viernes, diciembre 30, 2011
Google is 2011´ Top Web Brand. Mashable.com
Google is the top digital brand for 2011, followed by Facebook and Yahoo, according to recent research tracking unique monthly visitors per month.
A Nielsen study shows Google is the top digital U.S. web company, with more than 150 million visitors each month.
The search giant’s nascent social network Google+, however, is not to credit for the majority of that traffic.
jueves, diciembre 29, 2011
Estudio revela las costumbres IT de la próxima generación de trabajadores
El Cisco Connected World Technology Report asegura que los jóvenes recurren a medidas extremas a pesar de las políticas IT y riesgos de robo de identidad.
Tan solo en México, 51% de los encuestados admitió que todo el tiempo ignora las políticas de IT para poder accesar programas y aplicaciones para realizar su trabajo; en Brasil ese mismo porcentaje lo ignora la mayor parte de las veces debido a que considera que no está haciendo nada malo.
El estudio, realizado en tres partes, revela actitudes alarmantes hacia las políticas IT y las crecientes amenazas de seguridad presentadas por los empleados de próxima generación que se integran a la vida laboral, un grupo demográfico que creció con internet y tiene un estilo de vida que mezcla la actividad personal y comercial en el lugar de trabajo.
El Cisco Connected World Technology Report es un estudio internacional que examina las demandas y el comportamiento de las nuevas generaciones de trabajadores hacia el acceso a las redes, la libertad de dispositivo móvil, los medios sociales y los estilos de vida laborales. Los resultados son claves al explicar cómo esta nueva mano de obra eleva los riesgos personales y corporativos en medio de un panorama complejo, una correlación que se destaca con mayor profundidad en el Reporte de Seguridad Anual de Cisco 2011 Cisco 2011 Annual Security Report.
Los últimos resultados del Cisco Connected World Technology Report revelan una creciente preocupación para los empleadores. El deseo del acceso de información bajo demanda está demasiado incorporado en la nueva generación de empleados y muchos jóvenes profesionales toman medidas extremas para acceder a internet, aún si esto compromete su propia seguridad o la de la compañía. Tal comportamiento incluye utilizar conexiones inalámbricas de los vecinos, sentarse frente a comercios con redes Wi-Fi gratis y pedir prestado los dispositivos de otras personas sin supervisión.
Tomando en cuenta que al menos uno de cada tres empleados (36%) respondió negativamente cuando se les preguntó si respetaban a sus departamentos IT, al equilibrar el cumplimiento de la política IT con los deseos de jóvenes empleados de tener más acceso a los medios sociales, dispositivos y acceso remoto, se ponen a prueba los límites de las culturas corporativas tradicionales. Al mismo tiempo, estas demandas de los empleados ponen mayor presión en los reclutadores, gerentes de contratación, departamentos IT y culturas corporativas para permitir más flexibilidad con la esperanza de que la próxima generación de talentos pueda entregar ventajas por sobre los competidores.
Rebecca Jacoby, CIO de Cisco, dijo al respecto que “el rol de IT en cualquier negocio es unir exitosamente las arquitecturas tecnológicas y las arquitecturas comerciales. En la medida en que las manos de obra se tornan cada vez más móviles, el cambio en infraestructura IT significa que la seguridad y la política no son más un “agregado” sino una prioridad. Los resultados indican la real necesidad de un enfoque estratégico de los tipos de servicios IT ofrecidos mientras se consideran los procesos y cultura establecidos en cualquier organización para crear relaciones más fuertes y confiables entre los empleados y departamentos IT”.
Resultados Clave
- Para el Cisco Connected World Technology Report, se encuestaron a más de 2.800 estudiantes universitarios y jóvenes profesionales en 14 países que representan las economías más grandes o crecientes. Este reporte, realizado por segundo año, fue comisionado para entender cómo las compañías deben equilibrar las necesidades comerciales y los riesgos de administración con las expectativas y comportamiento de la siguiente generación de empleados.
Impacto del comportamiento riesgoso en la tasa de robo de identidad
- Quizá como resultado directo de liberar los límites de la privacidad, uno de cuatro estudiantes universitarios (24%) y empleados (23%) experimenta robos de identidad antes de los 30 años. Cuando se aplica a un grupo mayor de personas, dos de cinco estudiantes universitarios dijeron conocer amigos o miembros de su familia que hayan experimentado robo de identidad. Los siguientes resultados proporcionan una visión de la frecuencia del robo de identidad en esta generación.
Seguridad y privacidad online
- Uno de tres (33%) estudiantes universitarios no le importa compartir información personal online, cree que los límites de la privacidad se están liberando o no piensa acerca de la privacidad, dando un presagio de cómo la mano de obra de próxima generación mundial se ocupará de la información en línea – quizás para los negocios como para las actividades personales.
