Arnold June 2012 For-Fee Columns
June 12, 2012
The June 2012 for-fee columns by Stephen E Arnold have been shipped to the commissioning publications. The topics covered this month are:
- For Enterprise Technology Management, “Android and Humpty Dumpty” looks at the enterprise implications of the many versions of Google’s mobile operating system.
- For Information Today, “Is the SharePoint Tsunami Losing Force?” reviews some of the signals which may indicate that Fast Search could be nearing the end of its useful life. In the column are excerpts from an interview I conducted with Comperio US’s president, Bjorn Laukli.
- For KMWorld, “HP and Autonomy: Is Change Coming in Enterprise IDOL?” reviews some of Hewlett Packard’s plan for its $10 billion technology acquisition, Autonomy plc.
- I discuss a domain of content ignored by most enterprise search systems. I profile a vendor tackling this opportunity.
- For Online Magazine, “Has IBM Mapped the Course for Commercializing Open Source Search?” takes a high-level look at how IBM has used open source search to reduce costs and create new high-value commercial software which do not get described with the word “search.”
For copies of these articles, you will need to hound the publisher, not me. I just write ‘em. I don’t archive work for hire. I will gather together some of my older for-fee columns in pre-final mode. We will post these in the near future on the main ArnoldIT.com Web site.
Stephen E Arnold, June 12, 2012
Freebie
Why Newspapers Fail
June 5, 2012
Quote to note: I don’t want to “shirk” my responsibility to highlight interesting management analysis. My source is the free Wall Street Journal. On the Web site appeared a three page letter allegedly penned by Warren Buffett, icon of American business and Bill Gates’s pal. The subject is the investment uplift for newspapers. The write up explains that some newspapers have value. But here’s the quote to note:
Times are certainly far tougher today than they used to be for newspapers. Circulation nationally will continue to slip and in some cases plunge. But American papers have only failed when one or more of the following factors was present (1) The town or city had two or more competing dailies; (2) The paper lost its position as the primary source of information important to its readers or (3) The town or city did not have a pervasive self-identity.
The question becomes, “If the formula is so obvious what has baffled so many newspaper publishers?” I will have to wait for an azure chip consultant, an academic, or an unemployed webmaster to give me the answer. In the meantime, I will check news on my iPad and catch local info via Twitter.
Stephen E Arnold, June 5, 2012
Sponsored by HighGainBlog
No Shirking Unsolicited Inputs about Traditional Publishing
June 4, 2012
Straight away I am not a “real” journalist. I am not a college professor. I am not a pundit. I am an old guy who is greatly amused with the antics of Warren Buffet, a budding newspaper magnate. I am an old guy who finds the business high jumps of traditional publishers a modern day Kabuki. The story is well known, and I like seeing how the actors deliver the script. I am an old guy who chuckles as online successes which are attracting more legal hassles than a high school physics teacher’s magnet and iron filings demonstration.
You will want to read “The Washington Post Co.’s Self Destructive Course,” “Responding to Shirky on the Washington Post” and “WaPo Must Transform to Survive.” Both write ups adopt the “we know better” approach to providing business advice. I am assuming that both authors are ace executives, have a good mastery of finance and management, and can run big organizations in a way that would cause Jack Welch to take notes.
A tip of the sombrero to Cervantes and Picasso. Get those windmills.
The fact of life in traditional publishing is, for me, easy to summarize:
There are fewer people who read books, magazines, and newspapers than there were in 1970. For the readers, there are many choices. For those who don’t read, the easiest path between their need for information and information is medieval, maybe preliterate Bronze Age. And Google? Instead of white papers Google shoots videos. I sat and watched two camera people and one guy with a sound boom. The focal point was a Googler “running the game plan” about Google enterprise search. The Googler left out some information which I had heard circulating in mid May 2012 at the search conference in New York; namely, the US government was not renewing some Google Search Appliances due to cost, there are too few engineers devoted to the Google Search Appliance, and that any of the nifty integration requires custom code. Yep, a video. The truth for the non readers who don’t have time for the old fashioned approach to information.
