In the fight between Google and Microsoft-Yahoo, users win

Archana Venkatraman
On Wednesday [July 29], Microsoft and Yahoo paired up to announce a ten-year deal in the search markets. The companies announced that the partnership would improve efficiency in reaching and tracking online audience.
Together Microsoft-Yahoo will hold less than 30% of the US market share, even though it is significantly more than their individual numbers. A research firm comScore suggests that Google handles 65% of the US search market. On a global context, however, the game looks even tougher for Microsoft and Yahoo with Google having 70% of the market share. But the two companies claim the deal to be a game changer within the search market.
Through the deal, Microsoft acquires a ten-year license to Yahoo's search technologies while Yahoo sites will use Microsoft Bing as their search platform.
Professionals navel-gazing to know 'what's in there for me' may not see a radically different search experience in the short run, but the competition introduced within the sector could result in innovation, more sophisticated search technology, meaning-based content, efficient organic search and further collaboration and consolidation.
In isolation, the development may mean little to professionals, but this just marks the beginning of maturity within the digital information industry. We could see more such collaborations not only between rival companies but even complementary collaboration between search companies, social networking sites and information management companies.
As one expert told me "the future of the search is about you and me", I see it coming true.

UPDATE: What Future for Search?

I was going to wait until tomorrow's keynote on Search before blogging about this, but I understand that the session will now count Andrew Kanter, Chief Operating Officer from Autonomy as a panellist.
As one of the senior figures at Autonomy it is going to be revealing what he has to say about search and what plans the organisation has for its technology. If you are involved in Enterprise search or just interested in semantic developments, this will be a must see.
With search guru Stephen E Arnold moderating the session I have a feeling that the panel will get a thorough grilling.
We will be blogging from the session so if you can't make it check back here around mid afternoon for a round up.

Online Information Conference - Opening Keynote

"We are now seeing a new set of business innovations and it's an interesting time to develop business, information being at the heart of business. Without the information tools and tech that we will here about can't hope to be successful." So opened this year's Online Information Conference courtesy of its chairman Adrian Dale
The theme for this year (subsequent to the economic bubble bursting)
Dale explained how in the 1960s and 70s it was those professionals in personnel who saw the importance of their role in a businesses strategy to justify their place on the board. Their its predecessors in Finance were the same. Meanwhile, the 1980s and 90s was the time for the business process managers - the supply chain managers in other words to take the lead and further influence their organisations for business benefit.
For the information profession, that role has largely been contained and formed as a number of cottage industries such the realm of the librarian, web development, the records manager. Now though we are moving into a time when it's the information manager that takes the lead, said Dale - at least in those organisations that have the foresight.
Why now?
For one, because of the vast amounts of information being generated across the globe. A live feed from EMC showed a row of whirling numbers projected across the world to represent this current data generation, in fact 432bn GB created since 1st Jan 2008.
We are dealing with the explosion of information and it has now caught up with us, said Dale, we have got to get to the heart of these processes. Most businesses won't understand how to manage information properly. Unfortunately that can mean less cottage industry of information management and more like a personal approach with everyone managing their own, but is that really a strategy?
This opened up the floor for Keynote speaker Clay Shirky, author of and "Here Comes Everyone - the power of organising without organisations. More to follow...

