Yesterday, an article was written in Search Engine Land regarding Google and the secrecy behind their algorithm. The details around the algorithm - how it functions, the factors it considers, the weighting of all of these factors - is a closely guarded secret and one that Google is not ashamed to publicly stand up and say that they will not ever release this information. The fact that there is so little information surrounding the algorithm is the bane of every digital advertiser and web developer's existence. As we all know, in order for search to be useful for us, our website needs to feature in the top 3 or so organic listings. Very few people scroll past the top 3 listings, and ever fewer move past the first page of listings.
Google's CEO, Eric Schmit, is adament that Google will not officially publish the factors that are considered in it's algorithm; a fact that clearly riles the author of this article. The article differs from a traditional journalistic article in that it is very opinionated. It is very relaxed in tone and includes a short excerpt from the public interview with Schmidt. The fact that the article is so opinionated and biased clearly works well within the publication, Search Engine Land. This site is more of a blog format than a traditional publisher, and also specialised in the world of search engine marketing, hence the author can afford to display a strong opinion on a topic. Such a blog is designed to create discussion and thought-leadership on the topic of Search.
I do like the fact that the author has included video excerpts of the actual video and that they have included them at the end of the article. Often video included mid-article can be distracting, however attaching them in an appendicies format only supports the authenticity of the article.
Additionally, the author also directs the reader to other articles covering the same event and interview. One of these articles is written for the New York Times, which I think is a nice contrast to the opinionated blog format of the article in Search Engine Land. Here the article is much more objective. The author presents an unbiased coverage of the event itself, rather than using the platform for discussion; to present an opinion. This style is what one would expect from a reputable publication such as the New York Times.
In saying this, I do like the blog-style format of the article in Search Engine Land. I think, as part of wide reading, opinionated blog posts can really encourage further learning and deeper thought about a particular topic. It is important, to ensure that such an article is taken into consideration with, as I mentioned, wider reading on the topic, if one is to get a well-rounded view.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Social Media and Journalism
Mashable, today, put forth quite a lengthy article on the future of Social media in Journalism. I felt this was appropriate to review for obvious reasons, however, particularly as it focused on Social media, not just online in general.
I really enjoyed this article as I felt that it put forward some thoughts that are not always considered. The author puts forward the notion that Journalists need to give up the idea of being the only authority when reporting news - not a new idea - but they do make an interesting point when they say that "enlisting a community of intelligent contributors" can help journalists provide daily community coverage. I think there is an emphasis on "intelligent contributors" here - there are so many people playing in the social media space and information is not always valuable, relevant or credible. Sorting this, curating this, will be come a main task of journalists.
What I do really like about this article is the conversational tone that is set right from the start. Within the first section, the author asks the reader "... we would love to hear your thoughts and observations in the comments below" and this sentiment is echoed at the end of the article. I feel that this really reflects the nature and topic of this article brilliantly. It focuses on social media, collaborative reporting and conversations, and by asking readers to take part in a conversation is paralleling the focus of the article itself.
As far a the layout of this story goes, there were 2 main elements that concerned me. Firstly was the number of hyperlinks within the article. This is the standard way of referencing online, however the fact that there were 5 hyperlinks within the first paragraph and a half, was quite distracting. Readers are spending less and less time deep reading as it is and adding this many links is likely to send your reader away from your article. Additionally, whilst the story was organised in to easily discernable headings, the screengrabs that were used weren't clearly referenced. The images spanned the entire width of the blog with little reference, thus it was difficult to actually identify whether the image was actually part of the story or was perhaps an ad.
Otherwise I felt it was a very well-written article that covered many angles of the story in depth.
I really enjoyed this article as I felt that it put forward some thoughts that are not always considered. The author puts forward the notion that Journalists need to give up the idea of being the only authority when reporting news - not a new idea - but they do make an interesting point when they say that "enlisting a community of intelligent contributors" can help journalists provide daily community coverage. I think there is an emphasis on "intelligent contributors" here - there are so many people playing in the social media space and information is not always valuable, relevant or credible. Sorting this, curating this, will be come a main task of journalists.
What I do really like about this article is the conversational tone that is set right from the start. Within the first section, the author asks the reader "... we would love to hear your thoughts and observations in the comments below" and this sentiment is echoed at the end of the article. I feel that this really reflects the nature and topic of this article brilliantly. It focuses on social media, collaborative reporting and conversations, and by asking readers to take part in a conversation is paralleling the focus of the article itself.
As far a the layout of this story goes, there were 2 main elements that concerned me. Firstly was the number of hyperlinks within the article. This is the standard way of referencing online, however the fact that there were 5 hyperlinks within the first paragraph and a half, was quite distracting. Readers are spending less and less time deep reading as it is and adding this many links is likely to send your reader away from your article. Additionally, whilst the story was organised in to easily discernable headings, the screengrabs that were used weren't clearly referenced. The images spanned the entire width of the blog with little reference, thus it was difficult to actually identify whether the image was actually part of the story or was perhaps an ad.
