Bigmouthmedia search engine news: Main Headlines

Google launches customisable search function

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Google has introduced a way for signed-in users to change the way search results are shown for their account.

SearchWiki went live this week and allows people to customise the re-order of results and add comments to pages for future reference. Pages can also be completely removed or if something relevant doesn't come up then a user can add a page in. These changes are only made to results for the one user but are stored for future searches - around 40% of Google searches are thought to be repeats of earlier queries.

The added interactive element of the search engine has been brought in to help users who frequently search for the same terms and although Google have said it won't affect the main search results as seen by anyone else, many spectators feel that if they see regular patterns emerging then their algorithm may get a little tweak - either just to update the top results or to help remove spam.

Cedric Dupont, SearchWiki product manager, said: "You now have more control over what search results appear for a given query on Google.

"SearchWiki allows you to reorder, remove or add notes to specific web search results so that the next time you do the same search, you'll see the customised result set that you prefer."

After a member has edited results, they can still see Google's own version of the search by clicking a link at the bottom of the page. The public results will also display public comments, with Google usernames associated with each review.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Google not so Lively now

Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Google has announced that its answer to the virtual world of Second Life, is about to shut up its virtual space for good even though Google Lively was only launched in July.

According to Google, the ill-fated Google Labs project was originally set up to allow users to interact with their friends and express themselves online in new ways. Users could create their own social networks and set up virtual spaces and design their own rooms, which could then be embedded into other social media such as blogs, Facebook pages, etc.

Unlike the successful Linden Labs virtual world, Second Life, which has a large established community and these days boasts over 35,000 users online at any one time, Lively failed to live up to its name. It never really gathered the following which Google had hoped for despite a large fanfare at its launch.

Launched at a time when even Second Life was encountering difficulties trying to expand, there appeared to be little real widespread appetite or chatter for the experiment after the first couple of weeks, and now it seems its fate has been sealed.

Google has stated on its blog, "It has been a tough decision, but we want to ensure that we prioritize our resources and focus more on our core search, ads and apps business. Lively.com will be discontinued at the end of December, and everyone who has worked on the project will then move on to other teams.

"We'd encourage all Lively users to capture your hard work by taking videos and screenshots of your rooms."

It should be noted however that despite the closure of Lively at the end of the year, Second Life has reported an upsurge in its fortunes, suggesting that the recent plateau in their growth figures may be at an end, possibly giving Second Life another life yet.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Fan pages doomed by social saturation

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Social media websites are incredibly, and increasingly, powerful. They have masses of traffic, frequent updates of fresh content and often huge number of links. Nearly every music artist today has a social media page, whether it's an official site or some created by a loyal fan. Popular social media platforms for music artists include:

Last.fm
MySpace
Wikipedia
YouTube

Most artists will also have an official website, so the opportunity to saturate SERP's with a large number of official and social media pages is huge.

And that number could soon be set to expand. Facebook very recently made a move into this market when it opened up internal linking on user profile pages. Facebook now lists "fan of" which link back to the artist's official site to fan sites meaning the social network is hot on the heels of other music friendly online communities.

So what does this mean for fan sites?

Well, if you are a fan site owner, you should be worried; this first-page saturation of social sites will eat up a percentage of your traffic, especially if you rank well for artist names etc. The pie is going to be shared that little bit more. If you are an affiliate marketer and you make commission from running fan sites, you may find your earnings falling short of previous times which will also have a knock on effect on merchants.

If you Google the music artist "U2" (a favourite over at bigmouthmedia) you can see how social media sites are and could result in saturation of the search results. 8/10 in this case - not bad. That's us excluding any MP3, ringtone, lyric or retail giants.

How will Google react?

Well, if you remember back to around 2003-2004 when retail giants like eBay and Amazon used to dominate the retail market for search terms you'll recall that there was not a term a user could query without either of these two giants appearing. Google then spotted that many of the results that were being returned were "search generated pages" - pages that were being generated from the results of a website's internal search facility. Google, understandably, did not want to show search results from other sites within its own search results and included documentation within their webmaster guidelines to prevent such pages appearing. The question now is whether Google will develop similar rules for social media, or whether these results will be seen as of high value to users? Does history provide us with a clue as to the way certain queries will be displayed in future?

Google's universal search results tend to show a wide variety of websites, be it be a blog, fan site, informational entry, picture, video, news story or product. However, this is increasingly not the case for entertainment searches - especially music.