Some things are hard to find

By Phil Muncaster.
Autonomy has just announced a new e-discovery solution to increase its presence in this burgeoning space. When it bought archiving and e-discovery vendor Zantaz last year, the firm clearly signaled its intent to expand into areas related to its core competency and heritage of enterprise search. And while it`s still best known for the latter - and while it continues to make oodles of cash providing big name clients like the BBC, Boeing and Coca Cola with search technology - the e-discovery space represents a massive opportunity, as firms look to overcome the challenges presented by an increasing raft of legislation and industry regulations.
In the US, of course, e-discovery has been driven mainly by the recently updated FRCP - Federal Rules of Civil Procedure - which lay down aggressive new rules for the discovery and presentation of electronic records as evidence in US courts. E-discovery, archiving, retention; they're all bound up in this area and with strict penalties for the destruction of evidence also part of the new FRCP, the stakes have been raised significantly for firms. Not that this is just a US problem either - just as SOX was felt in other countries, so the FRCP could have an impact elsewhere, including this side of the Atlantic.
This new hosted solution features technology to accelerate the time it takes your legal bods to review electronically stored-information and classify it according to its status, and also to review the information and make an early assessment of the related case. As you'd expect from Autonomy, which I guess prides itself on being able to scale in the enterprise search space about as far and beyond what any organisation needs, the technology can process terabytes of electronically-stored info without blinking - in over 100 languages and 1000 data types. The filtering of information in such massive data sets can make it easier to gain visibility into that information, says Autonomy.
It remains to be seen whether this being a hosted solution causes any hesitation among enterprise buyers - after all, it's meant to dig out the most sensitive of sensitive documents; will firms prefer to keep this sort of capability in-house? In its defence on the security front though, Autonomy maintains that because all elements of the solution are maintained by a single vendor, this reduces the risk of data becoming lost or corrupted, and makes the whole process more auditable. Let's see what happens; e-discovery is certainly here to stay though, and you can probably expect more big name vendors on the content management scene trying to get in on the action with "holistic, end-to-end solutions".

Fast deal muddies Microsoft search strategy

A lot of people see Microsoft’s agreement to buy Fast as just another example of how mergers and acquisitions are leading to inevitable consolidation in enterprise software generally. I’m not so sure it’s as cut and dried as that.

Most M&A is done to fill a gap in functionality or to grab market share. The Fast deal does both but it would also appear to cut right across Microsoft’s strategy of late last year when it described a plan to develop its search capabilities by organic means with a product called Search Server 2008.

Microsoft now says it plans to integrate Fast with Search Server and SharePoint but, having just cost Redmond $1.2bn, the Fast technology is a racing certainty to be predicated.

It’s a slightly odd state of affairs as it’s only a few months since Microsoft was describing how Search Server would soon be able to compete at the top end of enterprise search but, like Newcastle United parting company with coach Sam Allardyce, one can only assume that Microsoft saw the light a little at an odd juncture.

One report suggests Microsoft also might have taken a close look at Endeca and Autonomy before deciding Fast was the pick of the bunch available. Of course, Autonomy, at perhaps twice the price of Fast, would be pricey given Microsoft’s relatively Scrooge-like attitude to acquisitions, but both of these companies will now be under more sale scrutiny than ever, of course. It will come as no surprise that the most likely buyers are IBM, Oracle and Google.

Incidentally, Fast, like Autonomy, has R&D in Cambridge. That’s Cambridge as in the great university, punting on the Cam and so on, not Cambridge, Massachusetts or some other Cambridge. In enterprise search, at least, there is a part of the tech world that remains forever England.

You pay for what you get

Civil servants are reeling in the wake of the horrific news that CDs containing the records of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) database have been lost, and the futher news of DVLA data being lost. The full cost to tax paying members of the public may not be fully realised for years to come.

This debacle is not only an example of incredibly poor information management, but also a sign of a wider problem in the UK, that you get what you pay for. Or in this case you don't get what you pay for. 

Information management is, or rather was, at the heart of British life. Travel to former colonies like India or Australia and they'll gladly inform you of the regimented behaviour towards information that led to government structures that have served the sub-continent and prison colony well to date. Yet, those standards have dropped.

An IWR reporter remarked as we debated the issue, how come information of this value was so easy to simply download and burn to a CD?  Technology preventing such blunders is not new and is a basic function of many information management systems.

Revelations of the missing information came a day after a report on the BBC's Today programme that the Driving Standards Agency and vehicle licensing body the DVLA employees take on average three weeks sick leave a year. Missing information and low staff moral are examples of a civil service that is poorly funded and poorly managed.

It is too easy to wag the finger of blame at civil servants, when in truth a much wider debate needs to take place.  As tax payers and child benefit recipients we are angry and worried, as information professionals we are dumbfounded that such lapses could have occurred.  What of our role as citizens?  Since the 1980s we've wanted a John Lewis service, but only paid Tesco value brand prices.  If you want John Lewis quality, you pay John Lewis prices.  On the high street this modus operandi fits well with the public, as they choose when they want quality and when they want to increase their spending. So why is it that we expect our state services to manage high level information on a low level budget?

This needs to be a debate about our society and its values, literally, as well as an improvement in information management.

