iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Zite CEO: The Web Is Outgrowing Search

First Posted: 06/08/11 02:39 PM ET Updated: 08/08/11 06:12 AM ET

Zite Ceo

The Internet is outgrowing search engines.

So says Mark Johnson, CEO of Zite, an iPad app that labels itself a “personalized magazine” delivering news stories tailored to each users’ interests, reading habits, and preferences.

As the amount of information online continues to expand at its breathtaking pace -- there are over 140 million tweets posted to Twitter each day, and over 48 hours of video uploaded to YouTube a minute -- people will need new tools to help them wade through the deluge of data, he says.

“The web is getting too big for search,” Johnson told The Huffington Post. “It’s going to be harder and harder to find information because there’s so much out there.”

He suggests personalization may be the solution to this information overload online. Though content that is customized for a particular individuals’ preferences can be chosen and presented in a variety of ways, in Zite’s case, the stories that appear on its news reader are based on signals pulled from social networking sites like Twitter, as well as Google Reader and browsing behavior. Zite “learns what you like and gets smarter as you use it,” the app’s description reads.

Numerous other websites, apps and companies are experimenting with personalization in an attempt to encourage users to browse more, buy more, save time, and read better results. Netflix and Amazon, for example, tailor their movie and product suggestions to their customers’ likes dislikes and previous purchases. The same Google search performed by two different users could turn up entirely different results, as the search giant tweaks its suggestions on each individual’s behavior. And News.me, Flipboard, and Trove are also harnessing artificial intelligence to deliver news personalized to different people’s preferences.

In determining what stories appear in users’ readers, Zite does not yet rely on information from Facebook, something Johnson attributes to the nature of what people share on the social networking service.

“It turns out Facebook is a noisy feed compared to Twitter and Delicious,” said Johnson. “People share different stuff on Facebook than they do elsewhere -- it’s more funny videos and less high-quality content.”

Critics argue that personalization, especially when it comes to news stories, can be detrimental, narrowing people’s viewpoints and reinforcing established perspectives. In his book The Filter Bubble, Eli Pariser argues that editing via algorithms “moves us very quickly toward a world in which the Internet is showing us what it thinks we want to see, but not necessarily what we need to see.”

Johnson acknowledges these concerns, noting he sees it as his “duty” to “give people a broad perspective of the world,” though he counters that teaching computers to have a sense of “civic responsibility,” as Pariser has advocated, presents its own host of problems.

“It’s unclear what a fair, balanced view is,” said Johnson. “Is it fair to say, if you type in ‘evolution’ then we have to show something about creationism? I think that’s something that people who talk about social consciousness forget…. It’s not clear that that has a lot of value to the user … It’s a really complicated question.”

Personalization can also require sacrificing privacy: customization works best when users are willing to hand over data about what they click, how long they spend reading it, what sites they follow, and more. Yet legislators are increasingly concerned about the ways companies might use this information and are considering new laws that might limit what data firms can collect, and how long they can keep it.

Johnson says he is confident users will be comfortable allowing apps to track them as long as companies prove giving up some privacy delivers better, more helpful services.

“What we’ve seen from product after product is that people are willing to share more and more information if they see that they’re getting value out of it. The problem with personalization so far is that people don’t see the value of it,” Johnson said.

What do you think about personalization? Does it concern you -- or do you find it helpful? Weigh in below.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST TECH

 
 
  • Comments
  • 55
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
07:19 AM on 06/26/2011
I agree with Mark Johnson - The web seems to be going in a direction where you view it in a bubble, be that Facebook or twitter. Zite for me is opening up the news of the world, and not just topics I am interested in. I have found more varied and wonderful articles using this brilliant app than I believe I would have just using a search engine - http://macstarter.com/2011/03/15/ipad-app-review-zite/
11:26 AM on 06/09/2011
SO FAR, ZITE has proven - TO ME - to be the best "personalization' engine around the web.. Johnson's view of the 'users' of the net may be a bit myopic if he truly believes 'The problem with personalization so far is that people don’t see the value of it"... Quite conversely, people are BEGGING for an engine that can do personalization well enough to be adopted.

Fortunately or not, people make split-second decisions everyday; either by design, by mistake, by coercion or by instinct, what, where or how they ingest data. Tech, and it's value, can still be measured (and should be) by how well it's used to 'turn data into information' that's usable by humans every day. It's becoming more and more necessary all the time because the raw body of data is so big it's almost un-usable.

The thing that could ruin it all for data consumers and companies trying to shape that data for various reasons, is sheer greed.. Carriers, large content providers, tech vendors etc. could monetize the data and use of it to the point that NOBODY will use it because it's just too expensive... That's when big chunks of 'usable knowledge' falls apart.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
larrykat
Let's make a toast to future ghosts.
10:56 AM on 06/09/2011
It will never be getting "harder and harder to find information" - it will just be harder to find ALL of the information... just the same as it is now.
11:12 PM on 06/08/2011
The Web is not too "big" for search. Web crawlers scale very well with size. The problem is that the Web has become too dynamic and context-sensitive for search.

