Watson Weekly: Chasing Sales via Ads. Forget Thought Leadership

October 6, 2015

I was exploring the topics business intelligence and Big Data. I was intrigued by “Is Thought Leadership a Waste of Money?” My reaction was, “Nope, thought leadership is good.” Who wants to fool around with regular marketing methods.

What’s the write up say?

I highlighted this passage from a person who does not know about the genesis of Strategy & Business and the somewhat addled Booz, Allen executive who wanted a BAH branded Economist to generate revenue:

Once upon a time back in 1994, Joel Kurtzman, the then-editor-in-chief of Strategy & Business, coined the term “thought leader” as a means for identifying people within the business marketplace that merited our attention. Thought leaders were the individuals within their respective industries who offered fresh, creative ideas and commentary on industry problems and trends. Two decades later, much of today’s thought leadership has gone from original to repetitive. It’s not that business leaders, C-level executives, or entrepreneurs don’t have great ideas or valuable insights. The problem is a bit more complex.

But here’s the shocker. Strategy & Business was a reaction by Booz, Allen & Hamilton to publications and marketing campaigns mounted by other blue chip consulting firms.

Advertising, at least for blue chip firms, was somewhat low brow. The notion of pumping drivel into the in boxes of Fortune 1000 executives was also distasteful. Today advertising is the cat’s pajamas.

IBM is proving that nothing beats banging one’s own drum even if no one knows what the band is playing.

I opened my dead tree edition of the New York Times this morning )October 6, 2015), and what did I see? The work of Ogilvy & Mather? Sure looks like it. Big ad buy. Big images. Big assertions.

Cognitive computing via Watson. Yikes, where is the smarter planet? I did some poking around and came across “Tangled Up in Big Blue: IBM Replaces Smarter Planet With … Bob Dylan.”

IBM began to realize that the message of Smarter Planet — basically that computing is and will be integral to everything, as manifested in innovations such as smart power grids and connected cars — is no longer a differentiator for the business, explained Mr. Iwata. The emerging pattern, as harnessed and fostered by its Watson technology, is that these super computing capabilities can be built into anything digital because they live in the cloud.

IBM’s senior vice president of marketing Jon Iwata allegedly said:

“This will resonate strongly with not only our current clients but…companies and decision makers and software developers who aren’t currently IBM clients.”

The result in the dead tree newspapers I saw presented page upon page of IBM Watson marketing. Here are some of the pages from this morning’s print campaign in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal:

ibm ad

The massive ad campaign reveals that Watson consists of 100 million lines of code. No comment about bugs counts, however.

Obviously, this snapshot is too small to read. Put down your smartphone and buy the dead tree newspapers. Here are the themes I noted:

  1. Buzzwords
  2. Components that you, gentle reader, can assemble like Potassium ferrocyanide in chem lab when the teacher is inattentive
  3. Images of youthful, diverse people who are obviously into Watson
  4. Copy, lots of copy.

The information recycles that which is available on the IBM Watson Web site. The difference is that the multi page ads are the equivalent of a Bunker Buster dropped into the somewhat indifferent world of search and content processing. How will the likes of minnows like Coveo, dtSearch, Elasticsearch (now Elastic), Recommind, Sinequa, legions of business analytics firms, the specialists pitching everything from indexing (Smartlogic) to semantics (SenseBot), and all manner of information access vendors scattered across a somewhat Martian like landscape. Sure, there may be water, but can one survive on the stuff?

IBM is skipping the thought leader thing and going right to big buck advertising. I can imagine this scenario taking place in Joe Coffee’s. The IBM marketing team is meeting with the ad agency’s equivalent of Bindy Irwin. The scene is a hip coffee shop near the Watson office in Manhattan.

IBM Watson Wizard (IWW): We need something big to get this Watson bandwagon rolling?

Mad Ave Ad Exec (MAAE): Yes, big. We need to do big.

IWW: Let’s brainstorm here? Do you want another cappuccino with the neat latte art?

MAAE: Sure, sure. But make mine a macchiato.

[IBM Watson executive returns with more cappuccino and one artisan cafe macchiato.]