Otherwise I felt it was a very well-written article that covered many angles of the story in depth.
Online News Consumption Stats
This Article suggests that consumers are actually increasing their overall news consumption as online news adds to time spent reading traditional news formats.
Just further stats to back up what this course has been covering.
Monday, September 6, 2010
The Future of Augmented Reality
I discovered this article regarding the potentials of Augmented Reality on the National Geographic site today. It briefly discussed the background of AR, but largely discusses the possible future users of this emerging technology.
What initially engaged me with article was the large imagery that gives an artist's impression on how the technology could be used.
It provides quite a fascinating, visual representation and one that I think is very valuable in capturing a different type of audience. Some people are readers and others are not, and I believe this imagery adequately engages more visual people in the piece.
I did find the fact that the text boxes at the bottom were not aligned a little distracting, and I felt like the use of the horizontal scroll bar (see below) was a poorly executed functionality element. I actually missed it the first time I read the article and would not be surprised if others did too. It's a highly unconventional way to use an element that is usually found on the right hand side of the page and I think users are much more used to arrows or other scrolling elements in order to view wide imagery.
This is a relatively long online article, however I feel that the length is justified for the type of publication. The National Geographic is a monthly (I believe) publication which consumers would head to for in depth articles, as opposed to short news snippets. It definitely presents two sides to the AR story - from the makers of the technology and then questioning whether these developments will be a help or a hinderance. The story is presented with a level of authority and knowledge, which presents it as a trusted article (supported by the fact that it is published in a well-renowned and valued publication), and appears quite objective. I feel the author has done extremely well in created a very engaging article.
What initially engaged me with article was the large imagery that gives an artist's impression on how the technology could be used.
It provides quite a fascinating, visual representation and one that I think is very valuable in capturing a different type of audience. Some people are readers and others are not, and I believe this imagery adequately engages more visual people in the piece.
I did find the fact that the text boxes at the bottom were not aligned a little distracting, and I felt like the use of the horizontal scroll bar (see below) was a poorly executed functionality element. I actually missed it the first time I read the article and would not be surprised if others did too. It's a highly unconventional way to use an element that is usually found on the right hand side of the page and I think users are much more used to arrows or other scrolling elements in order to view wide imagery.
This is a relatively long online article, however I feel that the length is justified for the type of publication. The National Geographic is a monthly (I believe) publication which consumers would head to for in depth articles, as opposed to short news snippets. It definitely presents two sides to the AR story - from the makers of the technology and then questioning whether these developments will be a help or a hinderance. The story is presented with a level of authority and knowledge, which presents it as a trusted article (supported by the fact that it is published in a well-renowned and valued publication), and appears quite objective. I feel the author has done extremely well in created a very engaging article.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Facebook Places and concerns over privacy
There has been much talk today over the release of the Facebook "Places" application in the US, a rival to iphone apps like Foursquare. I looked at 3 different articles on this particular unveiling and the different ways they were treated by each publication.
Firstly, I noticed this article in the Daily Telegraph. This article fairly blandly reported the release of the app, without really giving an opinion or going for a particular angle. It is interesting to note that the article quotes "Some experts", without actually noting who they are, which does make you question the credibility of the article. Not to say that the expert opinions are untrue, however their authenticity could be doubted. The article does go to the trouble to quote the Facebook vice-president, however doesn't actually cite the reference for that quote.
This article only briefly mentions (in one short sentence) the privacy concerns that seem to be rattling the internet community at the moment. However, this article this evening on Mashable, seems to go into much more depth on the privacy concerns. Mashable is a social media news site, so it is understandable that it would report such a social-related story in greater depth. In fact, it ran a number of stories on the app today:
http://mashable.com/2010/08/19/facebook-places-iphone
http://mashable.com/2010/08/19/facebook-places-guide
http://mashable.com/2010/08/18/facebook-places-poll
http://mashable.com/2010/08/18/facebook-launches-its-location-features-live
The Mashable article cites other Facebook privacy related concerns that were raised earlier in the year (in fact, the Daily Telegraph article didn't provide any hyperlinks at all). The also cite the ACLU, a civil liberties group in Northern California; a reference that may be a valid one, but I do question how reputable they may be. They may be well know in America, however they are not known to an Australian audience.
I actually found the ACLU article cited by Mashable a very interesting read. They've taken quite a different approach and seems to be quite fear-focused. Whilst the Daily Telegraph report does not differ much to a basic press release, the ALCU is focusing on the monster that Facebook appears to have become. The use of taglines, such as "facebook is rolling out a "here now", privacy later", and phrases like "safeguarding your location information" clearly have a specific, persuasive purpose; to convince users to be wary of the app. It is quite successful in doing so.
