Since politics is closely linked with the welfare of many, we thought it was important to address the intricate link between information technology and politics, which many fail to conceptualize. Essentially, information technology equips people with a wider point of access to information. Over the recent months, we have seen that this has a tremendous effect on politics. For example, the widening popularity of “Fantasy Politics,� among the youth group increases political awareness in the generally apathetic group of citizens. For the functioning of a representative democracy, this is delightful news. This is, however, likely to adversely effect the welfare of Senior Citizens, who will proportionally lose its share of voice. And while technological advancement has shaped politics, it has also worked the other ways. The November election, for example, propelled a group of constituent-hugging politicians to pass a legislation banning online gambling. We also noted that this issue is global. In China, access to Wikipedia services (i.e. its citizens having access to information) could equip its citizens with a tool to pose a big threat to the power structure in the Communist nation. The widespread use of new technology essentially is a threat to the political processes in China.

Information technology has also played an integral role in the economic welfare of many. The rise of online gambling industry, Google, and Youtube, whom stack up billions of dollars in revenue, would not have existed without the rise of information technology. The success of these industries, one could argue, demonstrates how the development of new technology is a welfare-enhancing for the people. Economists, generally, substantiate that claim through its macro-economic growth models, where the increase in GDP is a function of growth in technology. However, we also pointed out that there are costs involved with such benefit. Youtube’s copyright mess is a prime example. While Youtube dramatically decreases the cost of accessing information (i.e. videos), it has been detrimental to some music groups and authors, who lost much of their business. They do have a point, since this mentality of tolerating unlawful activities (i.e. violating the copyright law) could be detrimental for the economic and social well-being of the society.

We thought it was appropriate to sum up our discussion with our final blog, entitled, “Big Brother Society: Public Policies and Information Technology.� We wanted to emphasize this point: while technology shapes the way we live, we can also determine how technology is used. For example, governments can abuse web-based CCTV cameras and fingerprint readers could reduce privacy rights to what George Orwell calls a “Big Brother Society.� However, we can utilize that very technology for harvesting crucial marketing data or to develop a security system for children. We must start to really conceptualize the enormous amount of power that information technology has, that can shape the political, social, and economic environment in which we live inhabit.

William frequently used Google News to look for IT news. He favors Google News, because Google gives access to world-wide news, which allowed him to grasp a firm understanding of IT development in the world, not just the U.S. He also used mainstream U.S. news sites, such as NY Times Technology, CNN Technology, and technology blog cites, such as ZDNET Asia.

Or preferred tagging from CNET.com for technological news. This website provides diverse and focused news relating to IT. Furthermore, he also used Businessweek.com, Yahoo News and CNN. These sites have a vast diversity of articles relating to the IT field, so it was easy tagging ones that were focused towards our topic.

Mark used the technology pages off of BBC.com and CNN.com. These websites provided great technological news, and both had a strong emphasis on political issues in the IT world. The sites differ greatly in topics, as one is from a European approach and one from a US point of view. Furthermore, with each site you get different opinions and are provided with different stories. This made tagging for our topic interesting and convenient, especially using BBC which is inundated with articles pertaining to IT issues in world politics.

All of the news articles we came across this semester can be retrieved at our delicious account. You can go there by clicking here.

When one asks the question, “What is the difference between liberals and conservatives,� one might get an answer like, “liberals are more accepting, and conservatives are more traditional.� Well, the actual difference between the two groups actually stem from the differing viewpoints on the role of government: liberals advocate heavy government involvement in the society, while conservatives advocate a limited government involvement in the society. Both groups, however, do not deny the importance of a government’s role in building infrastructure, (i.e. roads, schools, currency, etc). Such consensus exists because government’s public policy can provide something that will not be provided by individuals otherwise, maximizing societal welfare. A widely debated upon topic in public policy, accordingly, is the debate of what maximizes societal welfare.

The rise of information technology has created a debate in the field of public policy. In the UK, for example, Traffic officers today began piloting a hand-held fingerprint reader which they believe will “dramatically reduce the time it takes to identify suspects stopped by police.� ( here.) What’s the economic effect? Since police will be able to identify suspects without taking suspect drivers for formal fingerprint identification at police stations, it saves a lot of money. On a broader stroke, this also inhibits – at least discourages – individuals from giving false identification, decreasing their willingness to participate in crimes. From a public policy standpoint, this is befitting in our definition of “the role of government.� Such application of IT has expanded beyond the boundaries of police enforcement. Electronically enhanced healthcare has long been promoted as, “reducing costs, improving quality and efficiency and treating more patients with the same resources� (Click here). This, in fact, is one of the key reasons why governments around the world are heavily investing in IT technology. In fact, European Joint Technology Initiative (JTI) announced that they will conduct research in embedded computing systems, with 3 billion euro expected to be spent on electronics and software from 2007-2013. You can read that article here.