Amazon is pushing short books, 3,000 words to maybe three times that length. Why? There are lots of well heeled Amazonians who do not have time for a weighty tome. Magazines cost quite a bit, even for those with six or seven figure incomes. Future Publishing turned me off with its hefty price in the UK last week and an even heftier price at the lone remaining book store in my area of rural Kentucky.
The fix is not “hamsterized nonsense.” (The phrase is cute but I don’t know what it means.) The nonsense, I believe, is share buy backs. Okay, but if one is in the right part of the financial food chain, those buy backs can deliver a new BMW or a condo in Nice, France. That is the marvel of point of view.
My view is that these three pundits are advocating actions which are similar to a non playing, couch potato who shouts at the TV during a professional football game, “I could do a better job calling plays that you.” If that person were better, wouldn’t that person be working for a professional team. The fact that a person has not won such a job suggests that either the person is unqualified or had a shot and flubbed it. It is easier to criticize instead of do. When the do amounts to telling senior managers what they should do, I enjoy the exercise immensely.
My view of traditional publishing is:
- Demographics have changed so some of the old assumptions held by traditional publishing companies either don’t work or lead to unexpected consequences. One should learn from mistakes, but if most publishing Web sites are cost centers, not revenue pumps, then the problem is deeper than doing some digital stuff and adapting.
- Paying for content works when the information is must have. The fact is that most information is nice to have. Trying to charge for nice to have just does not work. A quick look at the history of Dialcom, the Source, or Gannett’s online local newspaper plays provide some interesting case examples.
- Small start ups cannot be replicated at most companies. The reason is that the people who do start up often approach tasks with a different mind set than an employee. Until the mind set shifts, arguing that a major publishing company work like a two person start up is silly. Never worked. Won’t work. Even digital outfits like Google cannot approach innovation the way it did in 1996 to 1998. When Googlers can’t find alternative revenue streams after 13 years of trying, what does one expect of traditional publishing companies?
The fact is that traditional publishing companies are in the buggy whip manufacturers’ position when automobiles appeared. The fact that non executives without profit and loss responsibility offer advice is just funny. The professional managers are often aware of what must be altered. Those managers and their blue chip advisors cannot implement meaningful change.
Academic inputs are not likely to induce change. Real journalists are not the answer to traditional publishing company woes. Verbiage is quite entertaining, however.
Stephen E Arnold, June 4, 2012
Sponsored by HighGainBlog
Autonomy and Tampa Bay Times Tie Up
May 23, 2012
Times are changing in the newspaper industry and Tampa Bay Times is embracing Autonomy’s web content management in order to maintain their lead position. The article The Tampa Bay Times Turns To Autonomy To Power Online Presence gives a preview on how this Pulitzer Prize winning paper plans to enhance their digital media coverage.
According to Joe DeLuca, publisher of tampabay.com and Tampa publisher of the Times;
“The publishing industry is going through a period of profound change. We understand that to continue to lead in the digital age, we need to deliver news and information to the public in a helpful, innovative and engaging manner. Autonomy will play a central role in our process of re-imagining the entire look and feel of our web presence, and the technology provides the ideal platform to help us evolve and expand.”
CEO of Autonomy Promote, Rafiq Mohammadi proudly announced;
“The Tampa Bay Times continues to extend its lead as Florida’s largest newspaper and one of the most well-known media brands in the Southeast U.S. by pioneering new ways to lead in the digital age.”
The Tampa Bay Times has been counted among the top 10 newspapers in the U.S. with good reason. Choosing to integrate Autonomy’s web technology into their existing system should guarantee their position stays firmly in place. Tampa Bay made a wise decision by tying it up with Autonomy.
Jennifer Shockley, May 23, 2012
Gartner, A Former Gartner Person, and Ego
May 14, 2012
Computerworld is supposed to be about computers. Now I don’t think too much about Computerworld era computers any more. I think that the owner of Computerworld was gung ho on Verity search once. That told me a great deal about Computerworld’s parent company.
The story “Can a New Analyst Firm Take Down Gartner?” Wow. Quite an amazing write up. Sprawled across three pages, the story is written by a person about whom I know quite a lot after reading the “real” news in Computerworld; for example:
- The author of the story is Rob Enderle who is a big wheel and apparently the brains behind the Enderle Group.