It really felt like there were 3 tiers of reporting here on the same issue:
- The Daily Telegraph with its fairly bland, seemingly-unresearched (or at least not originally researched) Press release
- Social media report from Mashable which felt fairly impartial
- ACLU website's somewhat scare-mongering report on facebook and it's failure "to build in some other important privacy safeguards."
Firstly, I noticed this article in the Daily Telegraph. This article fairly blandly reported the release of the app, without really giving an opinion or going for a particular angle. It is interesting to note that the article quotes "Some experts", without actually noting who they are, which does make you question the credibility of the article. Not to say that the expert opinions are untrue, however their authenticity could be doubted. The article does go to the trouble to quote the Facebook vice-president, however doesn't actually cite the reference for that quote.
This article only briefly mentions (in one short sentence) the privacy concerns that seem to be rattling the internet community at the moment. However, this article this evening on Mashable, seems to go into much more depth on the privacy concerns. Mashable is a social media news site, so it is understandable that it would report such a social-related story in greater depth. In fact, it ran a number of stories on the app today:
http://mashable.com/2010/08/19/facebook-places-iphone
http://mashable.com/2010/08/19/facebook-places-guide
http://mashable.com/2010/08/18/facebook-places-poll
http://mashable.com/2010/08/18/facebook-launches-its-location-features-live
The Mashable article cites other Facebook privacy related concerns that were raised earlier in the year (in fact, the Daily Telegraph article didn't provide any hyperlinks at all). The also cite the ACLU, a civil liberties group in Northern California; a reference that may be a valid one, but I do question how reputable they may be. They may be well know in America, however they are not known to an Australian audience.
I actually found the ACLU article cited by Mashable a very interesting read. They've taken quite a different approach and seems to be quite fear-focused. Whilst the Daily Telegraph report does not differ much to a basic press release, the ALCU is focusing on the monster that Facebook appears to have become. The use of taglines, such as "facebook is rolling out a "here now", privacy later", and phrases like "safeguarding your location information" clearly have a specific, persuasive purpose; to convince users to be wary of the app. It is quite successful in doing so.
It really felt like there were 3 tiers of reporting here on the same issue:
- The Daily Telegraph with its fairly bland, seemingly-unresearched (or at least not originally researched) Press release
- Social media report from Mashable which felt fairly impartial
- ACLU website's somewhat scare-mongering report on facebook and it's failure "to build in some other important privacy safeguards."
Sunday, August 15, 2010
Social Media as a news wire
This is not an article I am analysing - just one I wanted to share with the group.
Another article on the changing way we consume news and the role that social media plays in delivering it.
Another article on the changing way we consume news and the role that social media plays in delivering it.
Use of Social Media by the Police
I found this article on Gizmodo today regarding a group of New Jersey Police that are using Facebook as a means to name and shame criminals in their area. It is an interesting article and raises a few issues around the privacy of such "Name and Shame" processes. However, I wanted to review this article from an Information Architecture standpoint, rather than the story itself.
The navigation used across the site is very clear and simple, outlining the 5 major areas of interesting, with a "More" drop down that encompasses all other categories within the site. The page does show a simple breadcrumb for this article, which is purely "online". As Gizmodo articles tend not to be hidden down deep within multiple sections, the breadcrumb does not provide much information other than that it fits within the "Online" section. The other important thing to note about the article header is the prominent position of the Facebook "Like" button. It is at the top of the page on the right hand side. This is a very common and easily recognised position for such an element. The remainder of the share functionality sits at the bottom of the page It also indicates the importance Gizmodo places on sharing via social media; appropriate for a site that is focused on technology and all things online.
An element that I really like about this article header is that both the Author and the Date are hyperlinks. This allows the user to find more articles by the particular author, as well as additional news from that particular day. It is an effective way to encourage users to move around the site and spend more time there.
There are a number of hyperlinks included within the article itself, including the facebook page in question. The article does also link to the Courier Post article from which the story was obviously based. This particular paper structures their page quite differently for this story. Their header includes similar functionality (clickable author name, social media share functionalites), however they place a very large banner add within the middle of the page, right within probably some of the most important real estate on the page.
This is a highly unusual place for a banner ad and one that I find incredibly distracting. The page looks incredible messy and I found it quite difficult to focus on the story itself when compared to the clean and streamlined Gizmodo page.
 |
| GIZMODO article header, 14/08/10 |
 |
| "More" dropdown |
An element that I really like about this article header is that both the Author and the Date are hyperlinks. This allows the user to find more articles by the particular author, as well as additional news from that particular day. It is an effective way to encourage users to move around the site and spend more time there.
There are a number of hyperlinks included within the article itself, including the facebook page in question. The article does also link to the Courier Post article from which the story was obviously based. This particular paper structures their page quite differently for this story. Their header includes similar functionality (clickable author name, social media share functionalites), however they place a very large banner add within the middle of the page, right within probably some of the most important real estate on the page.
 |
| Courier Post page structure for same article |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)