Adherir a políticas IT
- De aquellos que son conscientes de las políticas IT, siete de cada 10 (70%) empleados a nivel mundial admitió romper las política de seguridad con variada regularidad. Entre las razones, la más común fue la creencia de que los empleados no estaban haciendo nada incorrecto (33%). Uno de cinco (22%) citó la necesidad de acceder a programas y aplicaciones no autorizadas para hacer su trabajo, mientras que el 19% admitió que las políticas no se aplican. Algunos (18%) dijeron que ellos no tienen tiempo de pensar en las políticas cuando están trabajando, y otros dijeron que adherirse a las políticas no es conveniente (16%), que se olvidan hacerlo (15%), o que sus jefes no los están observando (14%).
- Dos de tres (67%) encuestados dijeron que las políticas IT necesitan ser modificadas para responder a las demandas de la vida real para mayor flexibilidad laboral.
- Las compañías restringen muchos dispositivos y aplicaciones de medios sociales. Sobre esto, los jóvenes empleados dijeron que los juegos online (37%) eran la aplicación con mayor restricción. Los Apple iPods (15%) eran los dispositivos más restringidos comúnmente.
- Uno de 10 (10%) empleados a nivel mundial dijo que las políticas IT prohíben el uso de iPads y tabletas, señalando un creciente desafío para los equipos IT en la medida que la popularidad de las tabletas crece cada vez más. Tres de 10 empleados (31%) dijeron que los sitios de redes sociales como Facebook, Twitter, y YouTube también estaban prohibidos.
- En el caso de Brasil el 44% de los encuestados señaló que están restringidos en sus compañías los juegos de video, 32% mencionó el blogging y 31% el uso de redes sociales. En el caso de México 50% respondió que son los juegos de video, 27% el blogging e IM y 25% el uso de iPods y media players. 28% de los participantes de México y 25% de los brasileños señaló que no tienen ningún tipo de restricción en sus empresas.
- Tres de cinco empleados (61%) creen que no son responsables de proteger la información y los dispositivos, creen que los departamentos IT y/o los proveedores de servicios son los responsables.
Comportamiento riesgoso: ‘Pedir prestadas” conexiones inalámbricas de vecinos y tiendas.
- En otros tiempos, los vecinos solían pedir huevo o azúcar. Ahora ellos piden acceso a Internet. Casi uno de cuatro estudiantes universitarios (23%) ha pedido a un vecino acceso a una computadora o a Internet, y casi uno de cinco (19%) admitió acceder a la conexión inalámbrica de su vecino sin permiso. Casi uno de cinco (19%) estudiantes universitarios a nivel mundial admitió pararse fuera de los centros comerciales para utilizar conexiones inalámbricas gratis. Casi uno de 10 (9%) ha pedido el teléfono celular a un extraño. En general, dos de cada tres (64%) empleados a nivel mundial ha hecho al menos una de estas acciones.
Comportamiento riesgoso: Uso de la computadora sin supervisión
- Más de la mitad de los empleados encuestados a nivel mundial (56%) dijo que ellos habían permitido a otros utilizar sus computadoras sin supervisión – familia, amigos, compañeros de trabajo y hasta personas que no conocían.
- Los estudiantes universitarios exhibieron una tendencia mayor que los jóvenes empleados para involucrarse en un comportamiento riesgoso en línea. Más de cuatro de cinco estudiantes universitarios (86%) dijeron que ellos habían permitido a otros usar sus computadoras sin supervisión, lo cual indica que este comportamiento va a ser cada vez más prevalente en la medida que la nueva generación de empleados entra a la mano de obra en los próximos años.
- Más de uno de 10 estudiantes universitarios (16%) admitió dejar efectos personales y dispositivos sin supervisar en público, mientras buscan algo para comer, beber en un café o para ir al baño.
martes, diciembre 27, 2011
Encuesta revela que el uso global de internet creció pero bajó el interés por pagar los contenidos
Según KPMG la tendencia global muestra que los clientes "buscan pagar el mínimo posible para luego acceder a plataformas y contenidos gratis. Sólo cierto público paga algunos consumos de nicho y exclusivos, que no se consiguen de otro modo".
Así como el uso de internet se expandió durante el último año a nivel global, también se incrementa el rechazo de los usuarios de la red a pagar para acceder a contenido en línea. El porcentaje de usuarios que no están dispuestos a abonar pasó de 57% en el 2010 a 73% este año, según un revela la encuesta a nivel global de la consultora KPMG en 31 países a personas de entre 16 y 65 años.
Por ello, en la visión de la consultora es fundamental que los proveedores de acceso a la red fidelicen al cliente, para quien los factores más importantes para mantenerse en la empresa son: el precio (77%) y la calidad del servicio (78%), frente a la selección del dispositivo (54%) y el contenido o servicio exclusivo (49%).
"Las telefónicas y empresas proveedoras de internet deberán agregarle valor a la relación con el cliente y comprender que, aunque la calidad importa, el precio del servicio es mandatorio", sostuvo el vocero de la empresa para Latinoamérica, Diego Medone.
Agregó que la tendencia global muestra que los clientes "buscan pagar el mínimo posible para luego acceder a plataformas y contenidos gratis. Sólo cierto público paga algunos consumos de nicho y exclusivos, que no se consiguen de otro modo".
