Their announcement may not have quite the same affect as a News Corp press release, but the decision by the regional publisher to set up 'paywalls' on local newspaper sites should be noted as an equally important landmark.
With advertising revenues falling fast it is perhaps the local newspapers who are literally fighting for their lives. And although at first glance the idea seemed somewhat optimistic, after careful consideration, perhaps they have more scope to trial such a project then the nationals.
I can't remember the last time I saw a local paper on the shelf with a headline such as 'Local gardener grows human sized carrot' and actually picked it up for purchase. But the ace up the sleeve of the locals is that they offer unique news. Unlike national news, which will be reported to death by anyone who is anyone, regional newspapers report stories that others would simply not touch. And that makes them useful.
Therefore, they already have a service of interest and one that people may well be willing to pay for.
Merrill Lynch have estimated in the next five years that the cloud computing market could be worth $95billion...forgive me while I fall backwards off my chair and scream hystercially into the air with joy.
Of course, these are the guys who didn't see any sort of money trouble heading our way a few years back so whilst I wouldn't bet my house on their prediction, I also certainly wouldn't rule it out.
A great article in Business week goes into detail about how 'a major shift in the way companies obtain software and computing capacity is under way as more companies tap into Web-based applications' and it's hard to disagree.
It makes so much sense to use tools and applications online and the one stumbling block that remains is really fear of the unknown. As Business Week suggests, it's the crossover from old to new that is holding an already spiraling process back, like a dog owner desperately clinging onto the lead of an excitable puppy.
Any large business, or small for that matter, needs to make sure transitions are smooth but once the initial scepticism is past $95billion could seem somewhat pessimistic. The sky for is literally the limit for cloud computing (and yes, that was an absolutely cracking pun).
Apologies if it feels like I'm using today's post as a giant billboard but just wanted to draw attention to the LEWEB 2009 event which is fast approaching. So in true 'this isn't a billboard' style, here's a few links regarding the event and booking your place: LEWEB 2009 Info Booking your place
The tech conference held 1800 participants from 40 countries last year and this year is all set to top that again. Artesian will be there so would be great to connect with anyone else attending the event. Don't forget we're on Twitter and Facebook so tweet and ...book (will that catch on?) away.
Stumbled upon this today, which I think shows there is a strong desire to change the way we search and sort information online.
At Artesian we're constantly examining new ways to make online content as useful as possible and innovative ideas in the field are springing up all the time.
It's a really exciting time to be involved as it really feels like after years of getting to grips with the Internet, people are now finding ways to use it efficiently, rather than just get lost in detail.
I saw an interesting blog post from Danny Sullivan today summarising that there are three reasons why people use search engines. These were:
1) to hunt down breaking news (ie to confirm a rumour they've heard) 2) to research a particular subject (a theme or a company) 3) A loose hunt for information (the example given is 'best summer books')
This sums the search process up pretty well but what it doesn't mention is how often the search engine can provide disappointing results. For example, hunting down relevant breaking news insinuates that you already know that news and you're simply looking to confirm it.
Searching for specific areas of detail on a company or theme can be exceptionally difficult. Example, how do you best find out about management changes (which could include terminology like sackings, appointments, retirements mixed with directors, CEOs, bosses etc) at a company like Mint? You will be swamped with noise.
The only way to ensure you're hitting breaking news is to set pre-defined filters on topics you know you're interested in, example: management changes at Mint and have a semantic system in place that enriches both the search term and the company name to make sure you're not drowned by noise or miss a trick.
This then makes research easy. If you've got a system in place just searching for your specific filters, organising archived material just comes with the territory. You can't get that service from a search engine. So why start the hunt for information there? More to the point, why hunt at all when what you're searching for can just come straight to your doorstep?
The terms 'can of worms' and 'how to shut' will be written in bold marker pen somewhere in a Google board room this morning after Microsoft began negotiations with News corp over paying to index content.
This is very dangerous territory for the search engine as it sets a precedent to all sites that they're in fact aiding the search rather than the search aiding them. If the press can charge for indexing then why can't everyone else?
The ever continuing Cold war between Microsoft and Google has not seen such a direct hit to this point. This isn't Microsoft trying to gain ground on Google. This is Microsoft attempting to infect the very ground Google stands on.
The battle has suddenly become a little bit bigger than 'who wins Rupert Murdock's love'. The battle is now very much being taken to Google, like soldiers trying to break down the castle's defence.
Having just yesterday blogged about the need for a business focused social networking tool I awake this morning to the breaking news that:
'Salesforce.com announced a new product today called Chatter, which it describes as Facebook and Twitter for enterprises.'
...Now, although chief executive Marc Benioff doesn't want people to see 'Chatter' as a social network, the idea is almost to the word what I was debating yesterday. I can see only three explanations for this:
1) I read minds 2) The need was so obvious that everyone was thinking it 3) I'm Marc Benioff
I'm going to side with number two, despite my greater wishes dreaming it was number one.