Information professionals guiding you to the best bits of the blogosphere

Ben Toth reveals how he keeps his information intake healthy and why blogging can be more valuable than social networks such as Facebook.

Q Who are you?
A Ben Toth, 48, domiciled on a farm in Herefordshire. I trained as a librarian at University College
London about 15 years ago. I used to be the director of the NHS National Knowledge Service when it was part of Connecting for Health. The best known service it runs is the National Library for Health (www.library.nhs.uk). Currently, I’m designing the enterprise architecture for the National Institute for Health Research (www.nihr.ac.uk). I’m also writing a book on Health 2.0, which will be published in parts later this year.

Q Where is your blog?
A You’ll find it at http://nelh.blogspot.com

Q Describe your blog and the categories on it
A It’s just a public notebook really. Its content tends to reflect what I’m working on, but it’s mostly about libraries, health and the web. I could use Microsoft Word to keep my notes. I could use del.icio.us. But a blog is more visible and more in the flow of the things I’m reading, which
are almost invariably on the web. A lot of the entries I make are just notings – highlight, right-click and
send to Blogger. I use tags but I’m not very strict about categorising things.

Q How long have you been blogging?
A Since about 2001. Eighteen months ago I lost all my entries and had to start again.

Q What started you blogging?
A I was helping my daughter set up a website as part of a Brownie project she was doing. I couldn’t use the National Electronic Library for Health servers and I didn’t want to manage Apache or pay someone to, so we used Tripod. Which worked, but it was difficult to use. And then I read about Evan Williams’ little project, which became Blogger, had a go with it, and haven’t looked back. It’s become a
habit, and I haven’t got tired of it yet.

Q What bloggers do you watch and link to, and why?
A These days I follow things through RSS if I can, so my blog-watching is mostly via a feed reader. The only blog I regularly visit is Dave Winer’s (www.scripting.com) because he’s taken blog writing to a level where the argument is developed through the day and so needs to be read on the page. I look at Techmeme (www.techmeme.com), but that’s not really a blog. I used to maintain a list of blogs
that I linked to through blogrolling, but I can’t see the point of doing that any more. The social web takes care of that sort of affiliation-showing much better.

Q Do you comment on other blogs?
A I don’t comment much. Sometimes I carp from the sidelines on e-healthinsider (www.e-health-insider.com), but I don’t think there’s much value in commenting or reading comments. That’s not to say that discussion isn’t valuable, but I’d rather read views as blog entries rather than comments on
someone else’s blog.

Q How does your organisation benefit from your blog presence?
A It’s the best way of keeping in touch with what’s going on, and keeping a blog maintains some
visibility to people.

Q How does blogging benefit your career?
A Blogging and RSS are really important for me professionally. They keep me up to date in a way
that nothing else can.

Q What good things have happened to you solely because you blog?
A Making professional contacts that I otherwise wouldn’t have and maintaining ones that might
otherwise have fallen off. In some ways blogging is more useful than LinkedIn and Facebook
as a social networking tool. But it’s really only a matter of time until traditional blogging gets divided
up between Facebook, Vlogging and Twitter.

Q Setting work aside, which blogs do you read just for fun?
A The Fake Steve Jobs blog was great (http://fakesteve.blogspot.com). And when I need a chuckle, I check out the Dilbert RSS feed (http://dwlt.net/tapestry/dilbert.rdf ).

What are the blogs in your sector that you trust?
A The reliably interesting starting points on library matters for me are:
■ www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html
■ http://orweblog.oclc.org
■ www.philbradley.typepad.com
■ http://tomroper.typepad.com
And Jon Udell is a first-class technologist who happens to like libraries (http://blog.jonudell.net)

IWR Information Professional of the Year Award

The IWR American Psychological Association Information Professional of the Year award has been announced and went, deservedly to Brian Kelly, UK Web Focus for the UKOLN organisation.

The award is judged by a panel of previous winners and the IWR editorial team. As editor of IWR when I judge the award I look for an individual who is pushing the limits of information, technology and making the role of the information professional as far as possible and making it an exciting role.  When looking through the final results I could see that the other judges felt the same way and Brian was an excellent choice.

Brian's role is a national Web co-ordinator, an advisory post funded by the educational body JISC and the Museums, Library and Archives Council (MLA).