IWW: Who wants the macchiato? What have you got for me?

MAAE: Okay, we have been talking while you were standing on line? By the way, do you want one of us to pay for the coffee?

IWW: Nah, we’ve got more than a billion to burn. Let’s get to it.

MAAE: Here’s the idea. Imagine putting the Watson cognitive computing message in front of every, and I mean every, New York Times and Wall Street Journal reader. We warm up with some Monday Night Football buys and then, bang, we hit the buyers with the message, “Cognitive computing.”

IWW: Well, print? What about viral videos? What about social media?

MAAE: We will do that. We can pay some mid tier consulting types to send out Watson tweets?

IWW: But that did not get any traction?

MAAE: Tweets are good. We need to provide a big bang to make the tweet thing happen.

IWW: What’s the message?

MAAE: We were thinking think. But 21st century style. We want to go with outthink thing.

IWW: Out think. I like it.

MAAE: Now picture this. You know how everyone learned about chemical symbols in high school?

IWW: Yes, but I got a D.

MAAE: No problem. Here’s the picture. [Ad person grabs napkin and sketches a hexagon with a happy face.

ibm happy face

We show the components of the Watson system as little chemical symbols with codes in them.

IWW: Symbols? Codes? It looks like a happy face with an F in it.

 

MAAE: Grab your mental iPhone. Snap this happy icon with the Fd. You see “face detection.” Fd. Crystal clear. Non verbal. Immediate.

IWW: I don’t understand.

MAAE: Work with me on this. We make a list of the APIs and the buzzwords and put them into a graphic. We call the page “IBM Watson is the platform for cognitive business.”

IWW: Oh, like the structures computational chemists use to visualize complex constructs?

MAAE: What’s a computational structure whatever? I know a happy face thing with a hexagon. This gets the message across. Zap. Like an Instagram, right?

IWW: I get it. I get it.

MAAE: You like it, right? Big bang. Big splash. Big message but simple, clear, easy to grasp.

IWW: How many New York Times and Wall Street Journal readers know what API means?

MAAE: We’ve grab the upside. Wait for it. We will hook the Watson cognitive thing with a superstar. We are thinking Bob Dylan.

IWW: Bob Dylan. I remember him. Butwasn’t there some talk about drugs, political activism, maybe something with Croatia in France?

MAAE: Ancient history and myth. He’s an icon. Picture this. Bob Dylan becomes the image of cognitive computing. Can’t miss. Cannot miss. Winner. We become the messaging for API. Watson APIs will be huge. The chatter about text extraction, image tagging, and concept expansion. Deafening.

IWW: Wow, that sounds almost as powerful as the Jeopardy game show promotion. I really liked that game show thing. Watson won too.

MAAE: Right. That’s the value of post production. Now. One final point. Jules here came up with a great idea while you were waiting on line. We take the rock solid facts about Watson. Jules thinks this was your idea, and it is a great one. Watson. Only 100 million lines of code, you know, more than in a Volkswagen-type fuel emission system. We sprinkle these facts under a headline like “A cognitive business is a business that thinks.” Stir in Dylan and you can write your own ticket in this cognitive computing thing.

IWW: But what about outthink thing? You said the new hook was outthink.

MAAE: Yes, yes, outthink is the glue. Cognitive API outthink. Huge. I will send a contract over to you later today.

IWW: Do you think we will make any sales?

MAAE: Sales? Sure, sure. Winner. Be sure to turn around that contract. We need to get rolling like a rolling stone. Winner.

What other boosters did Watson receive on October 6, 2015. Well, the IBM Big Blue Boss is on CNBC. Not as perky as Bindy, but pretty excited about granting CNBC an exclusive.

One question: What about revenues? You know three years of declining revenue.

Stephen E Arnold, October 6, 2015

 

 

 

 

Stephen E Arnold, October 6, 2015

Full Text Search Gets Explained

October 6, 2015

Full text search is a one of the primary functions of most search platform.  If a search platform cannot get full text search right, then it is useless and should be tossed in the recycle bin.    Full text search is such a basic function these days that most people do not know how to explain what it is.  So what is full text?

