Kung Fu Panda 2, Google, and the Rebirth of Infographics

Everybody loves a good infographic. You know, those big data illustration thingies. I especially appreciate them when I’m reading an article that’s just a little beyond my comprehension; I like the mental push I get from a well-done infographic.  Infographics come in many formats, which are often times combined: statistical, timeline, process or flow, map, and conceptual. Oh, yeah, and they drive huge amounts of search engine traffic.

Algorithms Cha-cha-cha

Google burst to the top of the search engine market in 1998, not because it could index webpages faster, but because it did a better job at ranking and weighting them. In other words, it had a better system of algorithms for assigning relevance. Google then concocted its own supply and demand, as it were, by selling the results of searchable keywords through AdWords; A pay-per-click service (PPC), which still generates the majority of Google’s revenue.

Unfortunately, Google’s system was vulnerable to “content farms” which are websites that optimize their pages with mass amounts of content for the sole purpose of beefing up their own (PPC) ad revenue. These farms don’t care about content quality or the redundancy of information. Content is often poorly written or aggregated from other sites without concern for relevance. Consequently, Google’s value is diminished with cluttered and misleading search results.

Kung Fu Panda 2

Between February and November of 2011, Google targeted content farms by implementing new search algorithms that would provide better search results. While developing the new release, Google-insiders called the project “Farmer,” until DreamWorks’ Kung Fu Panda 2 was released in May. Coincidentally, Panda was the nickname of the lead engineer on the project and the name caught on. Remember Google’s other releases? Fresh? Caffeine? Me neither, I had to look them up.

Google changes its algorithm system all the time. What makes Panda monumental is that it changes the core basis for how Google ranks webpages. For the first time, Google is able to assign search relevance based on webpage design and content quality. It’s been evaluated that 35 percent of all Internet searches are being affected by Panda. To put this in perspective, Panda can affect up to 10 percent of searches made by any one individual.

After the second released version of Google’s Panda in November of 2011, infographics started to pop up everywhere.

So let’s review . . .

Google uses algorithms primarily based on keywords so that it can sell keyword results through AdWords. Content farms usurp Google’s revenue stream by using Google’s own search algorithms to attract and sell PPC ad revenue. They do this by hosting tons of worthless content affecting Google’s search quality. Google then changes its algorithms to rank well-designed websites with quality content higher in searches, leaving content farms high and dry. To maintain search rankings, webmasters bomb their sites with infographics. I think I just blocked out my first infographic.

What better way to conclude than with a real infographic about Google’s Panda release:

“…and so on, and so on and …”

Don’t worry, I’m not going to use the Faberge Organic Shampoo commercial as an introduction into yet another social media post, nor will I declare that then-Faberge CEO George Barrie should be dubbed the Father of Social Media . . . and so on, and so on, and so on.

Second Screen Experiences: A higher state of consciousness or more opiates for the masses?

TV watchers are an easy target for those who damn the activity. Their indignations always seem to fall upon a lack of intelligence boob tube, couch potato, idiot box, and the glorification of books. These haughty assertions are hard to refute for those of us who enjoy a good brain deadening experience, because the evidence is rather conclusive. Studies show that while watching TV, brain wave activity almost entirely switches from our left brain, which is linear, logical, and ordered, to our right brain, which is intuitive, creative, and random. This transfer “numbs” the left brain, leaving our right brain in charge.  That explains my late night urges to frequent a Wendy’s drive through.

A study commissioned by Yahoo and Nielson found that 86% of mobile users are on the web while watching their favorite shows, especially sports and reality TV. This phenomenon is part of the social TV movement called the “second screen.” That’s right, as a species we are instinctively evolving. These dual activities are reinstating a natural order by stimulating our left brain with verbal and problem solving activities, while appeasing the other half with imagery and entertainment. TV. An addiction, or a necessary evolutionary step toward a higher state of consciousness?

“Dewey Defeats Truman,” and the 2012 presidential election.

1948 was a tough year for pollsters covering the presidential race between Republican candidate, Thomas E. Dewey, and Democrat candidate, Harry S. Truman. The top three pollsters of the day (Crossley, Gallup, and Roper) had Dewey up five or more points going into the election. So confident was the Chicago Tribune of Truman’s defeat that it went to press before many of the exit poll locations had a chance to report. The results were 150,000 printed newspapers with a headline that read “Dewey Defeats Truman” and a humiliating public relations moment at the hands of our 33rd president.

At the heart of this polling mishap was the use of “quota sampling” that didn’t take into effect the bias telephone ownership had toward the wealthy who were more likely to be Republicans than Democrats.

Hmm, sampling bias, phones, emerging media, presidential election.

Was reality TV a necessary precursor to social media?

To some degree, we are all voyeuristic creatures. Whether we choose to embrace or repel the urge to look into the lives of others, the instinct is still a compelling factor in our collective behaviors.

So how did we go from a society that believed some things are best left unsaid, to “it didn’t happen unless it’s on Facebook”? What brought the masses out from viewing the few to being the viewed?

Philologist Dr. Pamela Rutledge hypothesizes that that two factors contributed to the development of social media. The first is the longing people have for their 15 minutes of fame, a.k.a. Andy Warhol. The second is the vast void of content, created by the Internet, that needed to be filled.

Fifteen minutes? Void? Tell that to my teenage daughter who would spend 15 hours a day, if she could, on social media sites (Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, YouTube), and who’s quickly approaching her 5000 friend limit on Facebook.

“There she is, Miss Media…”

Miss America Laura Kaeppeler

Okay, beauty pageants don’t hold the sway of days gone by, but you have to admire the pluck of this year’s 2012 Miss America pageant committee www.missamerica.org.

In Idol-esque fashion, last Saturday night the pageant allowed the public to vote online for a single candidate to compete as one of the five finalists.

The pageant utilized an elaborate mix of emerging media. Each contestant created a video that was part of a Facebook survey allowing enthusiasts to view and vote. The videos were also available on YouTube, and when “liked” also cast a vote. Voting could also take place via text messaging.

Nobody calls it multi-media anymore

After reviewing our 2007 first quarter financials, everyone in the boardroom was silent. We knew the recession accounted for a good portion of our downturn, but more concerning was that our customers—and our customers’ customers—were communicating differently. We had endured many threats of new media displacing traditional media, but this was different. Hours of conversation followed, filled with streams of anecdotal evidence that made it clear: everything was changing.