SiteLines - Ideas About Web Searching

SiteLines on Hiatus Until October 1

No new postings to SiteLines until October 1 2005.

More Consolidation - IAC buys AskJeeves

Just when you thought web search property consolidation was slowing down, here comes the huge IAC conglomerate buying up Ask Jeeves for $1.85 billion. In the March 21 press release, IAC CEO Barry Diller makes the suggestion that the answer-machine funcationality of Ask Jeeves is perfectly positioned "to become one of the great brands on the Internet and beyond, and by beyond we mean in wireless, in the search for anything on any device." The press release further commits to "making Ask Jeeves the search engine with the best local search, content and merchant information on the Web " (Translation: stuff that makes advertisers want to pay for keyword placement.)

IAC is a large, publicly held media conglomerate that includes sites such as Lendingtree.com, dating site Match.com, Hotels.com, Expedia, Evite, and CitySearch, among others.

What does this mean for search engine Teoma (www.teoma.com), the best serious-search component of Ask Jeeves? Probably more commercial/paid content, with improved quick-search commands to find popular, basic information (sports, brands, maps, phone numbers, and other easy-to-find facts at a glance). I'll be watching.

New York Times buys About.com

You may have heard that the NY Times purchased information portal site About.com last month. About.com was once a great information portal, which had for over a year been included as a top search tool in Search Portfolio. In exchange for some fairly intrusive ads, users were treated to good quality consumer-focused information on a variety of subjects. But over time, About.com seemed to lose its focus - many topical sites were dropped, and for the remainder, too much real estate was devoted to ads and not enough to hand-picked information links from its specialized guides. Then they got weblog fever and the new look and feel of guide pages mixed people up even more.

There is much hope that the NYT can revive About.com. Andrew Goodman of Traffick offered up a wish list (!) in his "Great or Ho-Hum? A Wish List for NYT's About.com" including some pleas for improved quality and quality controls.

SiteLines on hold until September 20

I'm taking a small break from SiteLines for the next three weeks in order to prepare several upcoming courses for the Education Institute of the Ontario Library Association, and a new program, How to Be a Great Web Searcher, which is the kick-off teleconference for the Special Libraries Association on September 14. If you're thinking of adding an online course or teleconference to your "must do" list for this fall, consider the fantastic roster of programs offered through these association leaders.

Medical Editors Fight US Treasury Ruling

In response to reports in February of a ruling by the US Treasury Department that editing scientific manuscripts from Iran, Libya, Sudan and Cuba violated existing trade embargos with those countries, the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) issued an expected defense of scientific submission criteria. In its March 23 statement titled "Geopolitical Intrusion on Editorial Decisions," WAME struck out against the decision and encouraged editors to resist decisions based on "nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs race, or religion of the authors."

(Small sidebar: medical librarians will find much of interest at the WAME web site, including discussions on impact factors, authorship disputes, and free access to medical research.)

Although many in the library community have interpreted the Treasury Department rulings as a ban on publishing manuscripts from these countries, the rulings may actually prohibit substantial editing, translation, or corrections of manuscripts -- not quite the same thing as a publication ban, but of concern nonetheless. A New York Times article quotes Tara Bradshaw, a Treasury Department spokeswoman, who confirmed the restrictions on manuscripts to include "collaboration on and editing of the manuscripts, the selection of reviewers, and facilitation of a review resulting in substantive enhancements or alterations to the manuscripts."

Yet accounts of statements made by other Treasury Department officials suggest broader applcation of the embargo. Some of these statements are reported in Nature, February 19 2004 (427): 663. In that article, David Mills of the Treasury Dept. is quoted as suggesting that anyone wanting to publish papers from Iran should seek a license to do so from the Treasury Department, and that US scientists collaborating with Iranians could face prosecution.

Journal of Religion and Society Devotes an Issue to Mel Gibson's Passion of Christ

I haven't seen the film, but those who have (or who support student research assignments on this hot topic) will surely be interested in the January 2004 issue of the Journal of Religion and Society. The issue presents several articles from a January 2004 symposium surrounding some of the issues featured in Mel Gibson's film The Passion of Christ. The issue also includes "A Viewer's Guide to Contemporary Passion Plays," which provides background material and contemporary interpretations. (Spotted on LII New This Week)

Computers in Libraries 2004

I'll be taking a brief break from publishing SiteLines during the week of March 8 to participate as a trainer and speaker at Information Today's annual Computers in Libraries conference. Notes from my portion of the March 10 panel discussion "Tips for Keeping Up" with Steve Cohen of Librarystuff.net, and Gary Price of ResourceShelf.com, are now available.

