Digital Black-Snouted Flying Frog: Objective Search Results
May 6, 2010
Pick a free online Web search service. Run a query. Are the results you see in your laundry list presented without regard to payment, bias, or some other digital tilt?
Tough to tell. At the Search Engine Meeting in Boston on April 26th and 27th, Dr. David Evans and I had one of our note-passing moments. Thank goodness he and I were not in the same math class. The professor would have taken our slide rules away and maybe banished us to the gym.
These notes presented below tackled the issue of objective search results and their becoming an endangered species in today’s rough-and-tumble marketplace.
We sketched and annotated a chart that looked like this:
The up swinging line suggests that as online users’ technical capabilities rise, the down-swinging line shows that objective search results have less value. The idea is that in the public Web search arena, subjectivity may be losing ground to objective selection and presentation of search results. The user * thinks * results are objective. The results may be subjective. If this supposition is true in a world of play for placement, online advertising, sponsored results, and the chicanery of search engine optimization experts, there may be some implications in world of Web search.
For instance, the type of search results from a service such as Delicious, Facebook, or StumbleUpon may be perceived as having more value. The idea is that if a person suggested a particular source of information and that person has some “connection” to the user, then the results may be more useful. Other possible descriptions of the results might be “trustworthy,” “accurate,” “non commercial”, or “reliable.”
In actual fact may be that these social results are as subject to commercial intent as the results in a Bing, Google, or Yahoo search list. That may not matter because there seems to be a flagging appetite for verification of information snagged from public Web sites. The demographic and social shift may be the prehistoric termites nibbling on the the intellectual foundations.
The passages below come from the notes that Dr. Evans and I exchanged in the course of our note-passing moment:
Arnold: I wonder if the interest in social media is a change in how people think about finding information. I think the social angle in the US is different from what I have experienced in China and Japan. Surprisingly there was some resistance to social media in Slovenia which contrasts sharply with the texting frenzies of the Chinese and Japanese.
Evans: In the US, we’re skeptical about authority (and resist the temptation to appear to conform to someone else’s opinions). This is not the case in other places (like Japan).
Arnold: Social is the new security problem. Information validity is an issue and some information is subject to manipulation.
Evans: It’s the network of associations that permits individuals to “suspend skepticism” and conform, cooperate, join in, etc. A kind of democracy effect. One network effect I have observed is the “rule of two”. If two acquaintances agree on a position, we’re likely also to agree.
Arnold: The social trend in the US is able to make factually incorrect information into “accurate” information.
Evans: Is this an Anglo-centric phenomenon? That is, is it a “sea change” only because we are Americans? In Japan, France, Italy, India and many other countries, social collaboration is the norm.
Arnold: The potential for misinformation is ratcheting upward in the US. Information can be shaped and the consumers of that information are unaware. Think of Fox News, which is owned by Mr. Murdoch. The information pushes an agenda, and despite its approach, the content gets wide distribution and is sometimes indistinguishable from information that does not have a slant or a political angle.
Evans: It’s ironic that a technology–digital computers and networks–designed to overcome limitations in human memory and ability to calculate probabilities and ground facts–would become the vehicles for and licensers of socially grounded points of view.
Arnold: It’s tragic that many individuals cannot make informed judgments about the information used to “know” something. The lack of information literacy gives social media in the US considerable potential for disinformational activities.
Evans: The Web has introduced noise in the information channel. It’s hard to distinguish one results of a search from another. The results “look alike” in a search results list. One might be from a respected research institution, another from a blog post. The attitude (banal democracy) has become, “Who can tell which is more reliable?”” We may be taking a huge step backwards.
Arnold: The digital Dark Ages? Figuring out which information is more accurate, reliable, or objective may be like finding a black snouted flying frog. A long shot indeed.
Stephen E Arnold and Dr. David Evans, May 4, 2010
Big Data, Big Problems
May 5, 2010
Short honk: Not all data are created equal. Understanding the difference can also help understand the privacy issues involved. Danah.org took the time to explain the complexities of data, its origin and impact, in “Privacy and Publicity in the Context of Big Data” () They identify big data as the type of data that marketers and researchers and business folks deem valuable – data about people, their activities, their interactions, their behaviors. One of the pertinent points they make is that “big-ness and whole-ness are NOT the same.” In other words, quantity doesn’t equal quality. Think Google? Think Facebook? Worth a read.
