize, “grade”, and flunk some online information.
Arnold says, “In effect, Google is like a college composition teacher. Grades of C, D, and F are not acceptable. Deliver A or B content or suffer the consequences.” “Does Google have an emotional investment in great writing?,” asks Arnold. He answers his own question this way, “No, Google cares about ad revenue and lousy content could harm Google cash flow.”
The relationship between content producers and Google sounds grim at best. Fortunately, Steve Arnold, author of Google: A Digital Gutenberg and managing director of Arnold IT, recently provided four tips for moving out of “SEO hell”, where guessing and shoddy content are likely to yield decreasing traffic from major search engines like Google and systems which federate its outputs:
Protected: Raytion Search Connectors Expansion
March 28, 2011
Resource Links: Text Extraction From HTML Documents
March 28, 2011
We found another nifty links page to add to your software utility file. The list comes from Tomaž Kova?i?’s Tech Blog. He gathered resource links about text extraction from HTML documents to aid the wayward IT worker.
He first highlights articles that cover the basics of text extraction. By reading these articles, you gain a general knowledge about text extraction and the best way to approach it for your needs. He also mentions how to eliminate content “noise” (i.e. content farms).
He’s also collected a comprehensive list of links related to software about text extraction. He says, “There is only a small amount of competition when it comes to software capable of [removing boilerplate text / extracting article text / cleaning web pages / predicting informative content blocks] or whatever terms authors are using to describe the capabilities of their product.”
Extracting text from an HTML document is relatively simple. The type of software you use makes it more complex. He ends with information about APIs and other miscellaneous links that will be helpful. Stash it away for future use.
Whitney Grace, March 28, 2011
Google in the Red Zone
March 27, 2011
The “red zone” in American football means an area in which a team can and often is expected to score. I don’t want to go out on a limb or offer too much commentary. I think the two stories greeting me after de-planing from my Hong Kong flight speak loudly.
First, be sure to read “Google: A New Tool for US Intelligence?” The source is good old NPR, an organization in the minds of budget conscious regulators when I left a few days ago. The story contains this statement:
Still, Google Trends can’t predict the future. But it could be one more tool for intelligence officials who want to tap into the private conversations that could spark popular movements.
Too bad the story did not mention the In-Q-Tel and alleged Google investment in Recorded Future. Wonder why? Not me.
Second, you may want to give “At Google, Page Aims to Clear Red Tape.” If the link goes dark or you have to pay to read the story, there’s not much I can do. I found this passage interesting:
Some managers believe Mr. Page will eliminate or downgrade projects he doesn’t believe are worthwhile, freeing up employees to work on more important initiatives, these people said. One project expected to get less support is Google Health, which lets people store medical records and other health data on Google’s servers, said people familiar with the matter. Mr. Page has also tried to facilitate better communication among top executives and give employees access to them. He recently mandated a “bullpen” session every afternoon, in which he and the company’s executive officers sit and work on small couches outside a board room in Building 43 at Google’s headquarters.
I have a good feel for the “controlled chaos” approach at Google. My question, “Will Xooglers who implement management methods nurtured at Google be able to hit their revenue targets? My hunch is that Google methods are likely to create some significant management challenges and may exacerbate existing problems. Just what the US Department of Commerce needs.
The coverage of Google is becoming more an more interesting in my opinion. After more that a decade in business the “scrutiny” of Google remains oddly disconnected from the realities of the company which has one way of generating revenue.
Stephen E Arnold, March 27, 2011
Freebie often like lunch
Oracle and Open Source: An Analyst Slurps from the Empyrean Spring
March 27, 2011
Analysts. One has to love them. Most ignore the injunction, “drink deep or taste not the empyrean spring.” And why not? I just read “Salesforce.com (CRM) And Oracle (ORCL) Benefit From Open Source and Cloud Computing Based Applications That Will Lead To Higher Software Profits In H2 2011: An Exclusive Interview With Brad Zelnick Of Macquarie Group.” That is a title that will keep the Google modified algorithm hopping. Also, the url is probably going to be dead by the time you read this article. Such is the way of the kill switch, SEO choked Internet.
The key point in this write up is the analyst’s view of Oracle. The passage I noted was this one:
One of our top picks in 2011 is Oracle Corp. (ORCL) To some extent, it’s a consensus buy-rated stock, but sometimes consensus actually gets it right. Oracle is clearly one of the greatest technology companies of all time. They are an execution machine, and they’ve got a captive installed base of customers that continue to come back year after year to purchase more and more capacity. Investors don’t necessarily give Oracle enough credit for its innovation and the amount of money invested in R&D, which in recent years has resulted in an appliance strategy that we think is game changing. Oracle has a near monopoly in certain areas of traditional database technology and even middleware. I would suggest that customers don’t want to spend a dollar more with Oracle than they have to unless there’s something truly unique and truly advantaged in terms of technology, and that’s the way we view Exadata. We believe it has a value proposition that’s compelling not just in competing with appliance-based data warehousing alternatives from the likes of Teradata (TDC) or now IBM’s (IBM) Netezza or EMC’s (EMC) Greenplum, but also for consolidating transaction-processing workloads and basically delivering superior performance at a much lower total cost. It’s so compelling that we’re hearing anecdotal evidence of customers that in the past might have come to Oracle to negotiate an enterprise deal every few years, but that are now returning to the table to take advantage of Exadata. With an average price point of about $1 million per box – if we multiply that out by what we believe the pipeline could be, we think this can be a meaningful contributor to growth for Oracle into the second half of their fiscal 2011.