The Web is no longer a mesh of interlinked static HTML documents. The Web has become a full-blown application platform on which pages are dynamically generated by scripts which consider user accounts, continuously updated databases, and other kinds of state.

The text and links which appear at a URL depend on who is accessing it, when they are accessing it, and how they are accessing it. Many modern Ajax-type Web applications operate almost exclusively from a single URL and react to user inputs or data events without loading or reloading a page. The semantic concept of "links" has been broken. Increasingly, the things we click on aren't really links to pages, they're buttons which trigger events in an application.

Successfully indexing the Web has become less like a traditional crawler and more like the tools which developers use to automate the testing GUI applications by simulating a user clicking buttons, entering text, and variously exercising all the possible ways to use the application.

The crawler has to know usernames and passwords in order to index account-oriented Web applications. That's why all of these "personalization" services ask for your account info on various social networks. Their crawler has to be logged in as you when it indexes these kinds of Web applications which present totally different information to different users.

The Web used to be a single public database. Now it's a context-sensitive dynamically-generated view into various private databases. The data is no longer on the Web. It can't be indexed by crawling the Web. The Web is now a repository of code rather than data, applications rather than content.
06:29 PM on 06/08/2011
The concerns of critics that personalization technology can narrow people's viewpoints are valid and merit serious consideration. However, those same concerns apply to other ways we discover information as well -- through social groups, churches and synagogues, and professional affiliations -- which also fundamentally shape and narrow our viewpoints. It's important to distinguish between the larger public policy issue that citizens should be educated consumers of information, and personalization technology itself which simply helps businesses and consumers filter out less relevant content.

We don't need an algorithm to tell us what is true or right, nor should we blame those algorithms when they fail to do so.
05:32 PM on 06/08/2011
The problem is that most attempts, and there have been many, are Personalization Lite. Show me a tool that does it well and I'll use it. The Netflix Prize and Watson show how hard this sort of task is to do well. A couple months' coding with tags and linking won't get us there. Personalization has been promised for almost the entire history of the consumer internet, and what's currently available is still lame -- and it most certainly isn't interactive.
photo
SansArc
My bio is not empty anymore.
05:30 PM on 06/08/2011
People need something to help them see more diversity. Yet they search for things that validate what they already believe. Search can't keep up with information. Filtering helps to hide info you are not interested in. Not saying that people don't want to learn or seek new things. It's that search has created a culture where people do not want to take the time to search. Filtering is the result of this. But there is an underlying moral issue here. In that it helps people create their own walled gardens. But it came when people were being hammered with waves of too much information. I don't think one can expect it to be fixed in a short period of time. People are still fixated on their own world views. It will be a painful evolutionary process for our information system.

But you also have to consider the fact that our media works in the same manner. Politicians for that matter. In that they cater to what their audiences want. You dislike democrats? Tune in to Fox News. Your tired of media misinformation? Go to Media Matters. There are many areas in our world where personalization occurs. It's just that the internet will be the holy grail for it. It will achieve what marketers have been wanting to get for years. And it may come at a cost not yet seen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wmholt
You can't not know. You can't not care.
04:42 PM on 06/08/2011
Search is getting better and better in my opinion. If I use the exact phrase for a search term, what I was looking for comes in the top results.

However, If you don't know what you are searching for, well that's different, and perhaps your content should be delivered to you in a personalized service like the article says.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
05:20 PM on 06/08/2011
I think that is mostly true. But I've noticed a disturbing trend where far right propaganda ends up dominating a few subjects. Do a search on various gun control issues and virtually all you see in the first couple of pages are NRA approved content.
07:47 PM on 06/08/2011
Search most certainly is getting better and better. My assertion is mainly that search works best when you know what you're looking for: if you're just looking for an interesting stream of articles about a topic or to get a broader set of pages about a topic, there's really not a search query that you can type in that will get you that. That's the gap that Zite hopes to fill.
04:36 PM on 06/08/2011
Hi there, this is Dianne from Taptu, another social news reader. We definitely believe there is a middle ground between being *too* personalized and too random. We at Taptu don't think search will go away. When you're reading a newspaper, sometimes something catches your eye that you might not have specifically looked for, but enjoyed reading anyway. That's what we call serendipity--finding something you liked that you didn't even know you were looking for.