- Mr. Enderle worked at Forrester (an azure chip outfit explaining what’s what in all things related to anything that compute), Giga Information Group (ditto the Forrester services), and a profession who has “worked for” IBM. He worked on audits, competitive analysis, marketing, finance, and security.
- Mr. Enderle is a TV talent type for CNBC, Fox (a Murdoch “real” journalism outfit), Bloomberg, and NPR.
- Mr. Enderle “knows” Gideon Gartner, the brains behind the Gartner we know and love today as a publicly traded azure chip consulting firm.
- Mr. Enderle “helped found” the Giga Information Group.
- Mr. Enderle knows that “line management…doesn’t listen to Gartner and, for that matter, often doesn’t listen to IT either.”
There are other biographical nuggets in the write up too. Mr. Enderle “knows” Gideon Gartner. Be still my heart!
The main point is that an outfit involved in social CRM could—hypothetically and mostly without factual basis—just might be able to “take down Gartner.”
Yowza.
What does the kitty see when it looks in the mirror? A house pet or a wild lion?
The super hero in this story is a company called Ombud, which I assume is shorthand for ombudsman, a full time equivalent who is supposed to be a pair of ears with moist eyes and a warm nature able to solve a customer’s problem. I don’t know any ombudsmen, however. Those characteristics often match up with social workers in my experience.
There were several overt main points in the story about Ombud which I found more like search engine optimization and ego marketing. For instance:
I learned:
Gartner Group was conceived well before social networking, at a time when there not only was no Internet but no PCs. It seemed that it wouldn’t be long before someone would figure out how to blend experts, practitioners and vendors into a service that would be cheaper, more current and more focused on the unique needs of an individual company, thus providing more real value (regardless of price) than the older model.
Er, so what? Ombud is a Web site for a company which offers the same pay to play information which comes from most azure chip and blue chip consulting firms. Check ‘em out yourself at www.ombud.com.
Second, unlike Gartner and I assume any other consulting outfit, Ombud sells “access to RFPs which users create and vendors bid on.” I think the idea is that one can eliminate intermediaries, post a request for work, get bids, and pick a vendor. The organization just goes direct. I know how poorly the traditional procurement process works, but I am sure that a Fortune 50 company will experiment with Ombud. Anything that cuts the burdensome fees imposed by azure chip consultants is a good thing for most chief financial officers.
The Courier Journal: A Louisville Death Rattle
May 13, 2012
In 1981, I joined the Courier Journal and Louisville Times. That was 31 years ago. I am not sure how I made the decision to leave the Washington, DC, area to journey to a city whose zip code and telephone area code were unknown to me. I am a 212, 202, and 301 type of person.
I recall meeting Barry Bingham Jr. He asked me what I did in my spare time. I was thunderstruck. My former employers—Halliburton Nuclear Utility Services and Booz, Allen & Hamilton—never asked me those questions. Those high powered, hard charging outfits wanted to know how much revenue I had generated and how much money I had saved the company, when the next meeting with the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy was, and how the Cleveland Design & Development man trip vehicle was rolling along. The personal stuff floored me.
I did not have an answer. As a Type A, Midwestern, over-achieving, no-brothers-and-no sisters worker bee, fun was not a big part of my personal repertoire.
I asked him, “Why?”
I recall to this day his answer, “I want our officers and employees to have time with their families, get involved in the community, and do great work without getting into that New York City thing.”
Interesting. The Courier Journal had a very good reputation. The newspaper was profitable, operated a wide range of businesses, printed the New York Times’s magazine for the Gray Lady, and operated a commercial database company. In fact, in 1980 the Courier Journal was one of the leaders in commercial online information, competing with a handful of other companies in the delivery of information via digital channels, not the dead-tree, ruin-the-environment, and dump-chemicals approach of most publishing companies.
In 1986, Gannet bought the Courier Journal. The commercial database unit was of zero interest to Gannet, so it and I were sold to Bell+Howell. After a short stint at a company entrenched in 16 mm motion film projectors, I headed back to New York City.