Should investment in information technology be a concern of governments? Perhaps. Some investments are too costly for any individual to provide the infrastructure. The invention of a hand-held fingerprint reader, for example, is a very costly adventure that would cost millions of dollars in research and development. The invention of such tools, based on government expenditures benefit the society at large greatly. Could there be any downside to it? Definitely. First, there is a limited amount of capital that governments can spend. An expenditure in a certain area (i.e. information technology), necessarily takes away expenditure in another area (e.g. education). Second, history proves that excessive government involvement in the society has often led to the destruction of a democratic process. While the application of fingerprint readers or web-based CCTV cameras can save money, it comes at the cost of citizen giving up a right to check the power of the government. The absence of such check destroys government transparency, which many fear would lead to a “big brother� society. In the UK, for example, there is a pervasive fear that the government will implant microchips to its citizens so that people can be tracked. (You can read that article here). Such system would greatly reduce crime, since a suspect automatically becomes a convict. Yet, is that the kind of society we want?

What about the regulation of information technology? Internet has arguably been the greatest invention of the 20th century, having big effects on economy, information, and the society. Very little of the Internet is owned, operated, or even controlled by governmental bodies. According to Robert Kahn, the Internet indirectly receives government support through federally funded academic facilities that provide some network-related services. You can read that article here). Increasingly, however, the Internet communication services is being handled by commercial firms on a profit-making basis. How has this policy held? While that loosened government surveillance of internet, internet has been a platform for terrorist organizations, drug dealers, and child molesters. Moreover, identify thefts has become epidemic.

Why do these offences occur? Quite simply, the cost of violating the law online depends on the severity of punishment and the probability that they will get caught. While the government has legislated strict punishments against online violators, the probability that they will get caught is extremely low. This is the dilemma that public policy must address. At the end of the day, we believe that it is the role of the government is to strike the balance between its need to get involvement in the information technology industry and the citizens’ need to be protected from the government.

The concern is that the internet community may be using the internet to “abuse politicians or make ‘incommensurate demands’...[instead of] encouraging the general public to use the internet to ‘solve problems.’� He claimed that modern politics focused on quality of life, and these changes were especially apparent amongst teenagers who were among the primary users in this new IT age.

While blogs were a positive way for people of all sorts to reach the general public, there were increasing concerns as the new attitude towards politics is becoming that politicians are out to get and take advantage of you. One of the main concerns he noted was that a major IT attitude centered on anti-establishment and libertarianism as people want more power.

Mr. Taylor recently said that in the changing culture, “it's important for people who understand technology, to move from that frame of mind, which is about attacking the establishment into one which is about problem-solving and social enterprise.� He strongly feels that technology should be used to improve the relationship and communication between politicians and voters.

It is very easy to see Mr. Taylor’s point. We agree that the internet is frequently abused. Online “jokes� criticize politicians and can indirectly lead to negative publicity and smear campaigns. However, in a free society it is important to understand that all of this is going to occur. People will always voice there radical opinions, however right or wrong they are. Younger generations will also always be “rebellious.� Free speech grants everyone the right to say what they wish, and in the US this even means allowing racist groups such as the KKK to have a website.

Also, the internet can reach an extremely large group of people at a very rapid rate. This allows ideas to quickly be passed on and spread from one individual to another. There is some inherent risk in this, as it does allow for the risk of radical views and opinions. But again, this falls upon the responsibility and maturity of individuals to know what is right and wrong. Society also plays a large role in this.

The main political issues we see with the internet concern countries that are on the brink of revolution or instable. In such places the internet can allow individuals, radicals or not, to reach out to others. It also allows for the spread of propaganda, which with instability can have horrible effects. This would especially be of concern in the Middle East, where the spread of political ideas can lead to political outbreaks and attacks between various groups. It also allows the spread of negative, racist attitudes, which can hurt an entire ethnicity or culture as whole. This is where responsibility comes into play.

At the same time, it is the responsibility of internet users to not abuse their rights. It is clear that some individuals do take this too far and can stir up unnecessary problems. The web is a way to express opinions and ideas, but people should be responsible and respectful. People may have strong opinions but when high officials and others try and better communicate with the public people cannot abuse this opportunity.

