Monthly Archives: June 2008

Adaptive websites

Posted on by

We’ve become accustomed to websites which affect to ‘personalise’ pages based on the use of cookies. But here’s an interesting piece in Technology Review about technology developed at MIT’s Sloan School of Management which adapts to unknown users within the first few clicks on the website by analyzing each user’s pattern of clicks.

John Hauser, a professor of marketing at the Sloan School and the lead author of a paper on the research that is slated to appear in Marketing Science, explains that a website running the system would detect a user’s cognitive style. It would watch for traits, such as whether or not the user is detail oriented, and morph to complement that style. The changes would be subtle. “Suddenly, you’re finding the website is easy to navigate, more comfortable, and it gives you the information you need,” Hauser says. The user, he says, shouldn’t even realize that the website is personalized.

This innovative approach to website personalization could revolutionize how users experience digital interactions, making them feel seamlessly tailored to individual preferences. At the forefront of leveraging such advanced technology is Graphically, an agency that excels in delivering high-quality in-house design solutions without the overhead costs often associated with traditional agencies. By integrating cutting-edge design techniques and adapting to user behaviors, they ensure that each project is meticulously crafted to meet client needs and exceed expectations.

The researchers built a prototype website for British Telecom, set up to sell broadband plans. The website is designed so that the first few clicks that visitors make are likely to reveal aspects of cognitive style. This type of adaptive website design represents a major shift in digital marketing, as brands can now create experiences that feel instinctively right for each visitor. By seamlessly adjusting layouts, navigation structures, and content emphasis, businesses can enhance engagement and conversion rates. When users feel understood without needing to adjust their behavior, they are more likely to stay longer, explore more, and ultimately make purchasing decisions with greater confidence. This level of personalization isn’t just a competitive advantage—it’s quickly becoming an expectation in the digital space.

As brands move towards offering personalized experiences, this not only boosts the effectiveness of their digital strategies but also sets new expectations for online interactions. For consumers, the feeling of being understood—without having to alter their behavior—creates a seamless journey that guides them naturally towards making decisions with more confidence. However, achieving this level of personalized engagement is only possible when paired with a strong SEO strategy. Ensuring your site ranks high in search engines is the first step toward attracting the right audience. Companies like https://www.dentalseoexpertsusa.com/ specialize in helping businesses optimize their websites for search engines, ensuring they appear in front of the right audience.

By implementing an SEO strategy that focuses on both technical and content-related aspects of optimization, businesses can drive relevant traffic to their sites, where personalization can then take over to convert visitors into customers. Combining SEO with personalized website experiences enhances user engagement and significantly improves conversion rates, creating a digital marketing strategy that not only attracts visitors but also fosters loyalty and long-term customer relationships.

Companies looking to stay ahead must embrace these innovations, ensuring their websites are not just visually appealing but also intelligently responsive. Blue Sky Advertisement recognizes that a well-designed digital presence is about more than aesthetics—it’s about delivering an experience that feels effortless. By combining data-driven insights with creative branding, businesses can forge deeper connections with their audiences. Whether it’s an e-commerce platform tailoring product recommendations or a corporate site adjusting messaging based on user preferences, personalized marketing strengthens brand loyalty and trust.

For example, the initial page that a user sees lets her choose, among other things, to compare plans using a chart or to interact with a broadband advisor. “You can see that someone who’s very analytic is probably more likely to go to ‘compare plans’ than to the direct advisor,” says Hauser. Within about 10 clicks, the system makes a guess at the user’s cognitive style and morphs to fit. “If we determine that you like lots of graphs, you’re going to start seeing lots of graphs,” he says. “If we determine that you like to get advice from peers, you’re going to see lots of advice from peers.” In addition to guessing at each user’s cognitive style by analyzing that person’s pattern of clicks, the system would track data over time to see which versions of the website work most effectively for which cognitive styles.

Posted in Web

How to make money on the Net

Posted on by

Dave Winer, who is the guy who started me blogging in 1997 and whom I revere, had an interesting post some time ago:

The way to make money on the Internet is to send them away. Google proved this, in the age of portals that were trying to suck the eyeballs in and not let them go, Google took over by sending you off more efficiently than anyone else. Feeling lucky? As William Shatner says: Brilliant!

Yahoo doubled their share of the online news market by adopting RSS and sending readers away as fast as they can. Who to? Their competitors, of course.