I retained my residence in Louisville, and I have watched the trajectory of the Courier Journal as it moved forward.
I have to be blunt. The Courier Journal is not the newspaper, the company, or the community force it was when I joined Mr. Bingham and a surprisingly diverse, bright, forward-looking team 31 years ago. The 1981 management approach of the Courier Journal was a culture shock to me. Think of the difference between Dick Cheney and Mr. Rogers. The 2012 approach saddens me.
This morning I read “Answering Your Questions on CJ Changes,” written by a person whom I do not know. The author of the article is Wesley Jackson, publisher of the Courier Journal. (I never liked the acronym CJ and still do not.)
The main point of the article is that the Courier Journal has to raise its prices. Last week, Mr. Jackson wrote a short article in the Courier Journal informing subscribers a letter would arrive explaining the new services that would be available. We received our letter on Wednesday, May 9, 2012. We called on Thursday, May 10, 2012, and cancelled our subscription. I am not sure how many other subscribers took this action, but a sufficient number of Courier Journal readers called to kill the phone system at the newspaper.
Mr. Jackson wrote this morning:
Unfortunately our Customer Service Center’s phone system had technical problems, and many of you had long wait times or could not get through to get your questions answered. That I know was frustrating.
I bet. I would love to see the data about the number of calls and the number of cancellations that the paper received when it announced the rate hike, a free iPad application for subscribers, and an email copy of the newspaper sent each day to paying customers.
The write up troubled me for several other reasons:
- Some of the word choices were of the touchy-feely school of communication. There are 19 “we’s”. The word “value” appears twice, there are seven categoricals: six all’s and one never; and the word “conversation” appears twice.
- There is at least one split infinitive “to personally apologize”
- An absolutely amazing promise expressed in this statement: “For those of you who would like to ask questions directly, please email me at publisher@courier-journal.com or send a letter to Publisher, Courier-Journal Media, 525 W. Broadway, Louisville, KY 40202. I promise you will each receive a response.”
“Promise,” “all,” and “never”—yep, I believe those assertions.
I would have included an image of Wesley Jackson but I had to pay for it. Not today, sorry.
My view is that I hear a death rattle from the Courier Journal. The reality of the newspaper is that it runs more and more syndicated content. The type of local coverage for which the paper was known when I joined in 1981 has decreased over the years. When I want news, I look at online services. What I have noticed is that what appears in the Courier Journal has been mentioned on Facebook, Twitter, or headline aggregation services two or three days before the information appears in either the Courier Journal’s hard copy edition or its online site, www.courier-journal.com.
Dave Kellogg, the former president of MarkLogic, used to chide me that I should not refer to major publishing operations and “dead tree publishers.” My view was and is that I am entitled to my opinion. Traditional publishing companies have failed to respond to new opportunities to disseminate and profit from information opportunities.
The list of mistakes include:
- Belief that an app will generate new revenue. Unfortunately apps are not automatic money machines. (Print-centric apps are not the go-to medium for many digital device users.)
- Assumptions about a person’s appetite for paying for “nice to have content.” (One pays for “must have” content, not “nice to have” content.)
- Failure to control costs. (Print margins continue to narrow as traditio0nal publishers try to regain the glory of the pre digital business models.)
- Firing staff who then go on to compete by generating content funded by a different business model. (This blog is an example. We do online advertising and inclusions and sell technical services. For some reason, this works for me thanks to my team which includes some former “real” journalists.)
- Assuming that new technology for printing color on newsprint equips an information technology department that it can handle other information technologies in an effective manner. (Skill in one technical area does not automatically transfer to another technical field.)
I can hear the labored breathing of a local newspaper struggling to stay alive. What do you hear?
Stephen E Arnold, May 13, 2012
Sponsored by HighGainBlog, which is ArnoldIT
German Mathematicians: A Harbinger of Big Trouble for Sci-Tech Publishing
May 11, 2012
If you pay attention to scientific and technical publishing, you may know that there are significant financial pressures on sci tech publishers like Elsevier, Springer, and their compatriots. But the customers face financial pressures as well. Universities have taken steps to reduce their costs. Libraries have had their budgets cut. Tenure windows have been shut. Even the composition of a university’s faculty has undergone major changes. Some adjunct professors have to moonlight to cover their basic necessities.