It is easy to see both sides of the argument, and in the end it comes down simply to responsibility. Jokes and negative views will always be expressed, as will positive ones. The main idea is that individuals need to separate fact from fiction and know when not to joke around and take things seriously. With issues such as censorship, and governments and societies adding fuel to the internet debate, it is important that people work together to make the internet a better, safer place that can in the future lead to a complete integration and globalization of all cultures, countries, and societies.

Groups are extremely excited by the changes, however censorship exists. While “searches for apolitical terms turned up results, but searches for subjects taboo to China's Communist leadership, such as "June 4", remained blocked.� The reasons for the ban being lifted on Wikipedia are unclear. Many officials, however, have claimed that China is making new strides to support IT development and changes. China recognizes that it “now has 123 million users, making it the world's second-largest Internet market.�

Activist groups have been arguing that western companies have been “compromising their principles by censoring searches and blog titles in order to do business in China.� However, this issue remains controversial as others argue that small concessions and patience in dealing with China is the right plan, especially considering its large market. The Chinese government also recognizes the prevalence and importance of foreign business and does not want to do anything to curtail that.

We feel that these changes are extremely important. The Asian boom has been gaining international attention from all governments and businesses. While companies may oppose some practices of the Chinese government and its censorship, the country nonetheless remains rapidly growing. It is important that diplomatic relations remain positive as China continues to develop and change.

These changes, however little, are still a step in the right direction. While censorship still is a while away, improvements that allow the public to at least have some say will be great. Democratization and free speech are not instantaneous, but this is a start and its great to see these positive effects occurring in what will be one of the more influential countries in the coming years.

We must remember that the means of social institution that we choose to live under (i.e. democracy and capitalism) is dictated by what the people wants. Essentially, communism in China was derived by the consensus that it was beneficial for the state to dictate the economic and political agendas of the country. In the contemporary era of global integration and technological advancement, state control has been a hard subject to achieve. In this sense, internet and information technology has propelled a powerful movement that can jeopardize the political control of China.

***************Update, CLICK HERE: Less than a week after the ban on Wikipedia was released in China, it was again reported blocked in several parts of China. This is a major setback, and continues to show the complexity and importance of the censorship and free speech issues concerning the internet in China.

Advertisers are aware that most people dislike these ads; furthermore, most people find them annoying and uninformative. Why are they still used? The answer is simple: they are still economical. Although, bothersome and irritating these ads still increase candidates popularity in a manner that is worth the large amounts of money that is spent on them, at least that is what analysts say.

According to market penetration surveys only 10 million out of 110 million households own some sort of DVR, where TIVO is the most popular brand. Currently, marketers regard this segment group as a niche and insignificant in relations to the upcoming elections. However, this new technology has been increasing fear for the near future among marketers.

Surveys(click here) show that three-quarters of advertising leaders believe that the digital video recorder (DVR) ad skipping technology will have a dramatic effect on the landscape of TV advertising. Furthermore, they believe that this might eliminate the traditional 30 spot ads.

Marketers regard product-placement as the next revolution in advertising. TV producers will incorporate ads within the show itself. This will allow marketers a more subtle way of pushing their products to consumers. However, how will political campaigns be advertised if the conventional ads will disappear?

There are many speculations regarding the next generation of political campaigns. Some people believe TV shows and movies will be sponsored by politicians. Others consider this change as the end of political ads on television.

We believe only time will tell what will be the faith of political advertising on television. The only way, to our perception, of political ads remaining on TV is a change in their essence. People are not interested in political bickering or bashing. Moreover, people are interested in clear concise and straightforward messages. If politicians will continue using spin tactic and refrain from dealing with serious issues then people will fast forward their ads. However, if they will change their tactics and send messages that people would like to listen to, there is chance for these ads to remain economical.

As for products placement for political campaigns, we do not think it will happen. If it does, it will hurt Hollywood's credibility in the eyes of the public. The thin line between entertainment and politics should be kept and is beneficial to both sides. The combination of the two will only hurt TV shows and the politicians themselves.

Youtube is a litigation landmine, according to a NY Times columnist. Why? Youtube’s enormous popularity is based on its innovative service of allowing its users to upload, view, and share video files. The precise ingredient that allowed it to secure its popularity (and profitability) is haunting them back, as they face litigations from numerous groups. One of them is The Japan Society for Rights of Authors, Composers and Publishers (JASRAC), who has started by requesting 30,000 copyrighted video from being removed from its website. You can read that article here. Youtube has also settled a deal with three of the four major music companies — Vivendi's Universal Music Group, Sony and Bertelsmann’s jointly owned Sony BMG Music Entertainment, and the Warner Music Group. The entailed, among others, Youtube coughing up $50 million in exchange for legally using the copyrighted materials. You can read that article here. The Google acquisition of Youtube has exacerbated the “landmine� problem, as lawsuits against Youtube is piling up. What’s the dilemma here for Youtube?