In this role Brian is looking at the web as central resource for learning and research in higher education and is looking at ways to make the web a successful resource, which is a challenging role, because the web is still very young and is constantly changing. This can be seen with the recent changes dubbed Web 2.0, therefore Brian is going to be pretty busy for some time to come.

Based at the University of Bath, I know from information professionals I have dealt with in the academic sector that he is very well respected and his thoughts are often the basis for great debate within the industry. Linked to this is his blog, which is one of the most popular blogs in the sector.

I hope all IWR readers will join me in congratulating Brian for an award very much well deserved. 

Jimmy Wales on the role of Wikipedia in society

Jimmy Wales, chairman of Wikipedia was the keynote speech of Online Information 2007 with a presentation Web 2.0 in action: Free culture & community on the move.

Starts with Britannica editor Charles van Doren 1962, who said the encyclopaedia should be radical, but Wales claims they have been anything but.

Small showing of hands for those that have edited, although Wales believes it’s a good showing, "but not as many as college kids".

I consider us to be the Red Cross of information, he says as he describes its charitable status. Have 10 full time staff and will spend about $2 to 3 million this year, which is tiny compared to the major publishers. Vast majority of the money is from small donations, which he likes because its grass routes and not dependent on advertisers.

Wales talks about the desire to extend the languages that are in use on Wikipedia, including Hindi and Afrikaans.

Wiki is free in the sense of GNU, its free to copy, modify and distribute.

Shows a video of his travels to India and how he learnt that the local communities want to use the English version, as the English language is a route out of poverty. His organisation has been out to South Africa teaching students how to edit Wikipedia. "One of the things we have learnt is that if you can get five to 10 editors working together, it can make a great difference." These groups make progress and then they look towards outreach and who they can include. Hence the organisation has set up an academy to find the founding editors. It has begun in India, with 10-20,000 articles a month being put together by academy organisations.

Wikia is his next subject, a separate organisation with 66 languages, including a 67th, Klingon. Wales goes on to demonstrate using Google search results for Muppets and how the top result is the official site, but the rest of the results are from web based conversation, ie Wikipedia pages, forums and fan sites. He demonstrates an article on the Ford motor company and how on Muppet Wiki site, there is an article on Muppet Ford ads and how this demonstrates this level of information would never have been available before.

The search engine is a political statement, in a small P sense, Wales says. The proprietary software of the main players is a mystery in that people have no control of the accountability. The Wikia search will publish its algorithm.

Wales believes that the trust of social networks and setting up trusted networks can be utilised in search. .

On the role of collaboration, he asks the audience to imagine that they are designing a restaurants, discussing the idea that we trust the people around us, we don't put people in cages in restaurants because they will be using knives.
The wiki philosophy is to allow people to do good.

Exploitation 2.0

I got a smashing email the other day from a fellow Flickr user. Apparently, they'd shortlisted a picture of mine. How exciting.

Well, turns out, not that exciting. The Schmap shortlist was for a so-so picture taken in Brighton to be published in their online guide to Brighton. So far, so good. Unfortunately, I wouldn't be paid, and Schmap, and  I'm presuming its owners, get perpetual worldwide rights to the image. Free.  If, like me, you love free stuff, that's great news. Except when you're giving stuff - free - to a company that will make money from it. Because although Schmaps are free at the point of consumption, the company makes money by selling advertising off the back of them.

Of course, to look at the web, this is great; Schmaps has clearly got its messaging spot on, and there are tons of Flickr users who think that being published - albeit without being paid for their work - is about as exciting as it gets. Some professional photographers are particularly excited, of course.

SaaS might not fit enterprise search

The rise and rise of software as a service has been such a mantra in the IT media over the last few years that it comes as something of a shock to see the SaaS model actually on the wane in enterprise search. Nevertheless, a recent report by CMS Watch says it plainly: “[the SaaS] model has been a hot topic recently [but] the SaaS model for enterprise search is on the decline”. So, what’s going on here?

CMS Watch itself lists three possible reasons: the preponderance of web-only search in SaaS offerings; the popularity and ease-of-use afforded by appliances; and the competition-squishing presence of Google in the sector.

Let me suggest two more: the fact that free is a compelling price, and the notion that SaaS might not be all things to all men.

