SiteLines - Ideas About Web Searching

New Web-Based Spam Filter

For those of you stuck with ISPs or companies who can't or won't add server-side spam filtering capabilities, a new web-based tool may provide some relief from manual or client-side filtering of unending buckets of spam.

Spam Interceptor is a completely web-based filtering system that uses Spam Assassin to separate spam from wanted email messages. Possible spammers are sent automatic one-time-only authentication requests by Spam Interceptor: the sender is then directed to a web link that enables authentication. A basic account is free: upgraded accounts cost $10.00 US (via PayPal). Upgrading enablles multiple email servers plus some customizing of the internal Spam Assassin settings.

Internet Education Project

The Internet Education Project (IEP) is a "means to promote and share peer reviewed instructional materials created by librarians to teach people about discovering, accessing and evaluating information in networked environments." The site deserves support from the library community: if more heavily populated with shared instruction materials, this could prove a valuable resource for sharing proven instructional strategies that help people learn about how information happens online.

The IEP is maintained by Emerging Technologies in Instruction Committee of the Instruction Section (IS) of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), a division of the American Library Association (ALA).

How Much Information is Out There?

How Much Information is a project of the University of California, Berkeley School of Information Management and Systems. It examines how much information exists in print, film, magnetic, and optical formats – and seen or heard in telephone, radio and TV, and the Internet. The project originally started in 2000 and an updated 2003 study has just been released.

Worldwide Weather Sites

World Weather Information Service provides official weather forecasts and climatological information for more than 800 cities worldwide. Why continue using commercial weather services when this handy from-the-source site is almost as easy?

Pay-Per-View Pressure Points

Over the last three months, there have been some interesting news stories focusing on delivering fee-based article-level content to end users directly.

Pressure Point 1: Microsoft embeds pay-per-article content into next-generation MS Office

Microsoft will bundle pay-per-view access to selected Gale ,Lexis-Nexis and other partner content into its next release of Microsoft Office, enabling users who require information to do a quick search, identify articles, and purchase them instantly for a few dollars each. Vendors are betting that most people have no sense of where to look to find article-level information on the web and will pay for the convenience factor, making the a compelling business case for this type of content delivery. (To learn more about the bundling and why it's so exciting to vendors, read Barbara Quint's excellent article in the March 17 issue of Information Today)

Pressure Point 2: Industry analysts strongly prefer pay-per-view over subscription models

Largely overlooked last week was a report that the stock price of Elsevier, one of the world's largest publishers, had dropped sharply following BNP Paribas' release of a research report indicating dissatisfaction with Elsevier's persistent use of blanket subscriptions rather than more profitable pay-per-article model.

These bits of news point to an interesting trend toward the legitimizing, finally, of pay-per-view of electronic content. Long hoped for by publishers but unacceptable to users who expected free information or who were unwilling to pay, there seems to be increasing acceptance of pay-per-view as a legitimate and profitable business model. Companies like Gale, Microsoft, and Lexis-Nexis (which is owned by Elsevier) are betting that if they present inexpensive pay-for content at the moment of need, harried searchers eager for quality information will buy.

It's a substantial stretch to assume that electronic publishers will suddenly abandon blanket subscriptions -- the core of academic library purchases -- in the near future. However, if the pay-per-use model proves as profitable as analysts suggest it could become, subscription customers can expect to see some readjustment of the subscription model to make pay-per-view a more attractive option than it seems now.

ChillingEffects.org

The Chilling Effects Clearinghouse is a web portal for information on the protection of rights related to the distribution of online information. A joint project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, and University of Maine law school clinics, Chilling Effects provides information to help users understand First Amendment and intellectual property laws that provide protection to online activities.

The site offers information and background material dealing with topics such as Fan Fiction, Copyright, Domain Names and Trademarks, Anonymous Speech, and Defamation. The site is also collecting a database of Cease-and-Desist orders issued to web information providers.

This is a unique and valuable web source for information content providers' bookmark lists.

Googlization of Library Searches

In "Trumping Google? Metasearching's Promise, in the October issue of Library Journal, marketing consultant Judy Luther argues persuasively in favor of meta-searching across multiple databases of full text journals and bibliographic citation indexes. Luther suggests that library users want simple, novice approaches to information retrieval that resemble Google-style one-box searches.

Many libraries are already implementing the one-box approach to cross-database searching (also called federated searching or meta-searching), often against the objections of librarians who fear the demise of quality search strategies in favor of a dumbed-down approach.

While I have never been a fan of cross-database searching for information professionals or other serious searchers, this article compellingly argues for a simplified approach that can reach the vast majority of beginner searchers, with appropriate advanced options for deeper resource discovery.

Recommended Resource: CensusFinder

Spotted on the Toronto SLA resource list: Censusfinder is a meta-site of over 18,000 links to many sources of census records.

Recommended Resource: Consumer Search

Spotted on Resourceshelf.com, this is a portal site for consumer product reviews available on the web. In addition to linking to reviewing sources, Consumer Search also conducts reviews of the reviews, adding its editors own views on review quality and reliability. There are no apparent editorial relationships with the review sources that are covered. (If there were, the content would be suspect. The site generates revenue from ad placements and linkages to comparison pricing databases.) A worthwhile addition to consumer resource link lists.