• Profit – Youtube derives majority of its revenue from collecting cash for the advertising space it provides on its website. This business is successful precisely because they attract millions (34 million unique visitors a month, according to Nielsen/NetRatings) of internet users. Removing copyrighted materials, at the margin, will drive users away from the site, which will eventually cut down its margin.
• Costs – That being sad, removing the copyrighted materials are also all over the website – thousands of video files get uploaded everyday. Manually screening them should cost Youtube a Fortune. On the other hand, getting hit by hundreds of lawsuits also cost a lot of money.

Such benefits and costs are ones that should be taken into, when Youtube decides to restructure its business. It is, however, much more interesting to look at the societal benefits and costs of sharing copyrighted materials. Here’s an economic analysis: Giving copyrights to the producers of the material (e.g. a music industry) is de facto granting them monopoly power. What do we know about monopoly power?

If you don’t read Economics, just know that the gray area in the graph illustrates the “welfare loss� to the society. So why does law provide copyright? Many believe that the large profit that monopolies derive will lead to innovation. For example, Rod Stewart will not be producing the quality of music he produces if he earns $20,000 per album. In that prospective, Youtube’s video sharing effort hinders upon innovation. Yet, we need to consider the societal benefit from allowing the copyrighted materials to be shared: it will benefit the consumers. For example, an urban teen, who cannot afford a TV, can be inspired to become a lawyer after streaming Law and Order on Youtube. These are what economists like to call “externalities.� In the end, it is impossible to measure the exact ramifications of Youtube’s technology.

On that note, we still need to consider the law. Internet has increasingly been an arena where the rule of law has been ignored by many. This point is illustrated by the number of identity theft industries, which is a clear violation of the law. In the end, Youtube’s illegal practices violate the law, and that threatens the moral fabric of our society. We believe that such is such an important point that should force youtube to abandon its’ illegal business.

Are we advocating that Youtube should shut down? Hardly. Its video sharing technology can be used for a good cause. According to a news article, “prominent and not-so-prominent political campaigns are taking advantage of YouTube’s free video hosting to disseminate messages too expensive or too controversial for broadcast television.� (Click here to read the article). Exposure to a large segment of the population, in effect, is an opportunity for businesses, politicians, and individuals. This "spread of information" effect at a global stage could enhance welfare for many citizens. So before blaming technology, why not look for better ways to utilize it? (By the way, Youtube’s business line is “Broadcast Yourself� – not “share your illegal video here.�)

The gambling industry has also been turned around through the introduction of the internet and its creative entrepreneurs. There are hundreds of online betting sites online allowing web surfers to bet on almost anything.

Although gambling is addictive and has negative social effects such as increasing crime, it is legal in many states. In these states, gambling is highly regulated by the government and most important of all, it is taxed heavily. Therefore, allowing the public via the government to take advantage of the larger profits casinos produce.

What makes online gambling so unique and disturbing, from the government's point of view, is the fact they cannot tax it. Most online gaming sites are located in tax shelters such as the Cayman Islands and they are not regulated. Furthermore, the internet allows users to gamble from anywhere at anytime due to its high accessibility. This gives politicians to have a unique political incentive to stand against the industry.

In 2005 two IPOs of huge gambling giants 888 and PartyGaming portrayed the peak this industry was at. However, the US government was not ready to give up revenues from gambling and allow the continuation of the cash flows out of the United States.

On Sep. 30 the US congress passed a bill ( click here ) that tries to eliminate online gambling of US citizens. The ban limits the transfer of money from US credit card companies to the operators of the websites. Analysts predict this act would effectively bar online-gambling companies from operating legally in the United States, changing their business models and perhaps forcing some companies out of business.

The recent act has caused gambling sites significant losses of revenues and large decreases in the prices of the stocks ( click here ). This stock crash caused industry leaders such as 888 (loss of 26%) and PartyGaming (loss of 58%) billions of dollars in market value. Both online giants stated they will suspend their US service if President Bush signs the new bill. However, they will be looking into changing their collection strategy. In an attempt to recover losses and reorganize their businesses for the battle against the US government, both gambling giants are considering a merger). This merger will allow both companies a better financial structure to combat US legislation and reenter the US market.