Companies looking for a search service today will inevitably be attracted to freebie tasters, especially when the companies offering them -– Microsoft and IBM -- are as big as they come. As discussed earlier, these are highly attractive inducements that offer familiar environments to try out, and a solid upgrade path for those who want to carry on afterwards.

Second, it’s time to admit that SaaS has no Midas effect, except perhaps on marketers. The on-demand model has had a revolutionary effect on customer relationship management and sales force automation, and it is changing the way human resources operates, for example in measuring employee performance. But there are many, many other areas where it has had little or no effect. Even in the much-hyped area of productivity applications where Google and various startups have generated scads of coverage, there has been close to no impact on the hegemony of Microsoft Office, for example.

SaaS is a hugely important trend but privacy concerns, the need to delve into far-flung corners of the enterprise and ancient applications, and sundry other factors mean that search is unlikely to be a happy hunting ground for the model in the immediate future at least.

Information professionals guiding you to the best bits of the blogosphere - Lorcan Dempsey

Lorcan Dempsey has worked for JISC and libraries on both sides of the Irish Sea and the Atlantic. As a member of the National Information Standards Organisation, his blog on networked information and digital libraries is well followed.

Q Who are you?
A I work in Dublin, Ohio, was born in Dublin, Ireland, and spent a long time in between in the UK. I am lucky to have what I believe to be one of the most interesting jobs in the library world. I am responsible for the programmes and research area within OCLC (Online Computer Library Center). I also help shape OCLC strategic direction.

Q Where can we find your blog?
A http://orweblog.oclc.org

Q Describe your blog?
A I say that it is about “libraries, networks and services”. I suppose that over time it has become more general. At first it had more of a technical slant; now it ranges more widely. I tend to talk about how networks are reconfiguring library services and I have some recurrent threads. These include:

Making data work harder.
We invest a lot in bibliographic data and need to use it more imaginatively in our systems and services.
Moving to the network level.
No single website is the sole focus of a user’s attention. The network is the focus of attention. And a major part of our network use revolves around significant network-level services ­ Amazon, Google, IMDB, and so on. These match supply and demand in efficient ways. The real message of Web 2.0 is the emergence of this pattern of service: data hubs with strong gravitational pull generated through network effects.
Being in the flow.
The focus of attention has shifted from website to workflow. The network is not so much about finding things as getting things done, and we have increasingly rich support for “networkflow”. We may construct our personal digital identities around services in the browser or on the network (RSS aggregators, social networking sites, bookmarks, etc), and we use prefabricated workflows (course management system, customer relationship management system, and so on).

Q How long have you been blogging?
A Almost four years.

Q What started you blogging?
A After I arrived in OCLC I tended to send out a lot of emails. A colleague suggested that a blog might be a better model.

Q Do you comment on other blogs and what is the value of it?
A The comments on some blogs seem more important than on others.

Q What are the blogs in your sector that you trust?
A I keep a wide range of feeds in my aggregator and will focus on different ones from time to time. Again, I tend to be more interested in “voice” or those from whom I can learn something. From a library point of view, I look at Caveat Lector (http://cavlec.yarinareth.net) and ACRLog (www.acrlblog.org).

Alma Swan’s new blog, OptimalScholarship (http://optimalscholarship.blogspot.com) and eFoundations (http://efoundations.typepad.com) from Andy Powell and Pete Johnston, are informative and provocative. I find PlanetCode4Lib (http://planet.code4lib.org) an efficient and useful way of keeping up with a range of stuff.

Q What good things have happened to you that could only have happened because of your blogging?
A I have always contributed to the professional literature. But I find that blogging is quite liberating: it is much easier to write blog entries than longer pieces. It has made me write more quickly and to think about short communications.

Q Which blogs do you read just for fun?
A I look at John Naughton’s Memex 1.1 (http://memex.naughtons.org) and William Gibson’s blog (www.williamgibsonbooks.com/blog/blog.asp), and the pictures in YarnStorm (http://yarnstorm.blogs.com) make me smile.