Melody K. Smith, May 5, 2010
Note: Post was not sponsored.
eBooks and Mobile
May 4, 2010
“Paper View”, which appeared in Mobile Entertainment, provides an interesting glimpse of eBooks in the UK market. For me, the most telling comment in the article was this passage from the CEO of Mobcast:
There was a good deal of support for the no-DRM idea at the Mobcast event. Tony Lynch, CEO of Mobcast, was quite forthright. He said: “The current level of DRM is problematic. But ultimately, obscurity is a bigger problem than piracy. People need to be able to find what they want, and if they can they will buy. The single biggest complaint we get is about availability. That’s what we need to focus on.” Evidence suggests that removing DRM can work and may indeed become the norm in e-books as it is in music. In the 18 months since O’Reilly, the world’s largest publisher of tech books, stopped using DRM on its e-books, sales increased by 104 per cent. Hard to assess how much of that growth was organic, but it’s still a thought-provoking figure.
Common sense may not prevail. The stakes are sufficiently high that companies perceiving themselves as kingpins want control. Right now, I am looking at any reference to open, open source, and standards to try and figure out if these are marketing words or something else.
Apple is the poster child for control. When Apple talks about “standards” and an “open Web”, I have some disambiguation to do.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Simplifying Search, Is It Possible?
May 4, 2010
“iPad Guts Approach to PC Design, Says iSuppli” triggered a thought about enterprise search. The article points out that the iPad eliminates the complexity from personal computers. The interface dictated the operating system. In an effort to create a fool proof system, which required a different approach to a computer. The key passage in my opinion was:
…these design changes will have profound implications for manufacturers. As shipments of the iPad are expected to rise to about 20 million in 2012 up from 7 million forecast in 2010, the “question of which companies in the supply chain will capture the profits (from tablets) will be of major importance in the coming years.
The Google Search Appliance implemented a similar design philosophy. Other vendors offer appliances that eliminate the complexities of configuring dozens if not scores of settings.
Try and tinker with this.
Will enterprise search be simplified? There may be a race between the appliance crowd and the vendors who want to embed search in other applications. This embedding angle is similar to the plastic covers that auto manufacturers put over their engines. Blocking the Saturday mechanic minimizes problems. Will this “blocking” be enough to keep the complexity of search and content processing systems manageable and affordable.
Stephen E Arnold, May 4, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Facebook Chases Trends
May 3, 2010
When new users are signing up with Facebook, they are taking advantage of the opportunity to learn more about their likes, dislikes and interests. Mashable.com recently reported in their article, “Facebook Suggests Pages to Like for New Users” on this new approach to making connections and enhancing the new user’s first experience with their product. Apparently they are trying to get ahead of search by suggesting brands, people, etc. that you might “like”. As long as they don’t start using it for a cheesy marketing approach to sell something, it really can’t hurt. Finding a page of an organization you are truly interested in, but might not have thought were on Facebook is an added bonus. Key word search which requires turning ideas into search terms takes one more step out of the mainstream.
Melody K. Smith, May 3, 2010
Note: Post was not sponsored.
Search as Oil Slick or Volcanic Ash
May 3, 2010
I had a conversation with a person familiar with enterprise search. In the course of the ebb and flow, a metaphor surfaced, and I wanted to capture it before it slipped away.
The idea is that an environmental event or a human action can trigger big consequences. Anyone trying to get from Europe on April 16, 2010, learned quickly about ash plumes. Now the unlucky residents of the US Gulf Coast have an opportunity to understand the diffusion pattern of an oil release.
What’s this have to do with search?
The idea which struck me as interesting is that search is now having a similar impact on activities, processes, and ecosystems far removed from ground zero. I am not able to accomplish much of my “work” unless I can locate the program, file, information, and data I need. I don’t really do anything with physical objects. I live in a world of data and constructs built upon information. Sure, I have a computer and keyboard, and without those hardware gizmos, I would be dead in the water or maybe a sea of red ink?