Recently the UK announced that it will host an international conference to discuss regulation for online gambling ( click here ). The British wish to seek regulated online gambling through international agreements. This will allow each country to collect the tax and prevent the destruction of the industry. The United States refused to attend this conference.

We believe that gambling should be limited and regulated in the United States and throughout the internet. The move by the US congress to ban online gambling by passing on the enforcement to the credit card companies is a right move. However, we think it is not a smart decision. Instead of finding a way to collect taxes, like the British, the US is declaring a war on online gambling. It is a matter of time until the operators of these websites figure out a new sophisticated way to collect payments.

For example, online gambling companies can simply relocate their main operations to a different country, where online gambling is allowed (i.e. off shoring). In fact, many of the top companies are already on the move of doing this. Empire Online, for example, have said that it had “terminated its US operations, and…planned to develop its non-US operations� (( click here to read the article). Because internet is not “located� in a physical area, it is simply too hard to regulate. This being said, politicians do not make their decisions based on economic analysis – political processes are determined by the amount of political capital that politicians can capture. Given that November elections are around the corner, it would have been detrimental for any politician to take a stance against banning online gambling.

Where do we stand on the issue? The demand for gambling is very inelastic, especially in a rich developed country, like the United States. Online gamblers are not going to quit gambling because U.S. companies move to a different website based on a different location. The government needs to recognize this need and instead of fighting it, they should accompany and limit it with economic methods such as a high tax. They must remember that trying to regulate online gambling simply encouraging offshore business, which only makes it even harder to hinder its operations. And perhaps they need more advisors who can advise them on internet technology.

Just as millions participate in fantasy sports every year, college students in California have created a “Fantasy Congress.� Drawing much of its influence from fantasy sports, participants draft a team of real politicians and actually compete against other teams.

Fantasy sports, especially fantasy football have grown to such a staggering number that the growth of fantasy congress may not be out of the question. “A recent study found that fantasy football costs employers as much as $1.1 billion a week in lost productivity during the National Football League regular season, when nearly 37 million people spent an average of 50 minutes per week at work managing their fantasy teams.

Fantasy Congress has grown to include 6,000 participants from many US States and overseas. The point is to help draw more attention to the political elections and to politics as a whole. This has a huge potential to satisfy the political needs of many. According to a recent poll by AP, “some 35 percent of Americans, or 43 percent of likely voters, go online for election information.� (click here to read the article). The game also sets up to help create more of an interest in politics and elections for all people, especially younger kids.

Fantasy Congress could have huge impact on the political landscape of this country by bringing more attention to politics and make people care more about issues and elections. Just as many people watch or care about a football game just because “this player� is on my fantasy team, now propositions and politicians will become more important to many people. This is extraordinary, when you factor in the fact that the game targets internet users, who tend to be young. This could play an integral role in solving a notorious epidemic called “Political Apathy.� This could drive the younger generation to the polls.

Such interests also creates political transparency. The expansion of this idea will help make more people aware of new issues and what politicians are currently involved in. The fact that it is competitive will make people care more about what is going on and follow political issues more closely. This could, partially, serve as a potent force that could counter the recent decline in government transparency established under the banner of “USA PATRIOT Act.�

However, the main issue is to make sure that the point of the game is not lost. It is to gain awareness and expand interest. If this idea were to grow it is important it does not reach the point where people vote on propositions or politicians based on their “team.� The idea is to make people aware by creating a fun and stimulating environment, and it seems as though this new idea can definitely accomplish what it sets out to do. It is also important that such game could bring dramatic power shift in the American government. Because most of the younger generation leans towards the liberal camp, systematically compelling them to vote, could potentially end the Republican dominance. The problem? While this “enhances� the functioning of a representative democracy, this also affects the welfare of many. Here’s a list:

• Corporate America: Democrats tend to favor unions and higher taxes. That means the cost of operating business will go up.
• Senior Citizens: If younger people vote, the leverage that senior citizens enjoy will marginally decrease accordingly.
• College Students: If college students start voting, their voices will be heard. This could potentially lead to lower tuitions among public universities (like the University of Michigan, where a fine education at the Ross School of Business will cost more than $30,000 a year for out-of-state students).
  Figure – We do not want people to confuse politics with fantasy. After all, politics is a potent tool that can affect the welfare of many.

  With the first pick in the 2006 Fantasy Congress Election, I will select...let’s just hope a scandal doesn’t break out because I need a win this week! Let’s also not hope that gamers will not confuse fantasy with politics.