Ghostwriting in Medical Journals

In the Sunday December 7 Guardian, Anthony Barnett's article "Revealed: how drug firms 'hoodwink' medical journals" describes a widespread practice where large drug companies hire medical writers to write review articles on particular drugs, then submit the articles to reputable medical journals with the claim that they are written by academics or physicians. Barnett suggests that "almost half of all articles published in journals are by ghostwriters." The article includes statements from medical writing firms confirming the practice, and one particularly striking example revealed by Dr. David Healey, an eminent UK psychiatrist, critic of the psychiatric drug industry and author of Let Them Eat Prozac.

The problem of medical ghostwriting is not particularly new. The CBC profiled the practice in a 2003 episode of Marketplace, and articles on ghostwriting can be found as early as 1994 in the PubMed database. The CBC site has a particularly good section of links to related articles on the topic, for further review.

Thank you Dan Dagostino of the University of Toronto Library for drawing the Observer article to my attention.

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.

Walt Crawford on CIPA and web-filtering

In the summer issue of Cites and Insights: Crawford at Large, library digitization expert and all-around-iconoclast Walt Crawford of the Research Libraries Group has published a richly detailed 20-page guide Coping with CIPA: A Censorware Special to help US libraries understand and deal with the requirements for filtering web access in public libraries.

CIPA is the Childrens Information Protection Act, which forbids public libraries to receive federal assistance for Internet access unless they install software to block obscene or pornographic images and to prevent minors from accessing material harmful to them.

Like many library leaders, Crawford doesn't like filtering (his choice of the term censorware is telling) Nevertheless, this important document provides managers with the background of recent US Supreme Court decisions, quotes from several print and web publications, critical notes on software and blacklist solutions, and his own suggestions on possible actions and responses. Crawford is careful to state that this is his very personal though informed opinion, so readers will have to weigh his views with those of others, particularly the recommendations and advice provided through the American Library Association's CIPA Update Page

What does Yahoo's purchase of Overture mean for searchers?

No doubt you have heard that Yahoo! has purchased publicly-traded Overture in a cash-plus-shares deal. That may be good for shareholders, but what does this mean for information seekers? The early conclusion is: very little, and not much of it good.

The company's press release is a clue. There's no mention in the release of any search benefit -- the only benefits are related to advertising sales. There is specific mention of expanding Pay-for-Performance search into shopping, travel, and yellow pages properties; integrating contextual advertising (i.e. keyword buying) throughout Yahoo!'s growing network of web properties; and using the leverage that consolidation offers to easily enable Overture's 88,000 advertisers to buy ads in any number of ways.

This step is one in a series of consolidation steps among major search players, and was anticipated for some weeks before the actual announcement. The consolidation leaves three major players in the search game -- Yahoo! (which now will own AltaVista and AlltheWeb, as well as Inktomi, which it bought earlier this year), Google (still privately financed, with no credible rumours on either acquisition or initial public offering), and Microsoft's MSN Search.

While MSN Search isn't a particularly good first-step search engine, there is a huge and very public buzz about a major overhaul of the MSN search tool in order to make it go head-to-head with the other major players. This is an expected Microsoft tactic -- to enter or expand into an area where entrepreneurial key players (e.g. Yahoo!, Google) already hold a place, and with the power of hindsight and extensive market research, establish a new presence in order to almost instantly dominate the market. The strategy has been used successfully with MS Windows (taking on Apple/MacIntosh OS), MS Office (surpassing Wordperfect/Corel) and MS Internet Explorer (surpassing Netscape).

I welcome your comments on this! Please feel free to post your ideas in the Comments section which follows this entry.

About.com adopts a Blogging Model

About.com, a commercial portal site of over 400 web topical guides hosted by experts and enthusiasts, has adopted a Moveable-Type blogging model on the front page of each guide. You can see an example of the result here. As a result, the front page of each guide looks slightly less like a tabloid. The blogging model enables each host to easily post news items with dates/times, and permits newsfeed junkies to link their newsreaders to the guide's RSS/XML direct feeds.

The informational impact is principally on the front page of each guide, and little else has changed. Pop-ups, pop-unders, banners, sponsored links, and other creative ways of annoying serious searchers are as plentiful as ever. But each guide benefits from a context-sensitive left-hand sidebar of useful links and resources, which makes About.com a solid choice for selected topics -- mainly hobbies, travel, and small business. That part hasn't changed, which is great.