According to the Xojo article, “Full Text Search With SQLite” provides a thorough definition:

“What is full text searching? It is a fast way to look for specific words in text columns of a database table. Without full text searching, you would typically search a text column using the LIKE command. For example, you might use this command to find all books that have “cat” in the description…But this select actually finds row that has the letters “cat” in it, even if it is in another word, such as “cater”. Also, using LIKE does not make use of any indexing on the table. The table has to be scanned row by row to see if it contains the value, which can be slow for large tables.”

After the definition, the article turns into advertising piece for SQLite and how it improves the quality of full text search.  It offers some more basic explanation, which are not understood by someone unless they have a coding background.   It is a very brief with some detailed information, but could explain more about what SQLite is and how it improves full text search.

Whitney Grace, October 6, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Visual Analytics Makes Anyone a Data Expert

October 5, 2015

Humans are sight-based creatures.  When faced with a chunk of text or a series of sequential pictures, they will more likely scan the pictures for information than read.  With the big data revolution, one of the hardest problems analytics platforms have dealt with is how to best present data for users to implement.  Visual analytics is the key, but one visual analytics is not the same as another.   DCInno explains that one data visual company stands out from the rest in the article, “How The Reston Startup Makes Everyone A Big Data Expert.”

Zoomdata likes to think of itself as the one visual data companies that gives its clients a one up over others and it goes about it in layman’s terms.

“Zoomdata has been offering businesses and organizations a way to see data in ways more useful than a spreadsheet since it was founded in 2012. Its software offers real-time and historical explorations of data streams, integrating multiple sources into a cohesive whole. This makes the analytics far more accessible than they are in raw form, and allows a layperson to better understand what the numbers are saying without needing a degree in mathematics or statistics.”

Zoomdata offers a very interactive platform and is described to be the only kind on the market.  Their clients range from government agencies, such as the Library of Congress, and private companies.  Zoomdata does not want to be pigeonholed as a government analytics startup.  Their visual data platform can be used in any industry and by anyone with the goal of visual data analytics for the masses.  Zoomdata has grown tremendously, tripled its staff, and raised $22.2 million in fundraising.

Now let us sit back and see how their software is implemented in various industries.  I wonder if they could make a visual analytics graphic novel?
Whitney Grace, October 5, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Google Express Pales in Comparison to Amazon Prime

October 5, 2015

The article on Business Insider titled Google Should Be Very Scared of What Amazon Built, According to Investor Bill Gurley, details Gurley’s comments. Amazon Prime, according to Gurley, is challenging Google’s top dog position by offering inventory in addition to search capabilities. Shopping on Google might seem like a waste of time to many Prime members, who go directly to Amazon to search for what they are looking for. The article explains,

“Over many years, Amazon has built up this logistics framework and their one click feature and their Prime program to the point where the consumer has zero anxiety about the quality of the product, immense trust about the deliverability, down to a day and a half for most people, less than a day for some items. They trust on price. That doesn’t mean they are the absolute lowest price, but people don’t think Amazon’s trying to get ’em.”

Gurley estimates that Amazon may have as many as 90 million Prime Members loyal to their search engine for shopping, and using Google only as a last resort. Google Express, which most of us have never heard of, was Google’s “lame” answer to Amazon Prime, but without the years of planning and creating worldwide distribution centers. However, the article does not address that people use Google for quite a bit more than shopping, and Amazon Prime is limited that way.

Chelsea Kerwin, October 5, 2015

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Google Faces Sanctions over Refusal to Embrace Right to Be Forgotten Ruling

October 2, 2015

The article on Reuters titled France Rejects Google Appeal on Cleaning Up Search Results Globally explores the ramifications of Europe’s recently passed Right to be Forgotten law. The law stipulates that search engines be compelled by requests to remove information. Google has made some attempts to yield to the law, granting 40% of the 320,000 requests to remove incorrect, irrelevant, or controversial information, but only on the European version of its sites. The article delves into the current state of affairs,

“The French authority, the CNIL, in June ordered Google to de-list on request search results appearing under a person’s name from all its websites, including Google.com. The company refused in July and requested that the CNIL abandon its efforts, which the regulator officially refused to do on Monday…France is the first European country to open a legal process to punish Google for not applying the right to be forgotten globally.”

