February 2010

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for February 2010.

This year, it was interesting to watch the Roar losing players. Not because the changes in the team roster were inherently interesting, but because of the conversation that evolved around it. There was one very persistent meme that coloured discussion both in the media and among the fans: the senior players’ ‘drinking culture’.

The idea first surfaced in the media after Frank Farina’s sacking and was repeated as each older player left. This meme was very persistent and effectively framed the conversation around the changes to the club for the rest of the season. Players that used to be lauded by the supporters were now labelled unprofessional, past it, and a bad influence on the club by the very same fans.

What is interesting is what was not discussed as the club let go of their more experienced players, many of whom used to be fan favourites. The discussion was not about why the management were making these decisions, or how this will affect the club’s chances of making the finals; it was dominated by the alleged ‘drinking culture’ of the senior players, fuelled by rumour and loose rationalisation.

It was interesting to see how discussion about events within a community can be shaped so much by a simple meme. Most of the conversation by the fans and media around the club as its team roster was changed was framed by the ‘drinking culture’ meme.

A simple meme that can be summed up in a memorable phrase can shape conversation about events and brands. An idea that resonates and helps to create an easily understood context for the way events unfold will almost always spread. Once a meme gains traction with opinion shapers, it will be repeated by both those who embrace it and oppose it, and this will just help to perpetuate it.

Framing the conversation has been important in politics ever since a popular vote mattered. Today online it is still just as vital for guiding opinion. Ideas can spread fast, and, thanks to the volume of information generated each day and the nature of a lot of social networking sites, are not always visible at the start.

As with any other channel, online interactions and content do shape the way discussion around any given subject will develop. Using the Internet to publish content to this end helps to incorporate it in the conversation. From news articles to audio and video, content will be linked to, referenced and commented on. Producing content gives interested parties an opportunity to try to frame the conversation. The success or failure of the attempt rest entirely on how well the content resonates with those who have the authority, both formal and informal, to spread the meme.

Tags: , , , , , ,

The big news of the week was that Yahoo! and Microsoft’s search agreement was approved by both the U.S. Department of Justice and the European Commission. Yahoo! is now closer to replacing their search, and search advertising product with Bing’s.

From what has been said, up to Yahoo!’s latest post on the matter, Yahoo! is going to stop being a search engine and simply focus on providing enriched data. In their words:

1) Providing you with rich results that display the most relevant information from Yahoo!’s rich content properties, as well as other great product, local, entertainment, reference, social and tech sites.

2) Showing specific results from vertical search products, like Yahoo! News.

3) Providing handy tools on the left-side of the page, such as our Search Pad and Search Scan apps, site filters that help you refine and explore the search results more easily, and related search term suggestions to help you refine your search further if the results aren’t quite what you were looking for.

Yahoo! seems to see itself as a portal, and is operating as if a portal can be distinct from a search engine. However, Google and Bing have taken a different approach, and have demonstrated that a search engine can become a portal. The inclusion of many Google properties, such as Maps, Base and so on, onto their Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs) has been discussed at length for years now. Bing has also chosen to follow a similar path, and have developed a suite of additional products of their own. Both Google and Microsoft also have email products that include social functionality in Google Buzz and Windows Live. It is interesting that while a portal site is moving away from search, search is moving towards becoming portals.

Yahoo! SERP for Vancouver

Yahoo! SERP for Vancouver

Google  SERP for Vancouver

Google SERP for Vancouver

Bing SERP for Vancouver

Bing SERP for Vancouver


A lot of what Yahoo! has discussed that they can bring to the Internet as a part of their portal business is already provided as a part of the Google and Bing search experience, or as a part of their additional properties. Where we are with search in terms of the richness of data that can be sorted and surfaced in search, each SERP is essentially a portal site. Depending on the term, photos, news, blogs, social commentary and maps can all be presented on the SERP as an algorithmically generated themed portal page. In getting out of search Yahoo! is limiting itself to competing with Bing and Google purely on content that they have the rights to, their existing user-base and presentation of information.

Is this enough? Both Google and Bing are creating more and more properties. Both Google and Bing have been developing more inventory requiring very little ongoing maintenance and have been rolling them into their main SERPs. With the inclusion of more user generated content such as social media updates and personalised search from Google, and Flickr content in Bing Maps and an apparent focus on travel indicated in their PR, how much value can Yahoo! provide as just a portal?