I noted a short news item from the technical institute in Munich known as TUM or Technische Universität München. Without a University of Kentucky grade basketball team, most of my neighbors in Harrod’s Creek ignore this outfit. If you are into math, you pay attention to what the institution does.
Navigate to this news item and you will read:
Because of unsustainable subscription prices and conditions, the board of directors of the mathematics department has voted to cancel all of its subscriptions to Elsevier journals by 2013.
Negotiations are underway to work out a deal. The Elsevier organization is meeting to figure out how to prevent an “occupy Wall Street” type of activity among other German universities. If Elsevier does not come up with a solution and quickly, the company would have to cope with push back from authors who are annoyed with the Elsevier publishing policies and fees and cancellation of subscriptions from its best and most prestigious customers.
In short, we may have the first blinking of a yellow caution light for the professional publishing sector. Most consumers don’t know how much it costs to get four or more issues of a technical publication for one year. Some of the articles have been in the editorial and peer review oven for months. Online content is getting better and may be “good enough” for most researchers and students. In the case of math, online delivers more timely results and broad access to a technical write up can yield quicker, higher value commentary.
Will the loss of a single math department’s subscriptions have a significant impact on Elsevier’s financials this month? No. If the cancellation fever spreads and hybridizes with push back from authors, Elsevier could be in trouble, probably within a quarter or two.
Don’t agree? That’s okay. Just post your views in the comments section of this blog.
Stephen E Arnold, May 10, 2012
Sponsored by IKANOW
The Identity Crisis of Newspapers
May 9, 2012
A real journalist explains that real journalism is in a bind. Gigaom ponders, “What is The Purpose of a Newspaper?” In the write up, Mathew Ingram reflects on Felix Salmon’s recent Reuters’ blog post. Salmon proposed that the New York Times, financially beleaguered as newspapers are these days, start to sell early access to breaking stories. The idea was widely panned, of course, not least because it would put potentially investment-affecting information in the hands of subscribers before the rest of us. Ingram added his voice to the critics’ chorus, but the situation did start him pondering the plight of papers.
Naval gazing is a calming activity for some. It worked on the Titanic for some passengers a century ago.
The article traces the history of newspapers, with the twin but at times conflicting goals of making money and serving the public good. While it used to be that someone interested in one or two sections of a paper bought the whole thing, now users are picking and choosing their content. Such an audience is no longer willing to pay for content they won’t read. Ingram concludes:
“Maybe the days of mass-market newspapers with a broad readership are simply coming to a close, and what we are seeing is some of those newspapers evolve into controlled-circulation subscription newsletters, who serve the interests of their small readership and nothing else. And perhaps that isn’t such a bad thing — other solutions could theoretically take their place, or at least help share the load when it comes to the public interest. But the long-term effects of that remain unknown.”
Um, isn’t a newsletter a type of newspaper? We think so. All is not lost, my friends, just evolving. No one knows what the picture will look like when (if) the pieces finally coalesce, and it can be difficult to work in a shifting landscape, but that’s life. Change can just as well lead to opportunity as to disaster; much depends on your perspective.
Cynthia Murrell, May 9, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
Arnold Columns: Update May 2012
May 9, 2012
We have continued to produce Stephen E Arnold’s for-fee columns. Due to some minor health excitement involving Mr. Arnold, his monthly update about what and for whom he has been writing for money has been on hold. The content continued to flow. Here’s a run down by publication of the for fee columns submitted through May 8, 2012:
Enterprise Technology Management, IMI Publishing, London, UK. ETM publishes my Google column which originally appeared in KMWorld.
- January 2012, “Google Enterprise: The Berkeley Analysis.” The article discusses why a noted university chose Google’s apps, not Microsoft’s. The point is that price cutting is playing a major role in information technology decisions.
- February 2012, “Google Enterprise: Is There a Poison Apple in Paradise?” The column reviews the new version of the Google Search Appliance. The question becomes, “Could Apple pose an alternative to Google, an alternative Google is not anticipating?”