Seems like exciting stuff though, here's the full article
Stephen Fry, followed by millions on Twitter, has questioned the sites ability to morph into a business application. At a recent conference discussing the social networking site Fry stated 'it is important for all of us to understand its [Twitter’s] nature. It is human shaped, not business shaped.'
On the same day a leading professor from Kent University said social networking will wipe out email in the next ten years. If that's the case, and Fry's statement is correct business will be left with very limited methods of communication! I've said before on this blog that Facebook and Twitter are not designed with business in mind. And if emails are to become obsolete then businesses will be looking for a new way to share information quickly.
I doubt email will fall out of fashion this quickly in corporations but at the same time I continue to be encouraged with the communication tools we're using at Artesian to aid in business media monitoring. Focusing on the web needs of companies could soon be just as crucial as focusing on the web needs of the consumer and we're in a great position to take this forward.
I'm certainly no Stephen Fry, but that seems an exciting proposition.
I'm sorry for continuing on the same theme for a while but we are in the middle of a huge scrap for power at the moment and like a commentator leaning over his desk and yelling things like 'finish him!' I can't help but get caught up in the action.
Google seems to have reacted to Rupert Murdock's threat of pulling content off their search engines by changing their role in the whole process. Today they're unveiling a tool that allows 'television and online news agencies to create a platform to manage a bureau of citizen journalists.' Put simply, they are moving from searching content to providing content.
That's one pretty gigantic leap to take and a sign that Google aren't afraid to shift the goalposts either. Of course, they are promoting it like the Youtube tool is actually benefiting news corporations, allowing them to manage freelance, user generated material all in one place. But what they're basically doing is placing themselves in a position where Companies have to play to their rules if they want the best content.
In my personal opinion, it's a stroke of genius. In a sense they're almost cutting out the middle man. Rather than Google relying on news sites for search content, news sites will be forced to rely on Google for content to search. Recent witness footage from events like the Iran demonstrations and more localised events like pictures of recent flooding and storm damage shows this sort of material is gaining much more importance when it comes to presenting news, Google is exploiting that rather brilliantly.
Having discussed the British reaction to paying for online content I stumbled upon this article over the weekend, which talks about some really interesting points:
I think one of the most interesting quotes to take from the article, hidden amongst the plotting and the strategy is that there seems to be a general agreement that any future changes will focus on "a situation where the best content wins, not the best SEOed site.“
If this can be achieved, no matter what road it's down, then the Internet can really start filling its potential as a content rich source of useful material. However, there's just a sense that these quotes are largely smoke and mirrors and of course, the main priority is to be number one at all costs. Hopefully though, search can benefit from this attitude, rather than suffer because of it.
A survey has found that 75% of Brits willing to pay for online content would want to pay 10p or less per article. What is alarming is that apparently Jeremy Clarkson tops the list of columnists people would pay for (perhaps we need to have a long hard think about ourselves) but less alarming is that only 5% of those willing to pay would choose to do it using monthly subscriptions.
Micropayments would be the choice of many which is understandable given the freedom and flexibility they would allow. But through time, and once people start to notice the ever increasing bill a browse on the web would provide, I think this could soon become an unpopular choice. What the papers need to do is offer a service, a benefit to customers who are likely to want more for their buck.
For example, perhaps an I phone app that sends the reader a digestible chunk of the paper's daily news or specific sections relevant to the choice of the consumer. Browsing is part and parcel of web use and micropayments do not match this model. An application seems less hassle than a subscription and would still give you enough rope to continue browsing without the worry of spiralling costs.
But seriously, Jeremy Clarkson?! Come on now... And Lorraine Kelly's in at number 7...No wonder we're a country in turmoil.
What this basically means is providing you're browsing on something (the example given is a movie review) that your friend has commented on, you will receive that update inline with the page you're looking at. Now this could be a tremendously powerful tool for gathering opinion. For example, let's say you're reading an article on Gordon Brown's recent spelling blunder. In a split second you can find out exactly what you're connections are thinking about it.
Used in the right way, this could be an invaluable piece of kit for businesses trying to understand customer opinion. But I fear, that if used in the wrong way, this kind of stuff could just suffocate the Internet with endless comment. What need's to be remembered is that the news is priority, not the opinion.
If ever you were looking for conclusive evidence of just exactly where experts think the future of online use lies then look no further than Google's acquisition of Admob (a company only founded in 2006) for the astronomical price of $750million.
Admob is an advertising agency specialising in the mobile industry, clearly a very good place to be at this point in time. To spend that kind of money on such a new company demonstrates without question how important Google envisions mobile use in the future and judging from some other sources in the newspaper industry they're seeing it much the same way too.
We'll have to wait and see how Microsoft responds to this latest strategical advantage. Having already purchased Phonevalley last year, they may be forced to review their position once more.