  ]]> 2006-11-06T00:41:49Z 2006-10-23T16:26:40Z tag:mblog.lib.umich.edu,2006:/~willmoon/2936.9149 2006-10-23T16:26:40Z
  We plan to spend the remainder of the term discussing the social, political, and economic ramifications of technology in the contemporary era. These issues will include facets of the political spectrum, including issues concerning privacy rights, copyright laws, and technology’s...
  wienma web page wienma@umich.edu BIT200 We plan to spend the remainder of the term discussing the social, political, and economic ramifications of technology in the contemporary era. These issues will include facets of the political spectrum, including issues concerning privacy rights, copyright laws, and technology’s role in shaping our “way of living.� Such discussion will include issues which have become headline news across the nation in recent weeks.
  ]]> 2006-10-29T01:57:06Z 2006-10-18T15:41:10Z tag:mblog.lib.umich.edu,2006:/~willmoon/2936.8831 2006-10-18T15:41:10Z
  What do Bill Gates, Mark Cuban, and Professor Moore have in common? Blogging. Clearly one of the fastest growing “fads� in the IT world, it allows people worldwide and of all demographics to update people on their lives, their businesses,...
  wienma web page wienma@umich.edu BIT200 What do Bill Gates, Mark Cuban, and Professor Moore have in common? Blogging. Clearly one of the fastest growing “fads� in the IT world, it allows people worldwide and of all demographics to update people on their lives, their businesses, and their opinions.

  Blogging has become a way to reach out to numerous people on current events, news, and stories—whether it be friends and family regarding school, shareholders regarding company objectives, the general public about new directives, or even just to voice your opinion. As more and more people begin to subscribe and rely on blogs it is becoming more and more important to conveniently be able to search through databases containing various blog entries.

  BlogPulse is one such site which allows you to search and browse the blogging world by keyword, URL, or topic. It allows you to customize searches to meet particular needs, and offers other options to help you customize searches. Blogline Search, Blog Catalog and Feedster all offer similar services. Each site aids in locating blogs of interest using a variety of similar searching techniques.

  Figure – This is What BlogPulse Site Looks Like.

  All of these blog sites have one major setback: the searches are not as extensive as they could be. Each site does not allow you to search by publisher, and limits you in the detail, criteria, and complexity of each search. While all provide great links and options to search by topic, date, and key word, it is very difficult to find a blog written by a particular person, or with multiple different search criteria. Once again, Google dominates in this regard.

  BlogSearch provides the most efficient and effective blog search engine of all. If unable to find anything of interest off of the main site, a simple click on advanced search opens up a whole new organized database. You can search by title, with or without certain words, by date, or author. You can search using a combination of these criterion as well. Searches can even be filtered.

  Google’s service is further enhanced by the "preferences" menu. This enables users to customize search criteria and interface languages, to anything from Arabic to Estonian. The user-friendly site makes blog searching convenient, easy to use, and customizable for everyone.

  Try it yourself! While spending countless minutes searching the competing blog sites for articles on BIT 200, a simple advanced search on Google Blog Search with the words “Bit 200� and written by “Moore� immediately produce results.

  It appears as though once again Google maintains an advantage over its competition. Google’s BlogSearch is efficient, easy to use, and the most comprehensive of all. Have fun Google-Blogging!

  ]]> 2006-10-29T19:31:05Z 2006-10-16T04:47:46Z tag:mblog.lib.umich.edu,2006:/~willmoon/2936.8631 2006-10-16T04:47:46Z
  BLOGGING (n.) = A FORM OF A NERDY ACTIVITY Does the equation above hold? Perhaps – but you are going to have to argue with a lot of people. Blogging was primarily started by the so-called “geeks� (otherwise known as...
  willmoon web page willmoon@umich.edu BIT200 BLOGGING (n.) = A FORM OF A NERDY ACTIVITY

  Does the equation above hold?
  
  Perhaps – but you are going to have to argue with a lot of people. Blogging was primarily started by the so-called “geeks� (otherwise known as online journalists) who wanted to voice their opinion through a channel called internet. It was an effective method of communication because it gave them access to millions of people (i.e. the world) without having to go through the financial burden attached to traditional media. What started out as small scale online journals eventually drew thousands of internet users, and become political powerhouses– literally. Early popular blogging sites included ones by Andrew Sullivan, Ron Guzburder, and Taegan Goddard, among others, who aimed at influencing others with their political ideologies. These popular websites were not only able to influence others, but also figured out ways to collect sizable revenues through online advertising.