On the surface, the explanation is reasonable. I like the “greatest” which adds some special zest to a former Bear, Stearns’ vineyard worker. But even more notable is “an execution machine” with “a captive base of customers.” I pretty much agree. Where this empyrean influenced thinking leads, however, is interesting. Somehow Oracle and captive does not map to Oracle and open source. My hunch is that because Oracle bought some open source goodness, that is enough for our empyrean guzzling analyst.
Oracle is a proprietary outfit. Its search is proprietary, and, in my opinion, its tie up with Amazon is proprietary. And I think anything Oracle does with open source is going to go along the “captive” and proprietary route that makes Mr. Ellison a champ among champs.
Does this matter? Not to an investment type. Does it matter to open source? Yep.
Stephen E Arnold, March 27, 2011
Freebie unlike Oracle DBMS licenses
Google and Its Methods: Controlled Chaos and Legal Counsel
March 27, 2011
The Register ran an interesting story “Google Contradicts Own Counsel in Face of Antitrust Probe.” The issue is how Google determines what a user sees in a results list. The story covers a number of complicated issues. These are far beyond the ken of a Harrod’s Creek goose. Now I have no idea what is accurate and what is waffling. One point is that Google supplements its numerical recipes with a little help from the humans at Google. Interesting. After wading through Google’s patent applications, I had the mistaken impression that Google’s methods relied upon math. Guess I was wrong. Manual intervention and presenting information that is different from what certain Google representatives asserted surprised me. Numerical recipes are supposed to be consistent, maybe more consistent than Googlers. What’s clear is that Google’s use of controlled chaos as a management method creates a lot of work for those who have to figure what Googlers say is accurate at any point in time.
Tough job, and one that is important to outfits like companies dependent on Google for revenue, the search engine optimization crowd who make a living spoofing the GOOG, and the Google itself which needs AdWords revenues. Tough balancing act. Are there any winds blowing that will make keeping balance difficult? Will controlled chaos triumph over what seems to be some inconsistency?
Stephen E Arnold, March 27, 2011
Freebie
Antidot Funding
March 26, 2011
We learned in ITespresso.fr’s story “Antidot Raises Funds to Help Its Development.” (If you don’t read French, you’ll need to run this through a translator like Google’s free service.)
Antidot’s Finder Suite has been, according to the article, at the forefront of semantic web technologies. Now, Antidot wants to develop search engine-specific versions of their software. The company’s appeal to investors is not unusual, but they are hardly struggling. According to the company, the firm in 2009, experienced a 34 percent increase in revenue. The article said:
“ ‘In seven years, Antidot has multiplied its turnover 30 times and created 40 jobs, taking a strong position in a highly competitive market. Antidot has been profitable for seven years and we have the means to finance our development,’ explains Fabrice Lacroix, President and founder of Antidot.”
However, the company feels that this fund-raising is important to their growth at this time. There has been management change at Polyspot and Sinequa. Kartoo, another French search vendor, has gone dark. Antidot is not as well known as Exalead, which was acquired by the French technology and services firm Dassault in 2010. What will Antidot’s engineers develop? We will monitor the innovations.
Cynthia Murrell March 26, 2011
Is an AOL Management Shift Coming?
March 26, 2011
Let me go out on a limb. I have observed Googlers in cubes and in management positions. Unlike the Google believers, I think that the equation Google = Good Management is a bit like 1 + 1 = 3. I read “Huffington-Armstrong Smackdown at AOL” and realized that the author is pretty much on the right cow path.
Here’s the passage I liked.
Meanwhile, Armstrong has to keep control of the company. He needs Huffington — now regarded as the company’s savior — more than she needs him because she has such a strong image. I wonder how long Huffington, who has grown accustomed to speaking her mind and having all the power at her company, will remain content to report to Armstrong. AOL has done nothing since the Huffington Post deal to show that it is in control of its destiny, that it has a coherent growth strategy and that it knows how to win. Arianna Huffington, the theory goes, surely knows how to win.
I think this is on the money, but it does not make the point clearly enough. I think what I would have said is that the Googler (Tim Armstrong) is going to find himself reporting to a person who can manage, and dominate. In short, the Googler is going to have his hands full. Several decisions of the Googler will come back to hang like a cloud over the “new” AOL.
First, the play for local content was expensive and is going to be exposed as a move that won’t yield the money the local golden goose is alleged to reside in the AOL offices.
Second, the expensive New York media wizards will find themselves looking into the eyes of a person who knows how to get traffic and eye balls without expensive New York media talent. You can terminate folks in India today but tomorrow, the empty cubicles will be in the good old USA.
Third, in a day to day content of “who can manage better”, the Googler is going to be in one of those corporate Mixed Martial Arts’s battles. I go with the Huffster.
Stephen E Arnold, March 26, 2011
Freebie unlike the local news company AOL bought
Facebook and Search
March 26, 2011
I found “Bing Windfall: Facebook Testing Web Search Box” quite suggestive. The idea is that Facebook is going to have (maybe) a search box. My view is that Facebook is a head to head competitor to Google and Microsoft in search but, once again, I learned that my view is different from others’ views. Here’s the passage that caught my attention:
No doubt Bing would pay a serious amount of money for access to the 500 million plus members’ search queries when using Facebook. It is this type of deal that would dramatically increase Bing’s market share of search. Between the addition of Questions to help let friends answer questions you may go to Google to find answer, this test box must be a serious shot across the Google bow.
I agree, but I think that the future of Facebook in search is to crawl the Web sites its members input. The Bing angle might be a lucrative temporary step. With lots of Xooglers at Facebook, search is going to be part of the woodwork. Darned interesting challenge for the Google as its management team starts to think about Ohio’s grousing about alleged Google activities.
Stephen E Arnold, March 26, 2011
Freebie
Protected: Dead Tree File Search
March 25, 2011
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