In what can only be seen as an extremely bold move Rupert Murdock has suggested that his newspaper sites may well be taken out of Google search results. Having already announced earlier in the year that Newscorp would start charging for online content, this announcement is sure to be laughed off by critics who are already calling Murdock's strategy suicide.
The billionaire is certainly cutting cords all at once. He is risking further backlash here by challenging the brand loyalty online users feel towards Google. But Murdock must be well aware of the radical change that's needed to spring life back into the newspaper industry. In a recent interview he referenced the fact that few people under 30 were actually buying newspapers at all.
This move indicates he is keen to generate an entirely new, stand alone model online and whilst the developments will be raising quite a few eyebrows, suggestions that Rupert Murdock is taking his eye off the ball could be somewhat premature. After all, you don't get to where he is without having a bit of tactical nous about you.
Ever get those days where you feel really good about what you do? Today I discovered these statistics relating to the online business intelligence we are providing for a customer.
For the customer in question we are currently tracking 1,100 subjects (companies, regulatory bodies etc) alongside 500 separate business events (stories relating to corporate and market news), whilst removing stories irrelevant to their needs on the process.
To search individually for all of these things combined would take over half a million searches...half a million separate search queries. That's a very long day at the office! And we're doing this everyday, with no search hassle whatsoever.
Apologies if I sound smug but that is an incredibly powerful concept. And seeing as it's Friday I'm going to raise a smile and continue on my path of smugness. Enjoy the weekend!
Google are to launch the 'commerce search' today, a hosted enterprise search product to power online retail stores and e-commerce websites. Another useful tool in the B2C arena I'm sure but what about B2B?
Business search, sales search, media monitoring, all extremely important factors for a company being widely ignored by the search engine giants. Of course, the main focus of the search engine is to gain the biggest market share available, therefore heading after the consumer is far more productive from their point of view.
But business intelligence should not be ignored. There is a big demand for market news and precise results and search engines are proving that they aren't looking to cater for such a need. Delivering results for a consumer is clearly the objective, which should conclude to many that there is life and alternatives after Google.
MSN are set to launch their brand new homepage tonight with Microsoft's corporate vice president Erik Jorgensen boldly announcing that "now is the time to clean up the mess on the Web–people need less clutter and less hassle to find what matters most to them." Of course, he'd be right, but does the new MSN offer this? This is the preview of the new design
One thing is certain, it's a big improvement on the previously cluttered homepage. And it's taken strong influences from other successful models including Facebook and Twitter feeds as well as not being a million miles away from the appearance of rivals Apple. But I'm still not entirely sure where it's improving search.
It's a great base, something I'd happily view every morning but what has it actually done to improve the search experience? Everything still goes through Bing, that's not going to change and the same old generic titles are still filling the page ('money' for example, can mean many different things).
About as close as it gets to making an innovative change is with local search which 'combines media with Bing search and provides access to real-time community news that is grouped by ZIP code.' That sounds an exciting possibility, although unless you can also group stories by subject, clutter is still likely to be an issue.
However, it'll be great to see how this affects the search engine battle, that's for sure. Watch this space.
Search engines are forever working on ways to purify search and give users more relevant results but the rivalry between Bing and Google seems to working in a rather counter productive manner. In the constant battle to recruit companies onto their side Microsoft and Google are in actual fact striking deals to make search results more about strategy than quality.
Two very recent examples: Bing signing a deal with Thomas Cook in a marketing drive offering free holidays to customers in return for Thomas Cook pitching up top of it's travel queries. And not to be out done, Google's convenient sponsored ad from Apple that accompanies typing in 'Windows 7', advising you to switch over to avoid difficulties.
Is this really improving search? Or is this just the user being caught up in a battle of tactics? Of course there has always been money involved in getting to the top of search engines but this fight is setting a dangerous precedent of 'you scratch my back I'll scratch yours' in an arena that most certainly doesn't need favoritism.
It seems like only a couple of weeks ago all seemed rosy for Amazon's Kindle (...probably because it was only a couple of weeks ago...)but the news that ebooks are now outselling games on Iphone apps must be a worrying trend. Despite the Iphone screen being considerably smaller, the appeal of doing things on the move is pulling down any barriers that may previously have come with usability issues.
It's almost ironic calling it the I phone. I can't remember the last time I saw someone making a call on one. It's now a portal, a point of entry to access everything you can possibly need quickly.
If people are willing to reads books on the Iphone, then the very idea of printed news could be going the way of the dodo. Everyone knew the online shift was going to change the face of the newspaper, but this report could well be a sign that print could be wiped out altogether (The London Lite and The London Paper wouldn't disagree).
I Know I've rambled on about the mobile media trend recently, but this is surprising even amongst the patterns before it. This, to me is a strong indicator that the shift is coming much sooner than expected.