  Here’s a trivia question. Who gets involved if something is economically and socially profitable? Bingo! – Corporate America. We have now entered a stage where business giants started to pay attention to blogging. In fact, thirty of the Fortune 500 companies have already started blogging. CNN recently had a special news coverage entitled, “CEO Bloggers Communicate to the Masses,� which features the story of Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Sun Microsystems. Click here to read the article. According to Mr. Schwartz, corporate blogs is,�the single most effective vehicle to communicate to all of our constituencies -- developers, media, analysts and shareholders.� It is an effective means for CEOs to bypassing public relations departments, thereby having a more “personal� relationship with consumers.

  Figure – Jonathan Schwartz, CEO of Suns Microsystems, writes a corporate blog that generates around 50,000 viewers a month. Click here to view his blog

  So what? We have generated a list of Goodies that blogs can do:

  • Cure for the Agency Problem – One fundamental problem that exists in any publicly traded company is something known as the agency problem. Such problem arises when the interest of management and interest of owners (i.e. shareholders) do not align. CEOs may try to maximize the welfare of themselves (e.g. using corporate jets for personal travel), which may not necessarily serve the interest of shareholders. Current HP scandals and the prevalence of CEO resignations is largely a symptom of the underlying disease called the agency problem. What can corporate blogs do to alleviate this problem? Blogs provide a mechanism for shareholders to communicate with CEOs. This means that CEOs are under closer scrutiny of shareholders and the public. Essentially, CEOs will take the heat if they underperformed. That should provide an incentive to not screw up.
  • Cure for the CEO disease – the interactive nature of blogs frees CEOs from isolation from subordinates and shareholders. The feedback, theoretically, should allow CEOs to be aware of pressing issues.
  • Increase Corporate Transparency – CEO’s can have a more personal relationship with its constituency. Many potential consumers, who do not necessarily find it entertaining to analyze 10-k’s and other financial statements, now have access to a source that talk about corporations. This can help build goodwill and enhance corporate image to the world.

  There are, of course, downsides:

  • Agency Problem – while blogs provide another means for CEO scrutiny, it also squanders the time of management. In fact, according to CNN, “Sun's annual revenue has declined in four of the past five years, and shares have plummeted from a high of about $64 in September of 2000 to around $5 this year.â€?
  • Miscommunication – most CEOs do not have an advanced degree in English. In fact, many of them are horrible writers. They inherently bear the risk of ruining the goodwill of the company, which can spillover to negative publicity.
  • Insider Information Leak – It is in the nature of Journals that people talk about things they don’t necessarily talk about in public. Crucial information leak for corporations can cost corporations millions of dollars. For example, wouldn’t Yahoo want to know about what the CEO of Google has to say about its future growth strategies?

  We believe that it is not in the interest of most corporations to allow their CEOs to spend hours in writing corporate journals. It bears too much risk of ruining company image relative to the potential benefits it can generate. This is, of course, not a per se recommendation. Some CEOs, with the help of eloquent writing and clever strategies, can utilize blogs to accomplish many different objectives. However, we recommend an alternate blogging strategy for most corporations – corporations simply using blog sites to promote their goods and services, just in a more informal way. Such approach to blogging will save CEOs time, personalize the corporate image, and still allow corporations to capitalize on the benefits associated with new method of communications.

  ]]> 2006-10-29T19:30:44Z 2006-10-08T23:45:53Z tag:mblog.lib.umich.edu,2006:/~willmoon/2936.8684 2006-10-08T23:45:53Z
  As the world becomes more globalized and accessible to more people, language and communication barriers tend to stick out as a hindrance to further integration. Such barrier was fueled by America’s reliance on English as the “global� language, which failed...
  willmoon web page willmoon@umich.edu BIT200 As the world becomes more globalized and accessible to more people, language and communication barriers tend to stick out as a hindrance to further integration. Such barrier was fueled by America’s reliance on English as the “global� language, which failed to notice the importance of learning different languages. What’s the result? When Bush sends troops to Iraq, he needs to equip them with people who are fluent in Arabic and English. The problem? There aren’t that many Arabic interpreters who would serve the job. Ramifications? Law of Supply and Demand tells us that they are expensive. Solution? The United States Joint Forces Command teamed up with IBM to deliver MASTOR - Multilingual Automatic Speech-to-Speech Translator. Click on the following links to read further about this new technology
  • Arstechnica
  • CNN News
  • United Press International

  Essentially, this new laptop software, which has already been deployed to Iraq for testing, allows for easy communication between people of different tongues. Essentially, Soldiers will carry around laptops. The speaker will speak into the laptop, which will than translate and say aloud what is uttered by the speaker. The laptop will also translate the other party’s response into the holder’s language to allow for easy communication. This is all done by the use of ViaVoice technology, which recognizes words. In the event of an unclear response, choices will appear to help make the translation more clear and avoid confusion.