My Schedule at ALA/CLA

For the upcoming ALA/CLA conference in Toronto June 19-25, I'll be presenting the program Beyond Google: Searching Faster and Smarter on the Web on June 20 (full day, hands on) and June 23 (evening program, live demo) in association with the Ontario Library Association. The June 20 program is now sold out but you can still register for the June 23 session at http://www.accessola.com.

I'll also be on the exhibit hall floor throughout the conference in the Ontario Library Association booth, to show visitors the OLA's Education Institute great new online course offerings for Fall 2003, and to demonstrate the Search Portfolio, our peer-reviewed web site selection service for libraries. Please stop by the OLA booth to visit us!

Northern Light Purchased by Original Owner

Many longtime web searchers continue to mourn the loss of search engine Northern Light (www.northernlight.com). The company was an early innovator of search engine clustering capability, and highly prized in the professional search/research/library community.

Northern Light was sold to Divine in 2002 and subsequently, the public search engine component of the brand was essentially abandoned. A few months later, what remained of Northern Light was caught in the Divine bankruptcy net, and most observers expected the brand to disappear.

There is some buzz about a return. Northern Light's founder, C. David Seuss, repurchased Northern Light about 3 weeks ago during Divine's bankrupcy selloff, and is trying to resuscitate the product. However, Seuss's intention with Northern Light may be as an enterprise search tool/portal, and it remains to be seen if the new Northern Light includes a public web search component. The press release at http://www.northernlight.com/PressRelease.htm draws attention to Northern Light's corporate market research portal, an enterprise product. Regarding the popular Northern Light Web search engine, Seuss declined to make firm predictions.

Web Links Losing to Search Engines

According to a March 2003 report from WebSideStory, the percent of Internet users worldwide using search engines to arrive at their desired online destination is growing while all other ways of finding sites are shrinking. Over the past year, search engine use great to over 13% from just over 7%. Meanwhile, the number of people using web links has declined dramatically from over 42% in March 2002 to roughly 21% as of March 2003.

This trend will likely continue. Search engines like Google are featured so frequently in the news that awareness of and use of them will doubtlessly increase. As a result, browsing through high quality filtered catalogues will become a lost art, as will the discovery of web resources through serendipity (much like browsing the library card catalogue, if anyone remembers that).

Yet our classroom tests and exercises routinely prove to serious searchers that search engines alone don't perform as well as searching/browsing several different types of search tools to identify topical resources. Search engines are great for finding things you know are on the web already, but insufficient for richer resource discovery. Search engines like Google help us discover what is already well known and popular, but relegate unpopular (but often high quality) resources to the bottom of the hit lists where they will almost surely be missed.

RCLS DeskRef - Gone!

DeskRef is gone. Produced by the Ramapo Catskill Library system, it was one of my favorite portals to quick reference sources.

Gary Price reminded me that you can still see parts of DeskRef through the Wayback Machine's archived files.

In our web search classes at Workingfaster.com, we would have a race to find information (an easy way to pick up the pace at that mid-day slump!) I would divide the class in half and get one half of the class to use search engines and bookmarks to find answers to quick reference questions, and asked the other half of the class to use DeskRef. The difference in the results were dramatic -- DeskRef questions were often answered in 30 seconds or less, while the search engine users were still pointing and clicking long after for most questions, even those where the "answer" could conceivably appear in the first page of search engine results.

I continue to believe that libraries and governments have to take a leadership role in building and promoting high quality free portal sites like DeskRef -- the .com world won't step in and do it systematically or for the long term. Even within the professional searching and library communities , the value of these selective, quality-filtered tools is grossly underestimated. In time they will be sorely missed.

Yahoo's Search Changes -- How New?

There has been much news over the last few days on the new features of Yahoo's search. So far, there's not much to report -- Yahoo is still delivering results from its own directory and broader search results from Google (rather strange, given that Yahoo! now owns Inktomi, a rival search engine database producer). There is an added image search tool, which seems to deliver exactly the same results as Google's image search, plus the usual shopping searches. Early assessment? Not much new here for serious web searchers.

If you want to search using a search engine, use Google directly. Yahoo still has some good listings in its directory section: it's easier to search the directory by starting at http://dir.yahoo.com than at the overloaded main Yahoo page.

Gary Price is following the Yahoo story closely at http://www.resourceshelf.com -- I'll keep my eye on the major issues but search engine news junkies might want to take an occasional peek at Gary's site.