At Taptu we try to make it easy to have that high degree of personalization that helps cut down on information overload, but also that serendipity. We do this by letting you deeply customize the app, down to the sources you know you love, and by letting you search for streams by topic and giving you results that you might not have specifically known were out there. We also mix up our own curated streams, meaning you might find a story / article you weren't specifically after. Finding something that you weren't specifically looking for, but end up really enjoying--it's a great feeling--and that's why we're trying to strike the balance between personalizing news and serendipity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
05:21 PM on 06/08/2011
Hi there Dianne. So, and I'm not sure I'm interpreting you correctly but it sounds like Taptu is really the ultimate answer to all my search needs? ;)
05:42 PM on 06/08/2011
Well, we're "striving" toward that! :) The personalization/serendipity conundrum is definitely not an easy problem to solve. We do hope people will give our app a try and let us know if we're getting there.
07:50 PM on 06/08/2011
I certainly don't think that search will go away. There are plenty of situations where search is appropriate: when there's a needle in the haystack that I need to find and that I know is there. But, what if there's something in the haystack that I kinda-sorta think looks like a needle and that I know that there are lots of them? It's that latter case where search is neither good nor tuned for.

It sounds to me like Taptu and Zite have a very similar philosophy about a middle ground between random and echo-chamber.

Dianne, you should drop me a line at Zite. I'll bet it wouldn't be hard to figure out my e-mail address ;)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
abuckley23
Published author. Visit me at Planet Kibi!
04:33 PM on 06/08/2011
Sooner or later the internet will become self aware and create a body for itself to live in. Then it'll create a social media site to link all humans together before eventually killing and eating them. Beware of Zuckerberg...
photo
durant
Editor & publisher of Europeforvisitors.com
04:32 PM on 06/08/2011
There's a lot more to search than news,entertainment, and personal likes or dislikes. If I'm planning a trip to Elbonia or researching Earlobe Degeneration Disease, a site that serves up results based on my "likes and previous purchases" (or that tweaks its results based on Twitter popularity) won't be very helpful.

A better solution to the problem of search-engine overload might be to have radio buttons that let untrained searchers indicate whether they're looking for articles, product reviews, photos, maps, or whatever. Searchers wouldn't need to leave the main search page; they'd just have the option of pre-filtering or pre-skewing their results in a simple, non-technical way.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
05:22 PM on 06/08/2011
Great point. I thought XML and the "semantic web" were actually supposed to solve all this a long time ago. So we could do much more intelligent focused searches.
04:29 PM on 06/08/2011
Machine learning apps like Zite do the opposite of contributing to readers having narrower views.

They present users with views and content that they didn't know about. They are about the "discover what you've been missing". Arguably, they expand your knowledge via this process. Search is great and will continue improving, but search does not fulfill all of our information needs. If we don't know what to search for, or if we're already narrow-minded, how will search help us? This is a good question and I'd love to hear your answers.

I also believe we should welcome technologies that are trying to improve personalization. Machines should be able to learn to understand your interests and your intentions (personalization). This is a pre-requisite for the design of intelligent natural language interfaces, assistive technologies for the sick and elderly (we have a massively aging population), safe self-driving cars (in the USA alone about 40,000 people die each year in car accidents), etc. Personalization is essential in all these domains because each human is different, has different needs, evolves with time, etc.

I do agree that we should all get exposed to a diverse field of topics and many opinions. But, I believe critical thinking begins with how we teach our children at home and in schools. It would be nice to see apps and established companies, like Google, investing more in schools and education (e.g. sponsor primary school debate clubs).
photo
dhinds
A Collection of Quotable Gems
04:19 PM on 06/08/2011
While Zite focuses (and is betting on) a way to commercialize (and maintain them locked into) the public's casual interests, Tim Berners-Lee (the author of the technology underlying the World Wide Web (which added color, graphics, sound and movement to the Internet - the elements that made it popular and drove it's growth), and the w3c.org are adding MEANING to it via the Semantic Web Project http://www.w3.org/standards/semanticweb/

This will turn the Web's content into a Data Base automatically and obviously, maintain the ability of search engines to stay on top of the Web's growth.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gfs5541
04:06 PM on 06/08/2011
I like Zite. It's almost like Flipbook, but the app doesn't have hooks into Facebook. Moreover, Zite doesn't always protect you from opposing viewpoints, thus the content you select does result in different takes on a particular subject. Finally, you can setup a publication according to your tastes.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
05:25 PM on 06/08/2011
I tried Flipbook. Didn't get it. And I really don't see why everyone emphasizes Facebook integration (Bing promoters always work that in) as the ultimate answer. I have Facebook accounts but I don't put my entire life into them and I especially don't want my searches pre-screened to stuff I've already looked at.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TWeissMA
http://www.disabilitymessage.com
04:01 PM on 06/08/2011
There must be some kind of balance achieved, in my opinion. Yes, there is a need for, 'areas,' of interest where people can search in just those areas. However - there is also a need for a more generalized search where people can find things across a broad spectrum.

Attempts to appeal to both of these desires will find whomever tackles it fumbling about for a period of time I imagine. It could take a few years or so before anything coherent emerges. Should be an interesting ride, to say the least.