Google Answers Vs. Reference Librarians - A Response

The September 2003 issue of RLG's ShelfLife spotlights a study from DLIB Magazine on the effectiveness of Cornell University librarians over Google's freelance researchers who participate in the Google Answers information service. "Although Cornell reference librarians scored higher overall than Google's freelance researchers, their scores were not significantly better. Both groups were rated "good" overall, but one might have expected that highly trained and comparatively expensive information professionals would have scored consistently higher."

As an instructor of both librarians and non-professional searchers, the results of this study are disappointing, but not surprising. The googlization of search in popular culture, together with the promotion of web sites through conventional advertising and marketing, have created mass-market search tools that everyone knows. There is now comparatively little difference now between the web search knowledge base of librarians as compared with the general public.

So it isn't a surprise to see that the success rate of the Google Answers information providers wasn't substantially different from that of the Cornell librarians. I suspect that because, for the questions which could be handled with web search tools, both groups likely relied on the same well known and popular search tools, the results of their searches were very similar.

Most popular, well known search tools aren't very good. Many rely so heavily on pay-for-placement advertising that results are terribly skewed in favor of paying partners. And even "good" search engines like Google, Teoma and AlltheWeb aren't good for all types of searches. For many entertainment, technology and business topics, the algorithms used in rank ordering have been so thoroughly exploited by search engine optimizers that many Google searches no longer produce useful results.

There are excellent finding tools on the web that aren't search engines. Almost no one (except a small group of experts who teach web searching professionally) has ever heard of them. Even those who have heard of these titles can't remember to use them when faced with a search question.

Unlike reference books, which are static, inert, visible, and long-lasting, good web sites change. They get worse (or better); they change their focus; they get bought out by companies (and usually get worse); the original creator changes jobs, and the web sites fall into disarray; some go fee-based; some just disappear completely.

Many intelligent searchers fall victim to false claims of search tools, which often purport to be better than they really are. I was a little saddened to see that one of Google's testimonials on its press release page quoted an unnamed librarian: "Google is a lifesaver! Particularly, for those of us in the information business. As a librarian, I regularly refer patrons to Google..."

While Google is certainly valuable for certain types of searches (like tricky citation verification), sending patrons from the desk to flounder over a Google search can reinforce the common notion that librarians know no more about searching the web than the average person.

Keeping up with the best of the web is really difficult, and people -- even librarians -- can't do it. The evidence of their incapacity can be found all over the web, on those pages of allegedly "top web resources" that libraries faithfully created for their users. With some notable exceptions, most of these library-created pages are full of popular tools of questionable value, commercial meta-search sites, mediocre link lists, and plenty of now-dead URLs.

Revisit your library's general web search page. When was the last time it was updated? Do most of the links point to keyword-search tools, like search engines or meta-search tools? Are more than 50% of your links pointing to .com sites or sites with a lot of advertising? Has your page gone without major reassessment of links for more than 6 months?

If you answer YES to any of these these questions, you may be having difficulty keeping up with general site selection and deployment, and your users aren't getting to the best that the web has to offer.

Libraries may find that outsourcing this task can be far less costly than in-house maintenance. For example, the Search Portfolio is a continually updated, peer-reviewed desktop of the 100 top starting points for web searching. (Disclosure: I lead the Search Portfolio selection team, and I am very proud of the product.) Organizations can license the Search Portfolio like any other licensed datbase, for use by their user population.

Bookmarklets - Hot tool for faster web work

Many of the latest and greatest search gizmos leave me cold, particularly any that call for software installation on the desktop. But I've been watching the growing interest in bookmarklets and I can really see the value of these handy little browser toolbar shortcuts.

If you would like to learn more about bookmarklets, I draw your attention to two good articles: Greg Notess' On the Net column, Bookmarklets, Favelets, and Keymarks: Shortcuts Galore, and Mary Ellen Bates Tip of the Month: Bookmarklets- Nifty Tools a Mouse-Click Away. (Those new to bookmarklets should read Greg's article first, as it provides an excellent beginner-level explanation.)

Problems with Information on Health Web Sites

ConsumerWebWatch recently published an important study on the quality of information on health-related web sites. This is essential reading for health specialists and those who serve the information needs of the public seeking health infomation online.

Some interesting observations from the report:

• Whereas the medical literature is consumed with the importance of whether information is accurate on a web site, the popular press pay little attention to accuracy.
  
• The popular press -- even the biz-tech press, has ignored the story of the possible relationship between health web sites and pharmaceutical companies. "For example, when Yahoo! created its health Web site health.yahoo.com both ZDNet and CNet published stories about it. They discussed how this would be a new revenue stream for Yahoo! because pharmaceutical companies would be interested in advertising on
  the site. ...Neither piece was at all concerned about how ad revenue from health firms might influence health content, despite mentioning that the site would give links to prescribed medication right next to facts about symptoms and news headlines about each ailment.
  

Determining the quality and reliability of commercial health information is a big job, even for journalists who regularly investigate sources of information. Most commercial web sites disclose little about their ownership. Ownership of web sites (or investment in those sites) by pharmaceutical companies or their officers could have an impact on the information offered -- and if not the information, certainly the advertising appearing on the page. It is also possible -- and difficult to figure out -- what information about a disease, condition, or drug is MISSING from a health-related web site, and if that omission is intentional.