What's more, with social media sites affecting some of the world's most important decision making processes - Barack Obama's prevalence on Facebook and Twitter is just one example - Google might find that creating new rules for social media is another way to extend its far reaching influence.

Will Google develop or take note of the social media saturation and develop a "social filter" to allow a wider diversity of websites ranking? Arguably the need is it there, but only Google knows for sure.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Indian space agency to launch Google Earth rival

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Not content with its latest moon-bound mission, the Indian Space Research Organisation (Isro) has said that it will launch its own version of Google Earth in around six months. The project will be named Bhuvan - Sanskrit for 'Earth' - and is expected to provide satellite images that are newer and sharper than Google's popular 3D mapping tool.

There's already considerable excitement surrounding the project. According to The Times, Isro's chairman, G Madhavan Nair, commented: "This will not be a mere browser, but the mechanism for providing satellite images and thematic maps for developmental planning."

But will it really be a Google Earth killer? Bhuvan will offer high resolution satellite images solely of India to begin with. If this is successful, the project could then start to roll out images for countries across the globe, which - like Google's offering - will be accessible at no cost online.

At first glance, Bhuvan has one touted feature that's certain to appeal to users. Unlike Mountain View's version - which only lets you zoom in to a 200 metre wide area - Isro claims that Bhuvan will let users zoom into geographical images to as small as 10 metres across. The Times relates that, if preliminary tests are successful, Isro could even incorporate a GPS system into the tool. What's more, Google Earth's images for India and South Asia are not as detailed as its North American and European counterparts, and Bhuvan could offer an excellent alternative to this.

However, it's as yet unclear as to whether Isro has the same resources at its disposal as the Mountain View giants, or whether it has the capabilities to rival the vast number of innovative features and layers available to Google Earth users. It's already come under criticism for the huge amounts of money that have been spent on Chandrayaan-1, its first moon probe, in the light of India's huge population, many of whom live below the poverty level.

Google Earth has garnered a solid user base since it first emerged and its imaginative features seem to have whetted users' appetites for greater advances in the fields of online mapping, a desire that could well see Bhuvan gain global popularity fairly quickly after launch. Moreover, Isro's base in Bangalore - South Asia's high tech capital - means that it's likely to be surrounded by great minds. As a result, Bhuvan could be the emerging rival that encourages Google to step up a gear and really blow us out of the water with new Google Earth tools - watch this space in six months to find out.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Facebook offers application verification program

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Facebook has announced a verification program for applications which will separate the wheat from the chaff in the world of Facebook apps.

Facebook has described the verification program as "an optional new program designed to provide applications with a way to stand out and reassure users that they will provide a good experience". According to respected news site TechCrunch, applications which meet Facebook's verification standard will have to be "respectful, transparent and meet the guiding principles for trustworthiness". The guiding principles state that the applications should be meaningful, trust-worthy and well-designed. The program will go some way to help users determine which of the thousands of available applications are worthwhile and safe to use.

To become verified for a year it will cost developers $375 per application - which Facebook claims will "cover costs associated with the application review process". The program should provide a tidy revenue stream for Facebook, especially when you consider that there are currently 48,000 applications, of which Facebook expect at least 10% to eventually become verified. However, Facebook is offering a $200 discount to current students and registered non-profit organisations, reducing the verification fee to just $175, as long as they can provide official documentation.

Developers are given 3 attempts to gain verification status, with Facebook providing feedback during the approval process, and if they fail after the third attempt they have the opportunity to reapply again 3-6 months later.

Once an application becomes verified a badge is placed on the application's About Page, and also next to its listing in the application directory. Verified applications are given increased limits for requests, notifications and emails, along with an increased visibility in the news feed. Developers are also given $100 of free advertising credit per application. Has Facebook finally cracked the enigma of how to successfully monetise social networking sites? It certainly might be on the right path.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Jerry Yang steps down as Yahoo! CEO

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

It's been a tumultuous year for Yahoo!, by anybody's standards. After rejecting Microsoft's hostile - yet generous - takeover bid in the early months of 2008, it thought it had found a safe haven in its paid search advertising deal with Google. Five months later and Google's abandonment of the deal seems to have precipitated the desire for a leadership change, as Yahoo!'s CEO Jerry Yang officially announced his resignation yesterday.

One of Yahoo!'s original founders, Yang's 16 month long leadership of the search engine company has been blighted by criticism from the outset. Reports suggest that Yang made the decision to step down last month, but will occupy the position until a suitable replacement is found, after which he will retire to a place on the Yahoo! board as 'Chief Yahoo!'.

Roy Bostock, Yahoo!'s chairman, said in a statement: "Jerry and the board have had an ongoing dialogue about succession timing, and we all agree that now is the right time to make the transition to a new CEO who can take the company to the next level."

In a memo sent to Yahoo! employees on Monday, Yang expressed his deep affection for Yahoo!, stating: "All of you know that I have always, and will always bleed purple [the company's trademark colour]. I will always do what I think is right for this great company. While this step will be an adjustment for all of us, I know it's the right one."

The move comes after a spate of bad news for the search engine. Last month, it revealed a staggering 64 per cent slump in its third quarter profits and a 10 per cent cut in its workforce: around 1500 jobs. Shortly afterwards, Google caved to legal pressure and cancelled its paid search deal with Yahoo! - a move that Yang described as "disappointing".

Following this development, Yang even suggested that Microsoft 'should' buy Yahoo!, although the feeling was not reciprocated by Steve Ballmer, the software giant's chief executive. Resultantly, at the close of trading in New York yesterday, Yahoo!'s share price closed at a historic low of $10.63; in June, Microsoft's final bid for the company offered investors the significantly higher sum of $33 a share.

Yang's perceived failure to improve Yahoo!'s outlook seems to have been widely accepted as a step in the right direction for the search engine - but who will be his successor? CNNMoney suggests that the candidate is likely to come from outside Yahoo!, ruling out its current president Sue Decker. What's more, reports that Yahoo! is currently in talks with AOL-owner Time Warner could influence whoever gets the position. While nothing is certain just yet, one thing's for sure: Yang's heir will have to draw on all his or her experience and wisdom to guide Yahoo! in the right direction.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Presidential campaign reveals YouTube to be primary political source

Tue, 18 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Since it's inception in 2005, YouTube has long been the place to go for weird and wonderful videos from around the world. However, during this year's presidential campaign, the online video network became what many video-happy people considered to be the primary source for the latest political news and views, with every speech, ad and opinion from the pundits being posted on the site.

The 2008 Presidential Election was the first time that YouTube, and many other web 2.0 portals and communities, could find out how much influence the site could wield in national politics. While videos of politicians making blunders had been popular on the site for some time, those in charge of the site decided that YouTube would be best served by seriously engaging voters, candidates and the various mainstream media outlets.

According to the New York Times, the political team at YouTube came up with YouChoose in 2006, a section of the site especially created for showing video clips from candidates, which was launched in February of 2007. Despite initial fears from candidates that teaming up with YouTube would only have negative consequences, 7 out of 16 people who ran for the presidency ended up announcing their candidacy on YouTube. And as campaigns continued to heat up, many candidates virtually gave up control of the context of their videos and allowed YouTube users to have free reign.

Almost every candidate was met by YouTube's head of news and politics, Steve Grove, at the start of the campaign season. Candidates were encouraged to start their own YouTube channel, which could also help candidates raise money for their campaigns by allowing users to donate money via Google Checkout.

While YouTube was initially presented as a way for candidates to appeal to the "youth vote" (in much the same way as MTV had done in the 2000 and 2004 elections), the site eventually ended up dramatically affecting the perception of candidates across multiple demographics. The reliance of many on YouTube to keep up with the political occurrences also showed that nearly all those assisting in candidates' campaigns need skills with digital technology, as the New York Times reports that editing and uploading video is now more important to a campaign that direct mail.

YouTube was also enlisted as a partner to CNN for two presidential debates, at which some YouTube users had their questions aired and answered on CNN. Key moments in the election campaign such as the New Hampshire and Pennsylvania primaries were also followed closely by YouTube and its users.

Eventually all candidates opened YouTube accounts and uploaded thousands of videos, with Barack Obama's channel currently containing 1821 videos while John McCain's features 330 videos. The BarackObamadotcom account uploaded more than 150 videos in the final days of the campaign, how responsible becoming a winner on YouTube was in helping the President Elect become a political winner too is hard to ascertain. But one thing is for sure, future political campaigns will ignore the latest developments in digital media at their peril!

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Google introduces new iPhone Search-by-Voice app

Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

The Search-by-Voice app exclusive for iPhone is a search tool that utilizes voice recognition that lets you tell your phone what you want to know - without you having to take your gloves off. So if you're wondering where the nearest Starbucks is, just ask the iPhone.

Your question is then turned into a digital file that goes to Google's servers which dole out the results in the iPhone's web browser, Safari. Those with a fast network connection could see search results appear within seconds.

In an online demonstration video, Google said the goal is to provide "faster web search with fewer key strokes."

The iPhone will still offer type searches to those who want to tap out their enquiries. The voice recognition program also lets you search for contacts in your phone and automatically caters search results to local information no matter where you are.

The phone can tell when it's being picked up and automatically activates the voice recognition so you don't have to.

The Search-by-Voice app is free and downloadable from the iPhone App Store and through iTunes.

Industry news site TechCrunch reports Google's Search-by-Voice "...doesn't deliver perfect results yet, but as the app matures and learns everyones searching techniques, eventually it will creep closer to perfection."

Google is not new to the game in providing a voice recognition search service. Microsoft and Yahoo! already offer voice-search services for cellphones. However, Microsoft's Tellme service only gives specific information on maps, directions and movies, and Yahoo's oneSearch isn't considered as accurate as Google's app.

The Search-by-Voice app was originally due to be released Friday but TechCrunch speculates that approval problems and delays between Apple and Google pushed the release back.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Google adds on-demand indexing for Site Search subscribers

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Adding new content - or updating what's already on your website - is one of the most useful ways to keep sites fresh and to let search engines know your pages are active. But some search engines, like Google, won't recognise your new content straight away, which leaves webmasters anxiously refreshing their search results.

A new tool recently released from Google changes that. Google has launched on-demand indexing, guaranteeing that new updates will be returned in searches within 24 hours, although it states that in many cases it will be done a lot quicker. At the moment this is purely for Google Site Search and will not affect the results found on Google.com, but the webmaster's hope is that one day the search engine's main page will be able to index updates just as quickly. According to a Google spokesperson, they are currently separate so the company cannot be accused of offering search engine optimisation services to paying customers.

The indexing process is quick and easy. Once in Google's webmaster tools, a series of five clicks takes the user through to completion - a simple task of going to the indexing section, selecting the correct version of the site map and telling Google to index it. Essentially, this gives the webmaster more control over how often the site's index gets refreshed; however, attributes such as 'priority' and 'lastmod' will still be in use.

Many businesses are likely to prosper from this as they continue to add pages, products and articles to their websites.

Apple has already come out with praise for the product. According to Marketing Pilgrim, their senior director for Learning Resources, Tanya Wendling, said: "On-Demand Indexing was essential for our recent launch of Adobe Creative Suite 4, the biggest software release in the company's history. Google Site Search made it easy to implement search across our Creative Suite product line and online sites, and we are now able to index thousands of new pages and make them available to millions of users worldwide within hours."

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia

Could search be heading for an Apple makeover?

Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:00:00 GMT

Respected tech news site TechCrunch has posited an interesting theory - that Apple is working on some type of search engine.

Some of the facts posited by TechCrunch make this move seem possible and, just maybe, the rumours - which are now spreading like wildfire - could have an element of truth. The iPod and iPhone both use Apple's Safari (which has a 6-7% market share) as their browser and, unlike other browsers, can only use Google as the standard search engine.

Apple also has a suite of personal productivity tools available through Mobile Me that bring some hard core users to their servers daily and creates a whole lot of traffic which in turn equals a large number of searches - searches that could potentially provide Apple with a new line of profit.

Also, due to the competition between the iPhone and Google's Android, Google CEO Eric Schmidt - who is also on Apple's board of directors -sits out of discussions involving Apple's mobile strategy but now there are rumours abounding that he may leave the board.

However, one thing that could suggest that this rumour is nothing more than that is the fact that none of the big companies TechCrunch quizzed about the subject had lost search experts or engineers, which Apple would need to source before attempting to create a search engine. Those quizzed also did not know of any specific hirings within the industry.

Without hiring people who know what they are doing, Apple could not possibly aim to build a completely new and innovative search engine.

As Apple also receives hefty fees from Google for search marketing dollars earned from Safari, it seems unlikely that they'd want to jeopardise this loyalty. Even if Apple did launch a search engine they would still heavily rely on Google or its competitors for the advertising revenue they can provide. All this leads industry insiders to ask if Apple would really want to invest so much in search.

TechCrunch apparently received multiple reports about the possibility of Apple dabbling in search, but for now the news site remains unconvinced. However, the very fact that rumours have been so persistent has been enough to make them, and search fans across the board, wonder if there could be a kernel of truth in there. Maybe Apple is on track to shake up the way it uses Google, rather than trying to supplant the Mountain View giants altogether.

Digg This! | Save to del.icio.us | Reddit | Submit to Netscape | Google Bookmark This | Furl This | Add to Yahoo MyWeb 2 | Contact bigmouthmedia