Al respecto, marca como un potencial generador de ingresos la base de datos de los usuarios de Internet, que se genera a partir de que cada vez más los clientes habilitan a las empresas a usar los productos de rastreo y localización.
Desde KPMG explicaron que más de dos tercios de los usuarios de Internet permite que se actividad en línea y su localización sea rastreada, durante sus vacaciones, "siempre y cuando consigan algo a cambio", como comentó el responsable de retail de la consultora, Mark Larson.
A menor rango etáreo mayor predisposición a ser localizado, lo que, para Larson, es un "mensaje importante" que las empresas deben decodificar y adaptar sus estrategias para dar la respuesta adecuada.
"Proveer razones de peso para que lo consumidores compartan información sobre ellos mismos definirá los ganadores y perdedores del comercio digital. Cuanto más dirigida y a medida sea la interacción con el consumidor, más efectiva será, dado que la mayoría de los consumidores de todas las regiones prefieren la publicidad personalizada", remarcó.
En las tres regiones (América, Europa y Asia Pacífico), las compras online superan ampliamente las realizadas en comercios específicos del rubro bienes y servicios.
El 76% de los consumidores de América prefiere comprar CDs, DVDs, libros y juegos de video de modo online, antes que en un comercio. En tanto en Asia Pacífico lo hace el 67% y en Europa el 55%.
Asimismo, el 70% de los consumidores de las Américas y Asia Pacífico son más propensos a comprar vuelos y paquetes de vacaciones online, comparado con los europeos (61%).
Los bienes de lujo son los menos elegidos a la hora de comprar online (28%), y el 41% sostiene que no compraría alimentos por internet.
A su vez, unifica a los usuarios en el mundo la influencia de la información en línea para decidir una compra.
El 82% dicen sentirse "significativamente influenciados" por las fuentes de información online tales como la retroalimentación de los clientes o valoraciones, sitios para comparar (76%), cupones de descuento (73%) y los blogs (64%).
Al respecto, Medone agregó que la opinión de otro comprador es tan importante para el usuario que implica un "gran desafío" para las empresas tradicionales, que porque esto aumenta su exposición.
"Necesitarán considerar e implementar estrategias que les permitan interactuar con los clientes en todas las plataformas de venta, para asegurarle una experiencia satisfactoria independientemente de lo que el consumidor está comprando o el modo en que lo hace (on-line o personalmente)", concluyó.
sábado, diciembre 17, 2011
SOPA se detiene… por el momento… NOT!
SOPA no fue aprobada el día de hoy, no por que los congresistas estadounidenses hayan recapacitado o siquiera entendido la magnitud de lo que pretende hacer, simplemente se les acabó el tiempo o tal vez, se cansaron.
Para que se den una idea, ayer ví el debate 9 horas y media….Parece que duró once horas, la verdad es que la depresión de ver a viejitos pre-internet haciendo todo lo que podían para destruír, me ganó. Afortunadamente no fui la única masoquista, se reporta que más de 150,000 “nerds” — como los legisladores nos llamaban durante su sesión — vieron todo el debate o al menos, una porción del mismo.
El día de hoy por supuesto que no ví la sesión, la cual por cierto terminó de golpe sin mayor explicación de acuerdo a Techdirt.
El republicano y promotor de SOPA, Lamar Smith, simplemente pidió que se continuará en la próxima ocasión, lo cual será en enero del 2012. Al parecer este señor, capturado abiertamente por la industria, pidió se haga un estudio acerca de las implicaciones del bloqueo a nivel DNS, que SOPA esquizofrénicamente propone.
En fin, el día de ayer la verdad es que fue un doloroso espectáculo de ignorancia en donde gente con demasiadas canas, rechazaban todas las enmiendas a la ley que los congresistas Darrel Issa y Zoe Logfren proponían con evidencia en la mano y facts de los expertos que los dinosaúricos legisladores en pro de SOPA, simplemente rechazaban con no-argumentos, dejándo claro que no saben lo que estan haciendo ya que no entienden mínimamente como funciona el internet.
Los videos de la maratónica sesión los pueden ver en la cuenta de YouTube de Keep the Web Open. Solo les puedo decir que una persona bastante vieja, dijo en en un momento para justificar SOPA que ”internet es el oeste salvaje, una utopía de libertad sin fronteras para la decencia o el respeto”. LOL.
Casualmente al hablar de las violaciones a la Primera Enmenda (y en general derecho humano de la libertad de expresión) que el ICE comete al confiscar dominios, como sucedió con Roja Directa, Logfren mencionó el opaco proceso de ACTA. Curiosidades.
El tiempo es preciado. El tema del copyright cada vez resulta de más interés para gente que nunca se ha preocupado por su implicaciones , las cuales a diferencia de lo que piensa la industria, no tienen que ver únicamente con contenido de Hollywood, artistillas pop de moda o los sitios rogue. Los derechos y libertades civiles que el internet permite realizar de una forma única, estan amenazados por la industria del entretenimiento. No lo vale.