Tags: , , , , , ,

Bing has had a relationship with Facebook since 2008, and it has just become more involved. The latest announcement regarding Bing’s relationship to Facebook appeared on Bing’s blog on the 5th of this month.

Briefly, web search through Facebook will continue to be developed, including the integration of more of Bing’s features, and this will be rolled out both in and outside of the USA. Facebook will provide all display advertising within their site; however, Microsoft will continue to provide the search ads. In the whole post, it is the following paragraphs that I find the most interesting:

Bing will continue to exclusively power the web search results on Facebook. This change will also enable Microsoft to continue its focus on driving strong performing campaigns across our own social media and communications tools, including Windows Live Messenger and Hotmail, and via rich content environments across MSN and Xbox Live.

This is an exciting time for us as we continue to work with Facebook on great new experiences for customers. As you know, Bing has been very focused on helping customers make important decisions. We believe that counsel from family and friends can be a big part of that process. Going deeper in web search experiences with Facebook, in addition to the collaboration we announced last October about bringing public data from Facebook’s API into the search experience, will enable us to do great things together for our customers.

By providing Facebook with its websearch functionality, Bing can get around the strong Google brand, and get its search tools in front of people where they already are, rather than attempting to change existing habits the hard way. Bing’s features are comparable to what Google provides through their search experience, and Bing’s intent to become a decision engine and their integration of Wolfram Alpha has a lot of potential.

When you stop and consider the social networks that Microsoft is already heavily invested in, working with Facebook makes a lot of sense. The quote: “…bringing public data from Facebook’s API into the search experience…” is interesting in what it points to. Google is leveraging their own social data through Gmail, Google Reader, etc, to further enhance their own search results, and to provide a better ad product.

How Bing will use the data is collects from Facebook will be very interesting. As a recommendation engine, Facebook is incredibly effective, and the volume of data that they collect is very cool, or very scary, depending on your views. Data mining how links, information, video and photos are shared, tagged and recommended would be invaluable for Bing. Between these announcements and the development of Google Social, search will be a very different place in five years time, at the latest.

It is very silly to write off Microsoft too quickly. While they did release Vista and they have gone through anti-trust litigation, they still have considerable resources, and large companies can still be creative and agile.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

How someone searches is a result of every single query you have ever done. It is a learnt behaviour shaped by an ongoing conversation between the user and the algorithm.

The results page for each query is feedback on how well the question was articulated. If the results are relevant enough to end your search, that is good. If it was not, then you try a new approach and adopt a new method. For most web literate people, this process is repeated dozens of times everyday.

What appears on the results page is determined by three factors: the query itself, how the search engine interprets the query, and what sites appear to be the most relevant to this query. The user only has control over the query that they put in. However, over time, this will be influenced by the interaction between the search engine, the sites it indexes, and what the user deems relevant enough.

In low competition namespaces where optimisation activity is low to nonexistent, it is only feedback from the search engine that shapes user behaviour. Assuming an effective algorithm, the user may not have to try as many different query structures, refinements or synonyms to find a site that would be relevant enough.

In a more competitive namespace where the optimisation activity keeps pace with or exceeds the search engine’s ability to control what is deemed relevant for a specific query, the user’s behaviour is affected by both the search engine and SEOs who consider that namespace to deliver a good return. Assuming that the optimised sites do deliver an experience that is relevant, then this will have minimal impact on user behaviour. In namespaces where there is more than one potential subject, then optimisation activity for one may force a shift in the search behaviour of the users seeking the other.

A crowded namespace can have another interesting effect on search behaviour: an increased use of a site’s branded terms to locate it by existing customers. Where there is a high level of competition on generic product terms, or the most relevant site for the namespace is outranked by less relevant results, the user can be taught to use branded instead of generic terms.

Search engines are Skinner Boxes. Each time the user conducts a query, they get feedback on how closely it relates to their intent. In response to this feedback, their behaviour changes. The feedback they receive comes from two sources: the search engine itself, and those optimising for it. These in turn influence how the user describes the product online, and can encourage them to hone in on a more focused range of queries.

Tags: , , , ,