For a while ', the Internet and the World Wide Web has proven to be very promising. They whispered sweet nothings in our ears, promising the voice of the marginalized, the new democracy to be the great equalizer.
But it should be, because the Internet has a new champion. No, not Google. No, not Microsoft. And no, it is not even good ole 'Uncle Sam. They are only custodians. The Internet is the new master is bigger than she ever, and much, much older.
Meet the teacher
TheThe new web master is the same man who held the lead all the traditional media business.
The Internet is the new master is money and power. Not being able to earn money or the ability to improve performance (although this is certainly nice fringe benefit). No, this is new master of the Internet, the rich, powerful collective. Those same shape opinion and expression "mainstream" values and behaviors.
I think it should have been anticipated, such as the Internet, the militaryBirth. But then, we were young and optimistic and believe we were young!
A little 'melodramatic? Maybe. But basically the same Let me explain ...
The early promise of fairness
Internet was born as a computer network created for military purposes. In short, the World Wide Web was started simply because the Internet was there to host it, and the technology was there to deliver it. Both were announced as the new face ofDemocracy - finally had a voice of the voiceless.
Of course, even in those heady days, we all recognized some fundamental limits and practical techniques that threw really upset by the bill to the theory of the "new world disorder." First, the vast majority of the world's population does not even have access to a computer, because you leave your own Internet access. In fact, this was still the case even after the new owner took over the reins (and probably still is).
ButWe had confidence in the potential of the Internet. I also wrote an article in the mid-90s discussed the promise of the Internet's empowerment, and I quote:
"Being a decentralized, anonymous form of communication the Internet provides great opportunities to the world of the oppressed - improved (anonymous if desired) communication skills and better access to local and international news sources, only a few names for the same gifts. main threats for the Internetexisting media and political forces, not only for the distribution of information (and thus power) to the population, but also for the apparent inability (impossible?) regulate the flow of information to and from any country. "
Unfortunately I did not use the true potential of Internet censorship and control ... Content.
Who content is king swings
We often hear that "content is king". The logic of reasoning is as follows. For some time,The lion's share (80%) of Internet traffic to the site average is reached by the major search engines. Moreover, when people use search engines using only rarely on the second page of search results. In addition, research suggests that the number 1 in Google traffic meets twice what the number 2 This means that you need in the first two pages of major search engines ranking - ideally at number 1 - before starting your entry. The only way to achievethe top of search engines is to have thousands of links to your site from other websites. There are two so "reliable" to achieve this goal:
1) publish information on your site and update constantly, so that others link to your website because it is so great - keep your eyes on the paper "Some popular methods are news sites, blogs, folksonomies, journals. E-newsletter and customizable web portals like Google Personalized, visitors can choose (from adefault selection), what they see as news, e-mail, weather, stocks, etc.
2) Article PR - Write helpful articles and let publishers of newsletters and e-zines for free use - provided that you link to your site. (These articles are often written by SEO copywriters, and must be submitted to established banking products, which are gathered by free online editor.)
To reach in other words, at the top of search engines, you mustvirtual reams and reams of high quality information, content (eg copy) published. And you must do so indefinitely.
Based on these results, the adage that "content is king" became a sort of cliché. But if you look closely, the saying is inaccurate. There is nothing wrong with the logic, it was concluded that the problem. In reality, content is king no more than the sword. In fact, he exercises the content of the king (and I say "him" with the intention ofowner is usually male or patriarchal organization).
And when you have the content? Only those with the social power of education and money in terms of time task of research, writing and publishing indulges in command, said that the content (or those who committed the budget and the vision of, a SEO copywriter) .
Brandishing the content is increasingly difficult
And search engines (SEO) copywriter like me, this is a task that is increasingly time-consuming,simply because more and more content was added to the Internet (in particular due to the content search engine ranking of attention!). For example: in 1997 there were about 200 million pages on the World Wide Web (K. Bharat and A. Broder, "A technique for measuring the relative size and overlap of public Web search engines" [WWW1998]). In 1998 that figure to 800 million pages (Lawrence S. and Giles CL, "Accessibility of information on the Internet" [Nature 400:107-109 had jumped,1999]). Only 7 years later, the estimate is now 11.5 billion pages (A. Gulli and A. Signorini, "The indexable Web is more than 11.5 billion pages" [2005]).
In other words, the Internet today is your opinion heard the noise only virtual, if you really crank out the content. And that requires a large investment of time and money.
Information overload - the most effective form of censorship
Now do not get me wrong, I'm not saying that the Internet is denied accessInformation. Certainly does not. But ironically it is the Internet is very open, that his power greater censorship. With 11.5 billion pages currently online, and almost 10 million more added each day, we all slowly ask how much of this information you can trust. We are looking for useful content, and we always come back for them, but only if we trust the source. And, as a general rule is that we only trust websites that are:
or high ranking in major search enginesEngines;
or a high PageRank (PR) - PR is how Google scores importance. It gives all sides a mark of 10 points. Any site with a PR of 4 or higher is generally considered relatively reliable. More and more web-savvy PR people are using to evaluate the credibility and authority of the site. (You can use the PR of each page you visit using the Google Toolbar (http://toolbar.google.com).), And / or
or we thought leaders from a friend, colleague or industry (in general, of which onlyhappens when at least one of the first two conditions).
The result ... We only trust the same people who were food misinformation and disinformation for years before the advent of the Internet.
And where on average Jo is on the road? Even if you have the time, training and money to publish a website, a state-increasing information overload and will likely result in the marginalization of their website anyway. At best you will see how uninformedMinority, at worst, a rake conspiracy theorist!
Conclusion - we dare hope?
Several generations have wondered what they could achieve if only they could get on television. TV what it is, it does not wish came into play, if you like Jerry Springer should appear on the show, Cops, or Judge Judy, or have what they need for the starring role in American Idol, Big Brother, Amazing Race or Survivor takes. Then came the Internet. He argues that everything can not offer the TV.Unfortunately, it seems that the Internet is no longer true promise as a TV. The vast majority of high-level sites are used by the powerful, rich societies published. There are some differences, but nothing more. As the "newspaper" "reality" people are small-time stars of the Internet, the exceptions to the rule.
But I have not lost hope. All previous comments notwithstanding, I am inclined to see the glass half full. For eachnow and then, if the master is turned back, someone manages to slip the treatment of animals, to put it to one or two tricks (such as a folksonomy) to run. I like to think that my early days of optimism has been reinforced by something more than idealism and naivety. I still believe the technology of the Internet offers great opportunities. I just hope that "the powers" not too far away, and that not all of us little people at the edges, where we must be content to be pushedwith a duration of song "Jerry! Jerry! Jerry!"
Maybe folksonomies are the answer - or a prelude to an answer - or part of foreplay. Or maybe the Internet will focus on the history of the biggest hoax, after all. I do not know. All I know is that I'm looking forward to watch it unfold. For better or for worse, will certainly be interesting ...