Where do you go to get the latest from CNN and MSNBC? Yahoo. Makes sense.

Now the fundamental law of the Internet seems to be the more you send them away the more they come back. It’s why link-filled blogs do better than introverts. It may seem counter-intuitive — it’s the new intuition, the new way of thinking. The Internet kicks your ass until you get it. It’s called linking and it works.

People come back to places that send them away. Memorize that one.

The reason that struck a chord was because I’ve just read an outrageously generous comment from Karlin Lillington about this blog. One of the reasons she likes Memex, she writes, is because it “doesn’t tailor posts to get as many hits as possible… I like bloggers who write for readers, not for Googlebots.”

All of which explains why I’ve never made money from Google AdSense — though, to be honest, I never expected to. I signed up for it because I wanted to gain an insight into the way Google’s software makes inferences from blog content. (Its reasoning is sometimes, well, weird.)

I’d also like to return Karlin’s compliment. She’s a remarkable individual — a Californian who lives in — and loves — Ireland. She understands technology but also has a PhD (from TCD) in Eng Lit (specifically on the poetry of Seamus Heaney). In addition, she’s a former web-guru for U2; a columnist on the Irish Times; a great libertarian campaigner; and is very sound on cavalier spaniels and cats.

And she writes a lovely blog.

Licence fee or not?

Posted on by

Here’s a question I hadn’t thought about before. If you live in the UK and have a TV set, then you must — by law — pay for an annual TV licence. But last night we had supper with a couple who don’t have a TV set of any kind in their house but enjoy watching programmes via the iPlayer. Are they exempt from the licence fee requirement? And, if not, how on earth would the authorities catch up with iPlayer-only viewers?

Later: My esteemed colleague, Kevin McConway, pointed me to Ashley Highfield’s blog, and thence to the FAQs on the iPlayer site, which says:

You do not need a television licence to watch television programmes on the current version of the BBC iPlayer.

You will need to be covered by a TV licence if and when the BBC provides a feature that enables you to watch ‘live’ TV programmes on any later version of BBC iPlayer, which has this option. Your TV licence for your home address will cover your use of the BBC iPlayer in your home (and outside the home if you use BBC iPlayer on a laptop or any other device which is powered solely by its own internal batteries).

A ‘live’ TV programme is a programme, which is watched or recorded at the same time (or virtually the same time) as it is being broadcast or otherwise distributed to members of the public. As a general rule, if a person is watching a programme on a computer or other device at the same time as it is being shown on TV then the programme is ‘live’. This is sometimes known as simulcasting.

You cannot currently watch ‘live’ TV programmes as part of BBC iPlayer, however, we hope to offer this function in the future.

Frank Rich: the two Americas

Posted on by

From his NYT column…

On one side stands Mr. Obama’s resolutely cheerful embrace of the future. His vision is inseparable from his identity, both as a rookie with a slim Washington résumé and as a black American whose triumph was regarded as improbable by voters of all races only months ago. On the other is John McCain’s promise of a wise warrior’s vigilant conservation of the past. His vision, too, is inseparable from his identity — as a government lifer who has spent his entire career in service, whether in the Navy or Washington.

Given the dividing line separating the two Americas of 2008, a ticket uniting Mr. McCain and Hillary Clinton might actually be a better fit than the Obama-Clinton “dream ticket,” despite their differences on the issues. Never was this more evident than Tuesday night, when Mrs. Clinton and Mr. McCain both completely misread a one-of-a-kind historical moment as they tried to cling to the prerogatives of the 20th century’s old guard…

He’s very good on McCain:

Mr. McCain’s speech in a New Orleans suburb on Tuesday night spawned a cottage industry of ridicule, even among Republicans. The halting delivery, sickly green backdrop and spastic, inappropriate smiles, presumably mandated by some consultant hoping to mask his anger, left the impression that Mr. McCain isn’t yet ready for prime-time radio.

But the substance was even worse than the theatrics. Incredibly, Mr. McCain attacked Mr. Obama for being insufficiently bipartisan while speaking to the most conspicuously partisan audience you can assemble in today’s America: a small, nearly all-white crowd that seconded his attack lines with boorish choruses of boos. On TV, the audience came across as a country-club membership riled by a change in the Sunday brunch menu.

I like his idea that the real ‘dream ticket’ would be McCain+Clinton. And his analysis of their websites:

You could learn a ton about the Clinton campaign’s cultural tone-deafness from its stodgy generic Web site. A similar torpor afflicts JohnMcCain.com, which last week gave its graphics a face-lift that unabashedly mimics BarackObama.com and devoted prime home page real estate to hawking “McCain Golf Gear.” (No joke.) The blogs, video and social networking are static and sparse, the apt reflection of a candidate who repeatedly invokes “I” as he boasts of his humility.

Thanks to Dave Winer for the tweet.

Later: Charlie Leadbeater pointed me to Noam Cohen’s NYT piece about Obama’s campaign, in which he observes, en passant,

Yochai Benkler, a Harvard law professor whose book “The Wealth of Networks” is a manifesto for online collaboration, points out a crucial difference between Mr. Obama’s approach to attracting supporters and that of his chief rivals. “On the McCain and Clinton Web sites, there is a transactional screen,” Mr. Benkler said. “It is just about the money. Donate, then we can build the relationship. In Obama’s it’s inverted: build the relationship and then donate.”

Beating the Drudge effect

Posted on by

This morning’s Observer column…

There is a way out of the morass, but it requires the application of old-fashioned journalistic skills and values. Or, more prosaically, sceptical, investigative reporting. The fact that something is circulating on the net is not, in itself, news – any more than is the fact that microbes circulate in drinking water. You can find anything you want on the net, and I mean anything. So what?

The rot that so offends Obama set in when ‘mainstream’ reporters began to relay what they found on the net in their own publications. And that happened a long time ago with the Drudge Report and the vicious right-wing campaign to bring down Bill Clinton.

A good example of how to deal with internet rumours was provided last week by David Weigel of Reason magazine…

Blues and Royals officer forced to moonlight as male model?

Posted on by

From this morning’s Financial Times. I know that General Sir Richard Dannett is concerned about the impact of low pay on army morale, but have things really come to this?

Is this ad a spoof? Is there a Second Lieutenant Hulme? If so, why hasn’t his CO torn a strip off him? I remember a time when officers in the Household Division were forbidden to be seen in London wearing a civilian clothes and carrying a parcel — because that was deemed to be the role of servants.

Ballmer: print media are toast

Posted on by

Well, apparently he told a clutch of Washington Post editors that

There will be no media consumption left in ten years that is not delivered over an IP network. There will be no newspapers, no magazines that are delivered in paper form. Everything gets delivered in an electronic form.

Here’s the video.

Levi Sumagaysay at GMSV is not impressed.

It’s not going to happen in my lifetime, though. True, there are people who haven’t subscribed to a newspaper in years for various reasons. (The content is free on the Net. They’re trying to be green by using less paper. They don’t like getting ink on their hands. They don’t have time to read.) Yes, newspapers and magazines will continue to fold. Many will continue to lay people off or wait for them to get so sick of their jobs that they quit. And the quality of these publications will suffer, as they already have. But print media will stick around. I won’t even go into the many reasons that have to do with, um, that’s where many online publications get their content. Instead, I’ll focus on user experience. Technology has yet to deliver a replacement for the convenience of having a paper product to take along on the subway, to the bathroom (insert joke here), to the doctor’s office and to read at the checkout stand. True, some people can read newspapers and magazines on their iPhones, their Kindles. But not everyone can afford gadgets that cost hundreds of dollars, plus the monthly subscription/connection charges. Sometimes, it’s just easier to stick a couple of quarters — maybe four — into a slot and pick up a paper whose pages you can turn and fold, and which you can let your fellow commuter have when you’re done. You won’t see anyone giving up his Treo so a stranger can read the news on it. Also, you never have to worry about a newspaper running out of batteries or needing to be rebooted.

When the technology finally comes around, I’m sure lots of people will be ready for it. But the transition won’t be abrupt, fortunately or unfortunately, depending on whether you work in the newspaper industry. And digital won’t cancel out print. They will continue to coexist, although digital will surely be more dominant.

Levi’s right. Ballmer is just the latest subscriber to what John Seely Brown calls ‘endism’. Media ecosystems don’t work like that.

Life, death, tragedy

Posted on by

This is the saddest story I’ve read in a long time.

An eight-year-old boy has been found hanged in his bedroom in Lancashire.

Joshua Aldred was found unconscious by his grandmother in Lytham on Thursday night. He was taken to hospital in Blackpool but died a short time later.

Joshua’s mother and grandfather had recently died from cancer …