La legisladora Zoe Logfren emitió un sensato comunicado acerca de las sesiones de dictámen:
Este dictámen está lejos de ser finalizado, y es el más largo que el Comité Judicial de la Cámara ha tenido en bastante tiempo. El proceso ha sido agotador, pero algunas de las muchas preocupaciones que existen y la oposición que rodea a este proyecto de ley, ya han surgido en el Comité.Por lo pronto, el internet como lo conocemos, tienen un poco más de tiempo, muy poco tal vez. Quizás sería buena idea usarlo para organizarse y defenderlo, SOPA nos afecta a todos.
He visto comentarios en línea … en Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, sitios web de noticias, blogs, y keepthewebopen.com … estos mensajes indican que la mayoría de los que han oído hablar de SOPA, se oponen a ella.
Sin embargo, los mensajes también me dicen que muchas personas no entienden el poder que tienen. De camino a la sesión de hoy, hablé con un colega que había recibido una llamada telefónica de una persona con un pequeño negocio que se opone a SOPA y le hizo saber la forma en que le afectaría negativamente. Esto hizo que mi colega preguntará información sobre el proyecto de ley para encontrar alternativas. Si el pueblo estadounidense quiere decir algo para decidir el futuro de Internet, estas conversaciones tienen que ocurrir frecuentemente. Si te opones a SOPA, alza la voz.
De cualquier modo, una buena noticia para este fin de semana.
ÚLTIMA HORA
Mike Masnick de Techdirt acaba de informar que contrariamente a lo que se anunció hace unas horas, el próximo miércoles 21 de diciembre a las 9 am continuará la sesión de dictámen de SOPA. ¡Por piedad intelectual!martes, diciembre 13, 2011
By
Nov 21, 2011 4:12 PM
Nov 21, 2011 4:12 PM
The Perfect Computer for People Who Fear Computers
The
holidays are breathing down our necks like a creepy subway pervert,
lumbering by with a yuletide erection. iPads will be massive hits. But
for the tech-challenged person in your life? Save some dough and buy a
Chromebook.
Google announced a price drop and feature bump on Chromebooks today. They start at $300 now, which is in total Christmas gift territory. If you want to do a beloved computerphobe a solid this holiday season, you'd do well to introduce them to Chrome OS.
Granted, Chromebooks don't have the same cool factor as iPads, Kindle Fires, and even Galaxy Tabs. Those have more wow. But they don't have keyboards. They don't have familiar well-worn interfaces. Document printing is a bitch. So is photo-management. All those old-school, boring things that aren't necessarily glamorous but are often necessary. Despite over the air syncing, iPads still basically demand a computer. And although tablets may be instantly usable to infants and pets, for people who have gotten used to one way of doing things, at great effort, they can be a little scary.
Think about "simplified" computing experiences. Most of them aren't actually any good for anyone who wants a simple computer.
Tablets don't have keyboards. There are very many people out there ready to ditch their fully featured computers, but aren't quite ready to make the leap to iPad or Android only because they want to type on physical buttons. It's what they know, it's what they like. Sure, people can buy a third-party Bluetooth keyboard for their tablets. But those people aren't Google's audience. It should be selling Chromebooks to the people that can't be bothered to ever learn what Bluetooth is.
Meanwhile, netbooks are horrible. Horrible! They are an atrocity. They are like making love to a honey badger (assuming the badger is the top in the relationship). This is especially true for anyone who isn't eager to tuck into some serious driver and device debugging. They are the worst goddamn things computer manufacturers have ever loosed on an unsuspecting public. They are ugly and cramped ultimately useless for anyone who isn't a robot. If you disagree you are deeply wrong and I have lost all respect for your opinion.
Ultrabooks? Sure, if you've got a grand to drop on a stocking stuffer.
The Chromebook, on the other hand, is the ultimate machine for the tech-challenged set that just wants something easy, cheap, and bulletproof that always works. If you have ever used a web browser, there is nothing new to learn. Feeling confident? You can even play games and install some basic apps.
They are ready to go right out of the box, and as familiar as a Caesar salad. Flip it open and it just comes on. You've got email, documents, and social networking right from the get go. There's no setup, no software to update, no drivers to wrangle, no accessories to buy in order to import photos or be able to print. They'll play nice with other gadgets. They're pretty.
So why aren't more people buying them, recommending them, or talking about them as the ultimate democratic computers?
Much of this is on Google (and Samsung and Acer) who are pitching them to the wrong audience. To put this in Conde Nast magazine terms: Chromebooks are being advertised to a WIRED reader, when it's the Lucky crowd that actually needs them. The only place most people have ever seen a Chromebook is on a Virgin America flight—you can check one out for free at one gate and return it at the other. And sure, the disproportionately tech-savvy SFO-JFK Virgin flier might spend a few minutes perusing a Chromebook during a key party breather. They may even love it. But they're not the ones who need—much less want—a dead easy computer.