The search eruption. Source: http://www.liv.ac.uk/science_eng_images/earth/research/VolcanicAsh.jpg
Search is now disappearing in some organizations, absorbed into other applications. One way to describe this shift is to use the phrase “search enable application”. Another approach is to talk about search as a utility or an embedded service.
The Courier Journal and Winning Horse Races
May 2, 2010
Post-Derby day. Sunday newspaper day. Depressing, and it is only 9 am.
A near miss in New York City excited the NPR news team this morning (May 2, 2010). Nary a word about Greece, Spain, and Portugal, however. To get the details, I had to fire up my laptop and check out online news sources.
I walked to the end of my driveway to retrieve the Courier-Journal, where I used to work. I also picked up my home delivery copy of the New York Times. The NYT was wet because the blue plastic bag was not closed, so water happily nestled in the newsprint. I could tell at a glance that the NYT closed before the problem in Times Square was news. I tossed the paper aside to dry.
The C-J was the ad section and the soft features. No front page. What was delivered dripped water on the kitchen floor. My wife told me to sort the newspaper in the garage. Fun. The Derby was yesterday and I was curious about the coverage of the event. Despite the nose dive in the original content in the C-J over the last 20 years, reporters do hoof and gallop around the Derby in search of “stories”. Well, mostly it is “who got rich,” “who showed up”, and “who got in trouble”. No joy. A call to the C-J’s hotline triggered a recording that told me there were production problems with the Sunday paper. No big deal. There’s online, Twitter, and Facebook. The story was online here “Production Problems Prevent Delivery of Full Sunday Courier Journal.” I wonder if there were cutbacks and efficiencies applied that made one of the highest circulation editions of the year fail? Like aircraft maintenance, no one knows what shifts have been made until the toilets don’t work, the flights can’t leave the gate, or the pilot reports a “slight issue and some paperwork”.
The one section of the C-J that showed up is called “Forum”, and what do you know? The front page of section H for Sunday, May 2, 2010, ran a story with this headline: “Rethink: Newspapers are better off than you may think.” The author is a fellow named Arnold Garson, whom I don’t know. His picture shows a kindly visage in dark suit with red tie and the slug: “The Courier Journal remains a strong and credible local news provider and a profitable business today.”
Since my Sunday paper was missing the front page, the sports section, and some other bits, I am not on board with the assertion about “a strong and credible local news provider.” I think the “profitable business” part is really the point.
I read the article, which purports to be the text of a speed delivered on April 7, 2010, to the Downtown Kiwanis Club meeting. The article is a long piece, running about 80 column inches. If Mr. Garson read this speech, I am delighted I was not in attendance.
Summarizing the talk is easy: C-J makes money, reaches more than 85 percent of the readers, and makes money. Oh, I repeated myself. Sorry, but that point jumps out a couple of times in the text of the talk.
I noted some other highlights as well:
- The C-J is performing better than other newspapers; that is, “less bad” is “good”
- Delivery of the hard copy to “outlying areas” has been trimmed
- Ad rates and subscription prices are going up
- TV news viewers are older than C-J newspaper readers
- A 100 million people read newspapers.
You get the idea.
The C-J’s local Web site attracts 1.3 million unique users per month and generates 16 million page views. The C-J has achieved 380,000 mobile impressions per month. That’s good. The questions I had were:
- What’s a “unique”? What’s a page view” What’s a mobile impression?
- How does this compare with Facebook’s 400 million users in early 2010, up from 150 million in early 2009?
- What’s the relationship between circulation decline and uptake of the C-J’s Web site?
I could crank out more questions, but I want to jump to the wrap up of the talk. This is the assertion I find most interesting:
Ninety-nine percent of the nation’s newspapers, including The Courier-Journal will survive this recession based on our own core strengths, our determination to transform our business model and through the lift we will get from the recovery itself.
I am not sure how to make the leap from 99 percent survivability to “our own core strengths”. The core strengths seem to be advertising. I am not convinced the C-J does much local news. I understand determination. The assertion about the recovery seems to be a “maybe” argument. But it is tough to get coverage of the European financial crisis based on my reading the C-J every day. I have to turn elsewhere for that information.