Google countered that while the company was happy to meet the French and European standards in Europe, they did not see how the European law could be globally enforced. This refusal will almost certainly be met with fines and sanctions, but that may be the least of Alphabet Google’s troubles considering its ongoing disapproval by Europe.
Chelsea Kerwin, October 02, 2015

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

Legacy Servers: Upgrade Excitement

October 2, 2015

Enterprise management systems (ECM) were supposed to provide an end all solution for storing and organizing digital data.  Data needs to be stored for several purposes: taxes, historical record, research, and audits.  Government agencies deployed ECM solutions to manage their huge data loads, but the old information silos are not performing up to modern standards.  GCN discusses government agencies face upgrading their systems in “Migrating Your Legacy ECM Solution.”

When ECMs first came online, information was stored in silos programmed to support even older legacy solutions with niche applications.  The repositories are so convoluted that users cannot find any information and do not even mention upgrading the beasts:

“Aging ECM systems are incapable of fitting into the new world of consumer-friendly software that both employees and citizens expect.  Yet, modernizing legacy systems raises issues of security, cost, governance and complexity of business rules  — all obstacles to a smooth transition.  Further, legacy systems simply cannot keep up with the demands of today’s dynamic workforce.”

Two solutions present themselves: data can be moved from an old legacy system to a new one or simply moving the content from the silo.  The barriers are cost and time, but the users will reap the benefits of upgrades, especially connectivity, cloud, mobile, and social features.  There is the possibility of leaving the content in place using interoperability standards or cloud-based management to make the data searchable and accessible.

The biggest problem is actually convincing people to upgrade.  Why fix what is not broken?  Then there is the justification of using taxpayers’ money for the upgrade when the money can be used elsewhere.  Round and round the argument goes.

Whitney Grace, October 2, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

HP and Its Glorious DEC and Compaq Past

October 1, 2015

Gentle reader, I know you remember that beloved Alta Vista once was a Hewlett Packard property. Ah, what might have been.

I though about HP’s muffed bunnies when I read “Carly Fiorina’s Legacy as CEO of Hewlett Packard.” The write up summarizes an academic approach to figuring out what happened at HP before Carly Fiorina was replaced by Mark Hurd was replaced by Leo Apotheker was replaced by Meg Whitman.

What type of manager was Ms. Fiorina? Here’s the objective assessment in the article:

When Fiorina came to HP, the culture that she walked into was very much “aim, aim, aim and fire” — a slow culture, during a time when companies were moving very fast. In that context, she was what we want our change leaders to be — bold and disruptive. One of her moves was to buy Compaq, which had a fast moving “Internet” culture — “aim, fire, fire, re-aim, fire.”

I assume that approach contributed to the slow, steady decline of the Alta Vista search system.

Who benefited from HP’s handling of Alta Vista? I would suggest the Alphabet Google thing.

Stephen E Arnold, October 1, 2015

HP Autonomy: Why Do the Deal?

September 30, 2015

I read “If Ray Lane Hated HP’s Autonomy Move So Much, How Did It Happen?”

Darned good question. The article reviews information which suggests that HP chairman was uncomfortable with the tie up. Also, HP’s CFO gave the deal a thumbs down.

According to the article:

Reached for comment an HP spokesperson reiterated that the Autonomy buy had unanimous support from the board.

I assume this is the HP way.

Stephen E Arnold, September 30, 2015

The Many Applications of Predictive Analytics

September 29, 2015

The article on Computer World titled Technology that Predicts Your Next Security Fail confers the current explosion in predictive analytics, the application of past occurrences to predict future occurrences. The article cites the example of the Kentucky Department of Revenue (DOR), which used predictive analytics to catch fraud. By providing SAS with six years of data the DOR received a batch of new insights into fraud indicators such as similar filings from the same IP address. The article imparts words of wisdom from SANS Institute instructor Phil Hagen,

“Even the most sophisticated predictive analytics software requires human talent, though. For instance, once the Kentucky DOR tools (either the existing checklist or the SAS tool) suspect fraud, the tax return is forwarded to a human examiner for review. “Predictive analytics is only as good as the forethought you put into it and the questions you ask of it,” Hagen warns….  Also It’s imperative that data scientists, not security teams, drive the predictive analytics project.”