- March 2012, “Google Privacy and Enterprise Licensing.” This write up explores how recent revelations about Google’s approach to privacy may put barriers in place which could slow or block some Google enterprise license deals.
- April 2012, ”Google’s Cloud: Building and Threatening.” The essay considers that Google has been left in the starting blocks by Amazon’s cloud services. Google may catch up, but the pricing of cloud services, regardless of vendor, can be slippery to estimate.
- May 2012, “The Google Myth: Poetics and Glass.” The story considers Mr. Page’s role with Wall Street and Mr. Brin’s assignment to promote Google’s virtual reality “glasses.” Will these modern day Romulus and Remus billionaires continue to coexist in a positive relationship?
Information Today, Information Today, Inc. The Information Today column covers search-related topics for the an information specialist, competitive intelligence researcher or database publishing professionals.
- January 2012, “Augmented Reality: I’ll Be Back”. Autonomy, best known for enterprise search and content processing, has emerged as a leader in augmented reality or AR. The column discusses Aurasma, the company’s AR solution.
- February 2012, “By Jingo: Search Catchphrases 2012.” This article considers the role and implications of marketing phrases used by enterprise search vendors. The majority of the buzzwords have more to do with competitive jockeying than communication to an organization looking for a findability solution.
- March 2012, “Health and Medical Research: Drying Up the Bones.” Web-accessible, public medical information is tough to use. The essay looks at several services, including Quertle.
- April 2012, “Are Analytics the New Way to Search?” Most users don’t search particularly well. Some do not want to formulate search queries. The write up considers the question, “Can analytics deliver search results without asking the user to formulate a query?”
- May 2012, “Google and Microsoft: Interface Flipperoos.” The story points out that the new Google interface looks more like Excite 1996 than Google in 2007. Microsoft, on the other hand, looks almost exactly like Google.com’s interface in 2007. Are flips like this the new approach to search interface innovation?
KMWorld, Information Today, Inc. The column for KMWorld discusses enterprise information from the angle of semantic technology.
- January 2012, “Insight from the Information Tsunami.” The column discusses Microsoft SharePoint and BA Insight, a software complement to SharePoint designed to address some of the “issues” associated with Microsoft’s flagship content management system.
- February 2012, “Bitext: Engaging in the Semantic Arena.” The article profiles Madrid-based Bitext, a company emerging as a leader in the enterprise semantic market.
- March 2012, “Xyte and Insight into Online Behaviors.” The write talks about Xyte’s approach to market research and discloses some interesting findings about Facebook. These items suggest Facebook is a more potent online force than some believe.
- April 2012, “Consumerizing Knowledge Management.” The essay considers that analytics programs with training wheels deliver some benefits to enterprise users. However, acting on auto-generated reports without understanding the assumptions behind the report can lead to bad decisions.
- May 2012, “Big Data, Cows, and Cadastres.” The write up looks at specific business pay offs from the analysis of big data. The biggest benefits come from analysts who understand the data and the math behind a particular numerical recipe.
Online Magazine (published six times a year). Information Today, Inc. The features written for Online Magazine focus on open source search in the enterprise. For more than a year, Mr. Arnold’s column has explored a range of subjects related to open source search.
- February 2012, “Open Source Search: Clarity with Lucid Works.” The feature discusses Lucid Imagination’s newest release of Lucid Works Enterprise 2.0.
- April 22012, “Open Source: Fascinating Uncertainty.” The feature takes a look at some of the jockeying which takes place in the open source world involving “foundations.”
If you are a public relations person, an azure chip consultant, or an unemployed middle school teacher, Mr. Arnold does not accept story suggestions for these for fee writings. His policy is to contact people with regard to a question or issue. Mr. Arnold is not a journalist. In a previous life, he indexed medieval sermons in Latin. He does not understand “real” journalism, marketing, public relations, investment bankers, private equity firm owners, and sales people.
These articles are available from the publishers who purchased work for hire. At some point, Mr. Arnold’s staff may post versions of some of the essays on one of the reference Web sites Mr. Arnold operates. For copies of these articles, please, contact the publishers. For a briefing on one of the topics addressed in Mr. Arnold’s for fee writings, please, contact us at seaky2000 at yahoo dot com.