Cause and effect

This post comes courtesy of Metafilter. I could bash on about how, if I'm looking for something  interesting or  controversial when aimlessly browsing I go to Metafilter and not a search engine. I could draw a comparison between the effectiveness of Metafilter as a search engine for really cool stuff and the primacy of a certain search engine. Or how Metafilter does the job right first time most of the time, while the likes of BoingBoing et al show merely occasional flashes of brilliance when compared to the massively parallel user model of Mefi. But I won't, because they're all a bit tenuous, to be honest.
Instead, I'd like to point you toward a posting on Metafilter; if Google were optimised for Google. Click through the page, and it's possible to see how search engines have changed the physical appearance of the web. We're all aware to a certain extent of how external influences change the design and layout of sites, but I was stunned to see the sheer volume of cruft, crap and extra verbiage added to the page in the name of SEO.

Specialist publishers ride high at Frankfurt Book Fair

At a major international publishing event like the Frankfurt Book Fair the bright lights of trade publishing and all its household star names could easily drown out the academic and scientific publishers. But this has not been the case.

Talk at the event, in all circles, is about books and technology, in particular search and eBook readers. On both subjects the specialist publishers are leading the way and the trade publishers salute them.

Amazon and Sony were expected to steal the show with their eBook
readers, they are instead conspiquous in their absence, but that has
not stopped publishers and technology providers from talking about the
devices and their potential.

I was particularly interested in a conversation I had with sceintific,
technical and medical publishers WIley where they hinted that they and
other specialists may get involved in driving the adoption of eBook readers.
Could we see the eBook reader adopt a similar model to the mobile phone
where users sign up to a subscription service, content of a particular
kind in this case, and in return they get a sleek and sexy device? Its
certainly worked for the mobile industry, which now resembled the car
world with its emphasis on styling and marketing.

But such a move could also be a blind alley, as one expert said to me,
these devices don't support the interlinking and interactivity that
content users are currently enjoying with the web.

During the fair Google, Ingram Digital Group and Amazon have all used the scientific and academic publishers as case study beacons for just what can be done with books on the web.

Geographically the Far East is the leading adopter as its markets radically develop according to Mark Carden, Ingram senior vp.

Perhaps Amazon spread rumours of a possible launch to see if there was real interest, well if the level of conversation we've heard is anything to go by, the eBook reader is in demand.

MySpace and Google to follow Facebook Apps

It looks like they're all at it now. Techcrunch reports that MySpace will launch an application platform similar to Facebook Apps later this week. Techcrunch also broke the story that Google plans to do the same thing late last month.

I feel a little ambivalent about this, and it's partly because it's quite difficult to use an application on Facebook casually; to use it, you are prompted to invite your friends. If someone posts a video, you have to add the application too; you can't just watch it. And then there's the blasted invites to become a Jedi, Sith, Vampire, Werewolf, Mortgage adviser or similar. I might be exaggerating here, of course - Scrablous and Red Bull Roshambull are both cunning applications that have used up many working hours here at IWR towers.

There's clearly potential in applications on these sites, and opening up Google, MySpace et al is good for business and good for creativity. However, there does need to be a balance between utility to the operating sites and utility to the end user. I'm not sure about you, but I'm definitely getting a feeling that people are fed up with being swamped with apps, and fed up of spamming their friends with invites in the process. Of course, I may be (and usually am) wrong, but a successful launch by one or both of these behemoths could mean a dilution of the market - something that may cause a few problems for social networking services, which rather rely on a critical mass of users - you join because your friends join, after all. What are your thoughts? Let's have 'em.

Microsoft and social networking

Lovely post from Rob Scoble on what Microsoft thinks of the new spate of web apps out there. I would say I'm gobsmacked, if we hadn't seen this before; Microsoft doesn't hire idiots, it hires very intelligent people. As such, I find what Steve Ballmer (yes, Steve 'Dance monkeyboy!' Ballmer) has to say about the success of Facebook rather odd. I've made a similar, albeit slightly different point in the past, so it might be worth going back to that to clarify why I'm a bit shocked.

Ballmer says that a lot of social networking sites are faddish, flashes in the pan, and that they fall out of fashion quickly. I'd partially agree here - Scoble argues that LinkedIn and Facebook are his Rolodexes now, but their currency depends on the network effect - how often people update their profiles. I bet quite a lot of my business contacts on LinkedIn (In fact several I can think of right now) updated their information a couple of jobs ago. Plaxo is hopefully going to make a big deal of its plan to be the Switzerland of social networking - a way of managing your data online. But I still think that social networking sites are superseded by new and innovative feature sets - in the latest case, Facebook's ability to add home brewed applications at will.