Why do I think the talk is baloney? First, I fund the Seed2020 meet ups for women- and minority-owned businesses. I know that none of the more than 20 companies featured in the meet ups since November 2009 have been covered in the C-J. A couple of these businesses are real stories with solid news value. Nope. No coverage. One can argue that the weakening Business First, American Cities Business Journal publication is taking up the slack. Nope. The Seed2020 events show that there are solid news stories that are just not covered. I find the C-J argument on ground as muddy as the race track yesterday.
Second, without the C-J’s front page or the coverage of the NYT event in Times Square, I question the value of the newspaper as a timely source of information. Traditional deadlines and production problems underscore the irrelevance of the “business model” that will keep 99 percent of the newspapers in business. Mr. Garson does not provide any reference points for the number of newspapers in business in 1900, the number in 2000, and the number today. I do touch on this issue in Google: The Digital Gutenberg and won’t repeat the decline, consolidation, and homogeneity referenced in my monograph.
Third, the folks I know who are 55 and younger are not into newspapers. I watched how my son’s friends, now in their 30s, looked at the sports pages and their iPads and Macbooks. They talked to one another, chatted on their mobile devices, and sent text messages. This behavior took place as we sat at the kitchen table. The newspaper was marginalized.
Bottom-line: Timeliness, medium, and business model are intermingling with the DNA of people who don’t find the hard copy newspaper relevant. The C-J’s Arnold Garson is putting a positive spin on a reality that does not exist in our household.
Of course, I live in one of those outlying areas in Kentucky. I can log on to Newsnow.co.uk and learn about Europe. I can check Craigslist.com for ads. I can scan my Twitter stream to learn about the horrific accident that took place at Highway 42 and Highway 841 at 6 45 am.
No C-J needed for that. And I used to work there. Big changes to which the C-J and papers like the NYT are struggling to adapt. Like the long shots in the Derby yesterday, only one horse won. In my opinion, the C-J and the NYT are both entering the media race next year with long odds. Just my opinion and it is as valuable as a tip at the track.
Stephen E Arnold, May 2, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Designed to Sink: Aardvark and the Google Life Preserver
May 2, 2010
Aardvark’s owners referred to the company as “a sinking ship from day one” and they wouldn’t have had it any other way. A Gigaom article, “The Aardvark Theory of Product: Fake it Until you Make it,” details this startup’s shaky rise from directionless startup to its recent $50 million Google acquisition. The story is troubling because the Aardvark brain trust began without a product in mind, basically digitally tossing darts against a wall. The company tried dozens of different products until its social search program caught on and was promptly snapped up. We got the feeling this entire company was born to simply sell something, anything to Google or its competition. Are search products a failure if Google buys them?
Patrick Roland, May 2, 2010
Unsponsored post.
Filtering Travel Data Big Business
May 2, 2010
Sites like TripAdvisor have been in business for awhile, but some smaller players like open standard Kayak.com are gaining ground reports “Game-Changer for 2009: Trip Planning Web Sites”. From professionally-written sites like TripWolf recommendation-providing Uptake.com, social search and “mountains of data” are being integrated to create personalized user experiences for your travel choices. There’s also Triporati, which profiles users and crawls the other big travel sites for recommendations. Many of these sites include their own social network-style interactions, or use Facebook Connect. Businesses need to realize that these sites are going to “actively redefine customer expectations” and consequently get their hotel or airline bubbled to the top.
Samuel Hartman, May 2, 2010
Note: Post not sponsored.
Quote to Note: Open and Closed or Sort Of
May 1, 2010
Quote to note: This statement reported in the New York Times, paper edition, please, appeared in the story titled “Apple’s Chief Makes the Case Against Flash”, page B 4. A true keeper in my opinion.
Jeffrey Hammond, principal analyst with Forrester Research, which covers the technology industry, said both Apple and Adobe “are closed to some extent.”
“Some extent”. I wonder how the iPhone, iPad, and iTouch would define “some extent.” I wonder how those who want to fiddle with some of Adobe’s software would emend the “some extent”? I am delighted I am not longer in the consulting game, blue chip style. I don’t have to deal with these laser-like comments that illuminate complex issues. Back to the Derby festivities and the yellow green water in the goose pond. “Some extent”. Amazing.
Stephen E Arnold, April 30, 2010
Unsponsored post.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