Donald C. Anderson, May 9, 2012
Sponsored by PolySpot
No Big Deal: Beyond Search Passes 8,000 Articles
May 6, 2012
Beyond Search began in January 2008. I wanted to find a way to keep track of the most interesting news which I had been placing in my Overflight system. You can see some of the Overflight functionality at www.arnoldit.com/trax or www.arnoldit.com/taxonomy. A few days ago, Beyond Search passed the 8,000 post mark. You can search the archive of content using either the site search system, provided by Blossom.com, or the Google Custom Search Engine which indexes site content plus the links Beyond Search editors include in stories. Blossom is the search box at the top of the page. The CSE is labeled “Google.”
You can use the content to track a leading vendor; for example, enter the query “Autonomy” in the site specific search box and you see the events which we consider significant. You can also get my personal views on online products and services. Just run a query for “mysteries of online.” You can use the categories to limit a display to indexed content. No index is perfect, but you can look at a result set for a hot topic like “indexing” with a mouse click or two.
Now about the content.
First, I am not running a news operation. In fact, I don’t do news. Neither my editorial team nor I are real journalists. I am supposed to know about medieval religious sermons in Latin. The writers are mostly librarians or researchers who have been trained to produce the equivalent of a debate note card. I learned how to prepare 5×8 inch note cards when I returned to the US from Brazil and entered a wonderful American high school. Let’s see. That was in 1957 or 1958. In short, I have been doing one thing as my core research method for more than 50 years. Do you think I am going to change because a PR maven, an unemployed middle school teacher, an English major turned search expert or a Panda wants me to? In case you don’t know the answer, the answer is, “No.”
Second, we run sponsored content. We use Google AdSense. We run ads for companies who want to get a message in front of my two or three readers. I wish I knew what the business model for Beyond Search is, but the content continues to flow, seven days a week, year round. When I was in intensive care in January for more than a week, the content flowed. I know one of the editors smuggled my laptop into the hospital lock up where I was. We kept publishing. Those working on the blog just kept on going. My writing was given an extra cycle of editing because I was, quite literally close to being a gone goose. Keep in mind that the only difference between a note card content object and sponsored content is that the subject of the write up gets a chance to provide input to an editor. The ironic or cynical comments remain. If I get fascinated with a topic, I write about it or get one of the editors to produce content objects on the subject. So you will find certain topics get covered and then dropped, it is because I lose interest. You want news? Find a real journalist. Examples of what I follow and then drop range from European search systems to ways to federate the text and numeric data associated with building a fungible product like a personal computer.
Third, I am usually biased, often incorrect, and completely indifferent to the hottest trends that azure chip consultants pump out to sell consulting work. If you read the content in Beyond Search or any of the blogs which we produce, you have the obligation to think about what we present and make your own judgment about its usefulness, accuracy, or appropriateness for your particular situation.
Fourth, I use the content in Beyond Search for my columns in Enterprise Technology Management magazine, Online magazine, Information Today (a library oriented tabloid), KMWorld (an enterprise information tabloid), and Searcher magazine (a specialist publication for people who know how to use the old fashioned Dialog and Lexis systems). The content in my for fee articles is closer to the type of reports I prepare for my one or two clients. I am not a great writer. I try to look at popular or emerging technical trends and put them into the frame of my experience. If you want stories that reinforce received wisdom, you will find Beyond Search inappropriate for your needs. In my for fee columns, I knit together a number of items of information and interpret those items in a business context. The for fee columns, therefore, go beyond what is in the free blog.
My plan is to keep the information stream flowing and free. If you have a comment to make about the point of view or the information in a content object (my word for article or story), use the comments section of the blog. If you write me with spam, silly news releases, and baloney I did not specifically request—be advised: I may write about what I call “desperation marketing.” Don’t like the term? Well, I do, and it is accurate. The facile notion of “pivoting” a company is mostly marketing baloney. I don’t like baloney.
For more information about the editorial policies or how to contact us to get access to our two or three readers, navigate to the About page.
Stephen E Arnold, May 6, 2012
Sponsored by Stephen E Arnold
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