In addition to helping the IRS avoid major fails like the 2013 fraudulent refunds totaling $5.8 billion, predictive analytics has other applications. Perhaps most interesting is its use protecting human assets in regions where kidnappings are common by detecting unrest and alerting organizations to lock up their doors. But it is hard to see limitations for technology that so accurately reads the future.

Chelsea Kerwin, September 29, 2015

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

Google and YouTube Views: Relevance or Money?

September 24, 2015

I read “Google Charges Advertisers for Fake YouTube Video Views, Say Researchers.” My goodness, will criticism of Alphabet Google continue to escalate?

The trigger for the newspaper article’s story with the somewhat negative headline was an academic paper called “Understanding the Detection of Fake View Fraud in Video Content Portals.” The data presented in the journal by seven European wizards suggests that an Alphabet Google type company knows when a video is viewed by a software robot, not a credit card toting human.

“Fake view fraud” is a snappy phrase.

According to the Guardian newspaper write up about the technical paper:

The researchers’ paper says that while substantial effort has been devoted to understanding fraudulent activity in traditional online advertising such as search and banner ads, more recent forms such as video ads have received little attention. It adds that while YouTube’s system for detecting fake views significantly outperforms others, it may still be susceptible to simple attacks.

Is this a Volkswagen-type spoof? Instead of fiddling with fuel efficiency, certain online video portals are playing fast and loose with charging for video ads not displayed to a human with a PayPal account?

Years ago an outfit approached me with a proposition for a seminar about online advertising fraud. I declined. I am confident that the giant companies and their wizards in the ad biz possess business ethics which put the investment bankers to shame. I recall discussing systems and methods with a couple of with it New Yorkers. The lunch topic was dynamically relaxing the threshold for displaying content in response to certain queries.

My comment pointed to ways to determine if an ad “relevant” was relevant to a higher percentage of user queries. I called this “query and ad matching relaxation.”

I did not include a discussion of “relaxation” in my 2003-2004 study Google Version 2.0, which is now out of print. The systems and methods disclosed in technical papers by researchers who ended up working for large online advertising methods were just more plumbing for smart software.

When an ad does not match a query, that’s the challenge of figuring out what’s relevant and what’s irrelevant.

My thought in 2003 when I started writing the book was that most content was essentially spoofed and sponsored. I wanted to focus on more interesting innovations like the use of game theory in online advertising interfaces and the clever notion of “janitors” which were software routines able to clean up “bad” or “incomplete” data.

As I recall, that New York City guy was definitely interested in the notion of tuning ad results to generate money for the ad distribution and not so much for the advertiser. For me, no interest in lecturing a group of ad execs about their business. These folks can figure out the ins and outs of their business without inputs from an old person in Kentucky.

Mobile and video access to digital content do pose some interesting challenges in the online advertising world. My hunch is that the Alphabet Google type outfits and the intrepid researchers will find common ground. If the meeting progresses smoothly, perhaps a T shirt or mouse pad will be offered to some of the participants?

I remain confident that allegations about slippery behavior in online advertising are baseless. Online advertising is making life better and better for users everyday.

The experience of online advertising is thrilling. I am not sure the experience of receiving unwanted advertisements can be improved? Why read a Web page when one can view an overlay which obscures the desired content? Why work in a quite office? Answer: It is simply easier to hear the auto play videos on many Web pages. Why puzzle over a search results page which blurs sponsored hits from relevant content? By definition, displayed information is relevant information, gentle reader. Do you have a problem with that?

Google, according to the article, will chat up the seven experts who reported on the alleged fraud. I am confident that the confusion in the perceptions of the researchers will be replaced with crystal clear thinking.

Online ad fraud? What a silly notion.

Stephen E Arnold, September 24, 2015

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta