-
Website
http://www.scobleizer.com/ -
Original page
http://scobleizer.com/2006/02/11/blog-networks-changing-history/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
danja
44 comments · 4 points
-
polizeros
52 comments · 1 points
-
AndyBeard
69 comments · 4 points
-
Zachary Adam Cohen
35 comments · 8 points
-
dbarefoot
40 comments · 3 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
The best and worst thing Twitter did in 2009: RT
1 day ago · 22 comments
-
World-brand-building mistakes France’s entrepreneurs make
1 week ago · 181 comments
-
2010: the year SEO isn’t important anymore
1 week ago · 67 comments
-
A new addition here: the Meebo bar
1 day ago · 7 comments
-
iPhone developers abandoning app model for HTML5?
1 week ago · 52 comments
-
The best and worst thing Twitter did in 2009: RT
Search experience is getting poluted with all the blog postings. Blogs should be excluded from the normal search and should be kept separate. There is too much junk out there!
The search engines are really falling short, and it'll get much worse. The semantics of the internet search algorithms that worked fine yesterday are no longer apt to the task.
Isn't copying the post an infringement of copyright?
Then again, I read it knowing that it did come from the scobleizer, so attribution was still kept.
And I agree it's a problem.
We have discovered white page txt/doorway methods and commented on various forums. Yup bmw.de was one of them and then all the other a-listers picked up the chatter ands began blogging about it !!
So I am not sure extactly what you concern is or are stating some thing that we don't about (yet !)
Could you be a littler clearer with a concrete e.g ?
I said "authoritative." It's real easy to be authoritative and still be on the "Z list."
The advantage is that we should be able to "out" plagarism and similar tactics because consolidation is harder on the internet and (to quote DWiner) - these things can simply be exposed and then routed around.
engines build better algorithms that can effectively deal with blogs and how they work (or don't work as the case may be.)
Removing the content of blogs is looking backward not forward. It would be a retreat to "safe" ground, ineffectual and obsolete the usefulness of search engines. Metrics for relevance that are not as heavily skewed towards counting will eliminate the ability of such "lockouts" and content pollution.
Apply heat to the content locators not the content producers.
With that said, I am in talks with the blogger who posted the bit about the iTablet to see what's what.
Kind of like the difference between "Microsoft is anticompetitive and squashes the competition" and "in the past, Microsoft hasn't always had its competitors best interests at heart".
Y'know that "if 1% of my readership" bit? Well, how about if 1% of your readers start thinking that blog networks are just around to incestuously link, create link farms, game search engines and abuse users? ;-)
I know that's not what you mean, and I know it wouldn't happen, but considering your rant earlier about the importance of titles...
At this point it appears that either Blogniscient or Technorati generated the error as part of the search results. This is scary enough but I've never seen this happen before.
I am going to return to blogging about mobile tech, which is the purpose of my blog.
http://mashable.com/2005/12/31/why-online-media...
I'm not sure if there's a 100% foolproof way to make this work - after all, links and ads can be stripped out by really determined sploggers. And when you start putting attribution and/or ads in your feed, you've got to be careful not to annoy your readers. Either way, you can't prevent your feed from being republished, so you either need to accept it or turn it to your advantage with microchunking.
However, this is certainly not a "good thing"... to the extent that spam blogs, link farms, clickfraud, and the like pollute the information environment it reduces the "dietary content" of hardcore infovores like yourself and the rest of us.
The race of tool and technique for better, more efficent hunting / gathering of our information diet is unfortunately not without competitive pressures. As much as I do not like that fact, it is what it is.
For further regarding biological models for Internet activities and their utility for analysis, please take a look at
http://kentsimperative.blogspot.com/2006/02/nam...
People who know me know that I am the sort of girl who stands up for free speech, open-ness of information, good linkbacks (good finds get "stolen"/non-attributed from hackaday often, btw). I run three OS'es, many types of hardware, and love to get to the bottom of a tech mystery. Read my stuff (and other stuff from weblogs inc blogs), you'll see I post [via] and direct links (sometimes more than once in a post!).
Cheers,
fbz
aka Fabienne Serriere
tuaw/hackaday/engadget
Which does raise the question: the situation is theoretically possible (and nasty) -- do we have examples in the wild of this happening? (besides the "blog networks do this all the time"?)
BTW, one way of settling things (or at least, an interesting thing to do) would have been to check referrer stats for the initial post. On the server.
The good news is, the blogosphere is remarkably self-correcting.
Here is the post, do a search in the Google to see all those taking credit for it: http://www.seobuzzbox.com/duplicate-content-goo...
Aaron Pratt
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/confirming-a-pena...
what about such techniques which are used by those who actually index and control the flow of information into and out of blogsphere ??
There is a much richer dimension of 'gatekeeper' type attitude within the major players too.. !!
I began populating my articles with pictures that had my name on it for the amusement of seeing it on another site 2 weeks later with no attribution, and so I could prove my case. Then I made a formal complaint to my editor at About.com thinking I had all the right steps covered to make it simple to see that someone was plagiarizing my work... He said "it's some guy in Singapore, so you're outta luck. Our laws don't apply there."
The worse part of the story is that PC World did a "best 50 websites" back in 02 that listed their site. They did mention it looked similar to mine, which was at least something. But the give an "award" or at least the title, editors should do a little more than a couple clicks of research or they are no better than the losers who copy other people's writing.
Now that the Internet is more widespread and there are many more points of entry (especially search engines), it is much harder to do the same. But it seems like smaller clusters are forming as you mention. I'd say similar clusters also exist among porn sites, music and hacking sites where once you land on you get thrown, lead, or persuaded to go to another "networked" site. so this is not really new. But I guess since blogs are meant to bring more democracy to the Internet, maybe the concern should be over the dominance of the most networked and not the clusters being formed.