Google should be checking out free 3G Chromebooks at Greyhound terminals and Cracker Barrels. You should be able to pick one up off of exit 146 in Warner Robbins, Georgia, and drop it off again at exit 274 just outside of Denver. You should be able to try out a Chromebook at the Waffle House. They should sell them at Sears.
The thing is, Google is obviously aware of this. From today's blog post:
Marketing is the purveyance of bullshit. It is meant to convince you of something that often isn't true. And so here's something from a disinterested third party, that I hope you will take to heart if you are looking to buy an "easy" computer experience for a loved one this holiday. Yeah, the Kindle Fire and the iPad are really cool. But if you want to get something easy, functional, inexpensive, and useful, do yourself a favor and check out a Chromebook. Hopefully, you won't have to fly to San Francisco or New York to do that.
Original Image By Yuri Arcurs/Shutterstock
You can keep up with Mat Honan, the author of this post, on Twitter, Facebook, or Google+.
Google announced a price drop and feature bump on Chromebooks today. They start at $300 now, which is in total Christmas gift territory. If you want to do a beloved computerphobe a solid this holiday season, you'd do well to introduce them to Chrome OS.
Granted, Chromebooks don't have the same cool factor as iPads, Kindle Fires, and even Galaxy Tabs. Those have more wow. But they don't have keyboards. They don't have familiar well-worn interfaces. Document printing is a bitch. So is photo-management. All those old-school, boring things that aren't necessarily glamorous but are often necessary. Despite over the air syncing, iPads still basically demand a computer. And although tablets may be instantly usable to infants and pets, for people who have gotten used to one way of doing things, at great effort, they can be a little scary.
Think about "simplified" computing experiences. Most of them aren't actually any good for anyone who wants a simple computer.
Tablets don't have keyboards. There are very many people out there ready to ditch their fully featured computers, but aren't quite ready to make the leap to iPad or Android only because they want to type on physical buttons. It's what they know, it's what they like. Sure, people can buy a third-party Bluetooth keyboard for their tablets. But those people aren't Google's audience. It should be selling Chromebooks to the people that can't be bothered to ever learn what Bluetooth is.
Meanwhile, netbooks are horrible. Horrible! They are an atrocity. They are like making love to a honey badger (assuming the badger is the top in the relationship). This is especially true for anyone who isn't eager to tuck into some serious driver and device debugging. They are the worst goddamn things computer manufacturers have ever loosed on an unsuspecting public. They are ugly and cramped ultimately useless for anyone who isn't a robot. If you disagree you are deeply wrong and I have lost all respect for your opinion.
Ultrabooks? Sure, if you've got a grand to drop on a stocking stuffer.
The Chromebook, on the other hand, is the ultimate machine for the tech-challenged set that just wants something easy, cheap, and bulletproof that always works. If you have ever used a web browser, there is nothing new to learn. Feeling confident? You can even play games and install some basic apps.
They are ready to go right out of the box, and as familiar as a Caesar salad. Flip it open and it just comes on. You've got email, documents, and social networking right from the get go. There's no setup, no software to update, no drivers to wrangle, no accessories to buy in order to import photos or be able to print. They'll play nice with other gadgets. They're pretty.
So why aren't more people buying them, recommending them, or talking about them as the ultimate democratic computers?
Much of this is on Google (and Samsung and Acer) who are pitching them to the wrong audience. To put this in Conde Nast magazine terms: Chromebooks are being advertised to a WIRED reader, when it's the Lucky crowd that actually needs them. The only place most people have ever seen a Chromebook is on a Virgin America flight—you can check one out for free at one gate and return it at the other. And sure, the disproportionately tech-savvy SFO-JFK Virgin flier might spend a few minutes perusing a Chromebook during a key party breather. They may even love it. But they're not the ones who need—much less want—a dead easy computer.
Google should be checking out free 3G Chromebooks at Greyhound terminals and Cracker Barrels. You should be able to pick one up off of exit 146 in Warner Robbins, Georgia, and drop it off again at exit 274 just outside of Denver. You should be able to try out a Chromebook at the Waffle House. They should sell them at Sears.
The thing is, Google is obviously aware of this. From today's blog post:
We've heard from many of you that one of the things you enjoy most about the Chromebook is its hassle-free simplicity. If you're someone who's often called upon to provide tech support when you're home for the holidays like I am, you'll be happy to know that the Chromebook gets your loved ones up and going on the web quickly, without the usual pains of computing like seemingly endless boot times and setup manuals.That passage is buried, four paragraphs down. This is not an aside, Google! This is everything. Why isn't Google making more of how easy the Chromebook is? Why aren't Samsung and Acer? The Chromebook has the potential to be a huge hit if shown to the right audience. (Hint: the right audience probably sees its ads on TV and not on YouTube.) And more importantly, it could be a huge hit when your parents unwrap it in a few weeks.
Marketing is the purveyance of bullshit. It is meant to convince you of something that often isn't true. And so here's something from a disinterested third party, that I hope you will take to heart if you are looking to buy an "easy" computer experience for a loved one this holiday. Yeah, the Kindle Fire and the iPad are really cool. But if you want to get something easy, functional, inexpensive, and useful, do yourself a favor and check out a Chromebook. Hopefully, you won't have to fly to San Francisco or New York to do that.
Original Image By Yuri Arcurs/Shutterstock
You can keep up with Mat Honan, the author of this post, on Twitter, Facebook, or Google+.
viernes, diciembre 09, 2011
miércoles, noviembre 23, 2011
UPDATE ON SOPA
By David Jackson in Featured
UPDATE ON SOPABy David Jackson in Featured
Matt Cutts Blog – Progress against SOPA
CNet – How SOPA would affect you: FAQ
Question: What does it take to get bitter rivals, Google and Facebook – the two most popular and powerful entities on the planet, to put aside their differences and join forces for a
common cause?
Answer: Internet censorship in America, or the threat thereof.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past month or so, you’ve no doubt been hearing on TV news, and reading in newspapers and on blogs about a controversial new bill called SOPA (the Stop Online Piracy Act).
The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as H.R.3261, was introduced in the United States House of Representatives on October 26, 2011 by Representative Lamar Smith [R-TX] and a bipartisan group of 12 initial co-sponsors. The aim of the bill is to help U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders fight online transmission of restricted intellectual property. (Source: Wikipedia)
Serious First Amendment Ramifications
New bills that police the Internet get passed all the time, so why all the commotion over this bill? Because this particular bill has serious first amendment ramifications – a potential encroachment of free speech. Even famed attorney and constitutional law expert Floyd Abrams, a paid advocate for supporters of the bill, admits SOPA would censor protected speech. In a letter sent to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith and Ranking Member John Conyers, Abrams writes:
“Regardless of the particular standard or definition of foreign infringing sites, court-approved remedies under the Stop Online Piracy Act may result in the blockage or disruption of some protected speech. As discussed above, the bill provides a range of injunctive relief…, with a court making the final determination as to whether and how to craft relief against a website operator or owner or third party intermediaries. When injunctive relief includes blocking domain names, the blockage of non-infringing or protected content may result.” (Source:Techdirt.com )
Goodbye Internet Freedom
Opponents of the bill (including yours truly) think the bill would fundamentally change the Internet as we know it – and not for the better. Let me explain.
The idea behind SOPA came about as a way to try to eliminate piracy on the Internet. According to a recent article on PCWorld.com, online piracy costs the U.S. economy $58 billion in losses every year, including 373,000 jobs. And while I agree online piracy is indeed a serious problem that needs to be addressed, the excessive and invasive measures contained in SOPA are simply the wrong approach. The bill would unduly and randomly grant content owners the power of censorship.
That’s right, if SOPA were passed, content owners would have the power to obtain court injunctions to block access to certain websites that were simply considered “copyright infringement friendly.”
For example, if my website, Free-Marketing-Tips-Blog.com happened to have content that could be interpreted as “piracy-friendly,” my domain name could be blocked so it would be inaccessible by visiting my URL address. What the bill can’t do, however, is block numeric IP addresses. So if I were indeed a pirate, you could still access my website, or any other censored website for that matter, if you had their IP address. And while SOPA might discourage casual pirates, more determined and sophisticated hardcore pirates would likely not be dissuaded – at least not to any significant degree.
Why? Because the business of piracy is much too lucrative to be deterred by such measures. It’s sort of like burglar-proofing your front door… burglars will just come in through the back door.
Effective at Censorship
So essentially, the bill would be ineffective at what it was specifically designed to do – eliminate piracy. But would likely be very effective at censoring any suspected websites – even if the offense is unwitting and something as minor as you or one of your friends posting a copyrighted image to your Facebook page.
Heck, even a seemingly innocuous comment in a blog post could be considered piracy friendly. How preposterous is that?
There is also a concern the bill would stifle critically important technical innovation and job creation by overturning existing laws that were catalysts for the technological boom of the last decade; which could prove damaging to an already fragile and slow recovering economy.
Add to the equation the fact the bill has such vague standards and sweeping language, and you can begin to understand why so many people are up in arms over the bill.
Powerful Opposition
How strong is opposition to SOPA? According to an article on the blog PureVPN.com titled Protest Against SOPA Bill Reaches a Fever Pitch…
“An open letter against the SOPA bill was jointly written by the industry giants including Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, eBay, Mozilla, Yahoo, Zynga and AOL. The letter addressed the congressional sponsors of the bill urging them to reconsider the measures and it appeared as a full-page ad in The New York Times on Wednesday.
Apart from this letter a lot of other websites are protesting against this bill in their own way. For example Reddit, Firefox and Tumblr drew broad black lines on their websites to protest against this proposed law. When a user logs in at Tumblr he gets to see that all user-generated content has been blacked out. When users click on the gray lines to investigate, a message appears which tells them about the bill and encourages them to oppose it. Reddit and Mozilla have censored their logos which click through to instructions for contacting representatives.”
Even the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden has spoken out against the bill in a remarkably compelling speech on Internet Freedom.
So What’s Next?
At the time of writing this article, the bill currently sits in the House Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition, and the Internet. It has yet to be introduced to the floor for a vote. A sham hearing on the bill took place on Wednesday, November 16, 10:00 a.m. in the House Judiciary Committee.
Why was the hearing a sham? Because present at the hearing were parties overwhelmingly supportive of the bill, including Pfizer, MasterCard and MPAA, while Google was the only party present allowed to voice opposition. Talk about a stacked deck.
Will the Bill Pass?
Despite the tendentious hearing, Reuters is reporting that Darrell Issa, the Republican congressional
representative for California, has said that there is no way that SOPA will pass.
“There is a very broad coalition from far left to far right who realise this will hurt innovation, something we can’t afford to do. And there are other ways to accomplish what they say is their goal.
“I don’t believe this bill has any chance on the House floor. I think it’s way too extreme, it infringes on too many areas that our leadership will know is simply too dangerous to do in its current form.”
Conclusion
While Darrell Issa’s statement might seem like good news on its face, my position is, I’ll believe it when I actually see the bill die in the House. Remember, we’re dealing with politicians on both sides who are bought and paid for by corporate interests. Don’t take Internet freedom for granted. If you are against the SOPA bill, I urge you to take action by contacting your members of congress and voicing your opposition to SOPA today!
David Jackson is a marketing consultant, and the owner of Free-Marketing-Tips-Blog.com – Powerful, free marketing tips to help grow your business! http://free-marketing-tips-blog.com
Salvemos Internet !
Es el momento de pasar a la acción !
Salvemos Internet
El Congreso norteamericano está debatiendo una ley para censurar Internet a nivel mundial, creando una lista negra con Youtube, WikiLeaks e incluso a Avaaz. Pero si apoyamos a miembros clave del Congreso de EE.UU, podremos derrotar esta censura global en Internet. ¡Firma la petición !Es el momento de pasar a la acción !
lunes, noviembre 21, 2011
The keywords and phrases you use in your Meta description tag may not affect your page’s ranking in the search engines, but this tag can still come in handy in your overall SEO and social media marketing campaigns.
What Is the Meta Description Tag?
It’s a snippet of HTML code that belongs inside the section of a web page. It is usually placed after the Title tag and before the Meta keywords tag (if you use one), although the order is not important.
The proper syntax for this HTML tag is:
If you’re using a content management system (CMS), look for a field to fill out that’s called Meta Description, or possibly just “Description.”
Many years ago, the information contained in a Meta description could slightly help a page rank highly for the words that were contained within it. Today, neither Google, Bing, nor Yahoo! use it as a ranking signal.
In other words, whether you use your important keyword phrases in your Meta description tag or not, the position of your page in the search engine results will not be affected. So in terms of rankings, you could easily leave it out altogether.
But should you?
There are 3 important ways that Meta descriptions are being used today that make them an important part of your SEO and overall online marketing strategy:
1. They can be used as the description (or part of the description) of your page if it shows up in the search results.
2. They are often used as part of the descriptive information for your pages when Google shows “extended sitelinks” for your site.
3. They are often used as the default description in social media marketing links such as Facebook and Google+.
Let’s look at each of these in more detail.
1. Meta Descriptions in the Search Results
People often think that whatever they put in their Meta description tag will be the default description that the search engines use under the clickable link to their site in the search results. While this is sometimes true, it’s not always the case.
Currently, if you’re searching for a site by its URL (for example www.highrankings.com) Google tends to use the first 20 to 25 words of your Meta description as the default description in the search engine result pages (SERP). However, if you have a listing at DMOZ, also known as the Open Directory Project (ODP) and are not using the “noodp” tag, they may default to that description instead. (Do a search at Google for www.amazon.com to see an example.)
Bing and Yahoo!, on the other hand, don’t always default to the Meta description tag for URL searches. Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don’t. A search for www.highrankings.com at Bing or Yahoo! shows content from my home page as the description rather than the contents of my Meta description tag.
Of course, real people aren’t typically searching for a site by URL, so what the search engines show for those types of search queries is not as important as a true keyword search. So don’t get hung up on what you see when you search for your site by its URL or if you’re doing a “site:command” search to see how they’re indexing your pages.
Instead, go to your favorite web analytics program and find the keyword phrases that are currently bringing you the most traffic. Then see what your description looks like at Google when you type in those keywords.
And surprise! What you’ll find is that your search results description will be different for every search query! You may see any combination of the following used:
* Your entire Meta description tag text as the complete description (typically if it’s highly relevant and contains no more than 25 words).
* A full sentence pulled from your Meta description tag, but not the entire Meta description (if it contains more than one sentence).
* Text from one part of your Meta description mashed together with text from another part of it (if it’s more than 25 words long).
* Some text from your Meta description mashed together with some text from the page.
* Some text from your page mashed together from some other text from your page (nothing from the Meta description).
Some of the circumstances that cause Google to not use text from your Meta description may include:
* The information in the Meta description tag was not specific to the page it was on.
* The search query used some words that were not in the Meta description, but those words (or some of them) were used in the page content. This includes words that Google considers somewhat synonymous, such as “copy” and “copywriting” or “SEO” and “search engine optimization.”
But even the above are not hard and fast rules. Google doesn’t always use all or part of the Meta description even when the exact search phrase was contained within it – especially if the search query is also contained within the content of the page. Suffice it to say that there are no hard and fast rules for when Google will show it and when they won’t.
My recommendation is to always use keywords on any pages where you get search engine visitors (or hope to get them). Make them very specific to the page they’re on by describing what someone will find when they click through to the page from the search results, while also using variations of your targeted keywords.
Because Google will show only show around 20 to 25 words as your description, many SEOs recommend that you limit this tag to a certain number of characters. In reality, however, you’re not limited to any specific number. Your Meta description tag can be as long as you want it to be because Google will pull out the relevant parts of it and make their own snippet anyway.
For instance, if you’re optimizing a page for 3 different keyword phrases, you could write a 3-sentence Meta description tag, with each sentence focusing on a different phrase. You could probably even insert more than 3 phrases in those sentences if you’re a good wordsmith. The idea, however, is not to stuff this tag full of keywords, but to write each sentence to be a compelling marketing statement – a statement that naturally uses the keywords people might be typing into Google to find your site.
2. Meta Descriptions and Extended Sitelinks
These days, Google often uses the first few words from your Meta description tag when they create the “extended sitelinks” for your website. But this too is not set in stone and is highly keyword dependent. You’ll see different sitelinks and different descriptions showing up depending on the words a searcher used at Google.
As an example, if you do a search for “High Rankings” at Google, you’ll see my sitelinks for that search query.
Google Sitelinks for High Rankings
At this moment, Google is showing my home page as the top result with 6 inner pages beneath:
* Forum home page: Description is from DMOZ/ODP. This page has the generic Meta description that is on every page of the forum.
* Link building forum home page: Description is content pulled from the page that uses the words “High Rankings” in it.
* SEO articles page: First part of Meta description.
* Newsletter home page: First part of Meta description.
* SEO/SEM resources page: First part of Meta description.
* SEO classes page: First part of Meta description.
For the most part, they’re using the first part of the Meta description as the sitelink snippet, but not always. You may have noticed that I optimized those Meta description sitelink snippets that are showing by front loading them so that the first 5-7 words or so are a short description of what the page is all about.
But here’s the rub. Do a Google search for “Jill Whalen SEO.” You should still see sitelinks, and you’ll even see some of the same ones as with the previous query, but some of the descriptions are different:
While the forum home page shows in both, this time Google has pulled text from the page rather than using the DMOZ/ODP description. This is likely because this search query had the word “SEO” in it while the other one didn’t. The SEO articles page also shows up here, and it is using the same Meta description snippet as the High Rankings query. The other sitelinks are different from before, with 3 out of 4 using
the Meta description.
As you can see, while you do have some control over your sitelink descriptions via your Meta description tag, Google might not always use them (just as Google does with their regular search results). Your best chance of having them show is to use, close to the beginning of your description tags, the words that you know pull up sitelinks. Also, be as descriptive as possible within the first 5 to 7 words.
3. Meta Descriptions and Social Media Marketing
Ever wonder why some Facebook links have great descriptions and others don’t seem to make any sense? It’s because some site owners have taken the time to write a summary of the article and place it into their Meta description tag, and some have not. If your article has a Meta description, Facebook and Google+ will default to that when you share a link on your profile or “Page.” If there’s no Meta description, you’ll usually see the first sentence or so from the page being used as the default.
While anyone can edit the description that Facebook defaults to, most people don’t. And at this time on Google+ you can’t even edit the default description. You can either leave it as is or delete it all together. Let’s face it — most of the time the first sentence of an article is not a good description of the rest of it. It’s not supposed to be, because that’s not what a first sentence is for!
Therefore, I strongly advise you to always write a compelling 1- or 2-sentence description for all of your articles and blog content that may be shared via social media, and place it into your Meta description tag. This will give you a big jump on your competitors who haven’t figured this out yet, making your social media content much more clickable because people will know what the article is actually about before they click on it.
Overall, the Meta description tag gives you a little bit more control over what people might see before they click over to your site. The more compelling it is, the more clickthroughs you should see. If your Meta description tags can help with that, then it’s certainly worth the few minutes of time it takes to create interesting, keyword-rich tags that sum up what users will find when they arrive!
Jill Whalen is the CEO of High Rankings, an SEO Consulting company in the Boston,
MA area since 1995. Follow her on Twitter @JillWhalen If you learned from this article, be sure to invite your colleagues to sign up for the High Rankings Advisor SEO Newsletter so they can receive similar articles in the future!
domingo, noviembre 20, 2011
Video-Brochure
Servicios Para Residencias, PYMES, SOHOS´s y similares.
Noviembre 20, 2011.
Servicios Para Residencias, PYMES, SOHOS´s y similares.
Noviembre 20, 2011.
|
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)