The new Zune, or the new Windows smartphone?

The New York Times (Thanks for removing the registration requirement, NYT bods!) puts it best; Microsoft is going a fair ways outside its core competency by taking on Google at the advertising game.
Google has said it will buy DoubleClick for $3.1bn, regulatory problems allowing; Microsoft has already shelled out $6bn for aQuantive. It's going to be a jolly tight - run thing.

That said, it sounds as if Microsoft is going to take a very different tack. Brian McAndrews, the aQuantive chief now running things at the Microsoft subsidiary, is keen to divorce ads from search, concentrating instead on telling advertisers how their customers get to - and click through - their adverts.

Social networking: the monetization begins

I've been kicking myself all day today; News Corp's purchase of MySpace is making better sense than before. According to the New York Times, MySpace intends to customise adverts based upon the data that its users freely provide as part of their profiles. Facebook isn't far behind, although why one advertiser thinks that journalists want to work from home (we do) on dull data entry (Oh, hold on, this sounds rather familiar) for £12 an hour (Now steady on), I'm not sure. On second thoughts, that sounds like perfect targeting.
The long and short of it is that NewsCorp reckons it can tailor ads to its users, using intimate data the users provide - rather than usage data that the site, or a search engine, gathers from the user's behaviour. News Corp. says that the ad targeting is based on what users say, what they do and what they say they do - smart work.
There's a catch here. Most users assume that the old model of web advertising - get a rough idea of the user, slap ads on page, collect revenue - applies. What they're about to find is that the data they are providing - to be shared with friends - is going to be used to sell stuff to them.
That said, there is a massive shift in the way people use the web. I now realise I'm an old 'un at the age of 32, because I'm going to say the following: youngsters use social networking differently. They are less concerned about freely sharing all kinds of information with others; with inviting people they don't know, and have never met, to be friends. They're unconcerned that the deal they are involved in - be advertised to in a very targeted manner in exchange for the platform - is not as good for them as it was in the past. It's a toss-up as to whether the new profiling and advertising methods will cause a backlash - we'll only be able to find out by watching how MySpace users react. Assuming, of course, that they react at all.

Fair use benefits the economy, so Free Our Data Mr Brown

A report from the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) in the USA shows that fair use of copyrighted material is beneficial to the national economy. According to the CCIA industries that can use material under the terms of fair use earned  $4.5 trillion, which adds more weight to the arguments of the Free Our Data campaign from newspaper The Guardian.

Free Our Data wants information held by the government, and therefore paid for by tax payers, to be made freely available so that organisations can use it.

Amongst the organisations using fair use terms that have benefited the US national economy are media organisations, education sector and software developers. 

Industries bound by copyright control with no fair use aspect contributed just $1.3 trillion to the US economy.

Fair use under US copyright law is described as being the use and copying of copyright protected material to comment upon, criticise or parody. Examples include summaries and quotes from medical articles for news, use of media content for teaching or the use of copyright protected material as evidence in a court case.

The Guardian Free Our Data campaign, run by its Technology supplement argues, rightly, that information collected by the Highways Agency, the UK Hydrographic Office and Ordnance Survey should be made available to organisations in the UK without being encumbered by clunky copyright restrictions. Although designated as trading funds, these three organisations receive almost 50% of their income from the public sector, which means taxpayers pay for it. Access to this data is charged for and as a result, organisations are turning to Google Maps for mapping information rather than using information they have already paid for through their business rates.

IWR supports the Free Our Data campaign because we are passionate about online information and want to see the UK remain a leader in information provision and we want to see British information professionals continuing to manipulate information in innovate ways that is beneficial to their user community.

Back from the dead... again

There's nowt but a note on Barrons to show for it, but something is stirring at the long-moribund website of The Industry Standard. Could it be that, a mere couple of weeks after Business 2.0 bit the dust, another title tied to the Dot Com boom is coming back from the dead?
The Standard was one of the stand-out magazines of the era, a mag that didn't take itself as seriously as others, and wasn't afraid to puncture a few egos in pursuit of the story. Sub Standard, the unofficial in-house rag, was a hysterically funny read - if you could get hold of it. If you haven't read James Ledbetter's account, you'll have missed out.

But besides making tech hacks a bit misty-eyed, what does it all mean?