  Figure – The system has a vocabulary of 50,000 English words and 100,000 Arabic words.

  Lets get down to what this technology really means to the world:

  • Security Concerns – You are looking at an example of a corporate-state relationship, where the state (i.e. U.S. army) allies with a corporation (i.e. IBM) to deliver security. While the program may not be completely fluent, it will serve as a non-bias interpreter. This eliminates trouble that can be derived from using native speakers, who may have an interest against the United States. This allows for efficient operations and missions via avoiding miscommunications.
  • Cost-Efficiency – Arabic linguists are rare, and it’s even rarer to find ones that are good at what they do. If the age-tested Law of Supply and Demand holds, we should note that utilizing these scare resources will be a financial burden upon the United States.
  • Technology Spillover – MASTOR could be a great asset to the military. But it could be used for other activities as well. Let’s enter in our good old buddy, Corporate America. MASTOR can allow for a more personal “touchâ€? to meetings. It can allow for meetings to take place with people speaking their own native languages but allowing for everyone to understand without going through a translator. This will result in a more personal and friendly setting, and easily allow for dialogue to take place between different business parties. We do acknowledge that people who make living off of translating will be economically hurt by the rise of this technology. Yet, it will be a tremendous cost-reducing phenomenon for most businesses.

  Mascot could further reduce cultural and language barriers, and unite people in a new way. It can take away the need for translators, allowing for a more intimate and personal discussion to take place. It can also help avoid miscommunication problems that can regularly occur in everyday life. Imagine that one day when you might be able to communicate with those servers at Pancharos! In essence, it has a potential to fundamentally alter the rate of global integration, where language has historically served as a major barrier.

  Again, never underestimate the power of Information Technlogy!

  ]]> 2006-10-15T21:02:20Z 2006-10-08T16:44:51Z tag:mblog.lib.umich.edu,2006:/~willmoon/2936.8210 2006-10-08T16:44:51Z
  Google is by far the most popular search engine available today on the net. Nevertheless, the competition does exist and has been increasing in the past few months. Microsoft recently launched its new search engine called Live Search. Furthermore,...
  orshotan web page orshotan@umich.edu BIT200 Google is by far the most popular search engine available today on the net. Nevertheless, the competition does exist and has been increasing in the past few months. Microsoft recently launched its new search engine called Live Search. Furthermore, competition from Yahoo and Ask.com has also heated up. Some of Google's competitors claim to produce better results than the leading giant from California. And frankly, the definition of “better� depends on the needs of different people. So instead of the “one-size-fits-all� attitudes that other search engines advocate, we came across a great tool that gives you the option of “not choosing,� which still allows you to extract the fruits of everything that is out there.
  
  

  Dogpile a new website that offers a great search tool for those who want the best results from the leading search engines. With its “Metasearch Technology,� Dogpile combines the best results from the 7 leading engines to supply more complete results on your query. That means that when you search for a word on Dogpile, it will automatically analyze that word for you so that you will only get the best aggregate results from search engines like Google, Yahoo, and MSN.

  What does this mean to you? Well, have you ever had a huge research project that required you to search through almost every search engine sites out there? The proliferation of new search engines definitely didn’t help you, because there were a lot of search engines to browse through. And why did you do it? Because it is very much true that the exact same word you search on Google retrieves different sources than that of Yahoo or Altavista. So in the end, you end up with a bundle of useful information, but you’ve squandered 10 hours doing it. Look no further than Dogpile to solve that problem.

  Dogpile only offers the best – what’s most clicked out there by internet users like you – in its search results page. For example, when you search “University of Michigan� on Google, Google will spit out 73 million+ websites for you to surf through. On Dogpile, you only get 93 of the most clicked websites related to the University of Michigan. That may be good for time-savers, but what if you want more than 93 sources?

  DogPile allows you to customize your search experience. This is great leap forward from the “one-size-fits-all� search experience, in that users are allowed to:

  • Customize the level of filter
  • Reorder search engines
  • Retrieve links to more results from each search engine.

  What does this mean for you? If you like doing a surface level search on a topic, you may want to adjust your filter to “high� so that you will only get the most related sources that you need. But if you’re a professor who may want to know everything about a given topic before you write that thesis, you may want to turn your filter down so you will collect most of everything that’s out there.

  ]]>