Slashdot Mirror
Information Obesity
Roland Piquepaille writes "How many phone calls, emails, voicemails, memos or stories do you have to go through every day? Probably more than last year. And probably too much. This article from the Sydney Morning Herald looks at this problem of information overload and how to deal with it. Here is a quick and not well-known fact: Website content management author Gerry McGovern says that something like 70 per cent of most websites goes unread. Despite that, when putting content on the web, "rarely do we ask the question: is anybody interested in reading that?" Good point. Check this column for a summary if you don't have time -- and who has? -- to read the original article."
That's exactly the point I came on here to make. It is impossible for the private Webmaster (and probably commercial Webmasters) to know what information might be useful.
I have an eclectic mix of information on my personal Web site. I doubt very many people would be interested in everything I post, but my Web site offers information found nowhere else on the Web that I know is of interest to several people. Several people have expressed interest and appreciation in the copy of Bagster's "History of English Translations and Translators" that I have on my site, and others have said they have enjoyed my story about my Navy experiences. Maybe someone else would be interested in my college class (Advanced Lasers) report on dye lasers? But, what is most relevant to the question of posting only interesting information would probably be my autobiography, which necessarily contains arcane details of limited appeal.
In matters of research, it is impossible to predict what little bit of information might make all the difference to a single reader. As someone who does a fair amount of research, more information generally is better than less, provided that the information is organized for rapid searching. I rarely need an entire document (the longer, the less-likely), but I often need some brief bit of information that often is not included in any article.
Taking stuff apart since 1969 (TM)
when putting content on the web, "rarely do we ask the question: is anybody interested in reading that?"
I for one put stuff on my webpage as reference for myself. I do put some small content there for other to read, and the logs do show that it does get read.
Ok, so perhaps 70 percent of all content goes unread. It's still good to have it there. Even if the site's navigation controls are terrible, even if the site is poorly organized, even if it's not updated very frequently...
The information can still be Googled.
The fact that Google and other search engines index by content rather than by title, author, or whatever, means that when someone does go to look up a particular piece of information, if there's something relevant on your site, they'll find it there. If you think about it, this is the ultimate indexing system. Microsoft has been trying to make this work in Windows for nearly a decade (remember the abomination called 'Find Fast' - not to mention their latest attempt, WinFS?) and failing miserably. Google handles it with all manner of grace and speed.
So go ahead, put up that content. Put up as much content as you like. Someday, it's going to be just the thing somebody needs to read, and when they need it, they'll find it on your site.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
To say 70% of most websites is a very broad statement and really needs narrowing of scope.
I agree. I have an http server on the internet that I use for my own purposes--development testing, links on my own home page, etc.--and I don't tell anyone else about it. It doesn't even have a registered domain name. But from time to time someone browses through a few pages.
I think all web pages are read by somebody, even if they are generally worthless.
There's a difference between volentary information and being spammed with it.
For instance, I get mail from a cow-orker who loves to send us a lot of junk mail. Problem is, I can't just write a write a filter or auto delete. One day, he's gonna ask me something, then report to my manager how I'm ignoring him.
I've also had some weird inverse. Currently, I gotta write a status report every day of what I do. I'm a programmer. I get projects that last me weeks at a time. Writing, "I wrote a function" is kinda.. lame.
So as much as information wants to be free, sometimes, it should just have a nice warm cup of "shut the hell up".
--
"I'm not bright. Big words confuse me. But Wanda loves me and that should be enough for you." - Cosmo
I don't know about the rest of you, but I only read comments ranged 4-5, and MAYBE 3 if it's a slow day. the rest of those comments go ignored, and bloating the /. database.
if only people would check to see if someone had already posted the same thing, stay on topic, not flame, and once again ask 'does anyone want to read this'?
I my self am breaking a few of those rules right now. I know this same comment has already been posted, and I know most of you don't care about it, AND... my bet is it doesn't break 3.
no comment
Im sure a much higher percent of books in libraries goes unread. It is not a bad thing. We hoard information because it is never certain when it will be usefull. There are tons of books from ancient grece that we can't find now because no one kept copies. we only knoe they existed because they are referenced in other books we did keep. tons of scholars would kill to get their hands on those books that are now lost.
Google News
Game Rankings
GameTab
I think sites like these are the future of info dissemination. I don't have the time to check out the separate game review and movie review watering holes. I have my local paper bookmarked, and BBC News, but all other news comes from Google. So on down the list. These meta-sites save a buttload of time and research.
When I do my online shopping, I always look for customer ratings. Now, I don't have to. Instead of the opinions of fifty average joes, I have the opinions of fifty paid professionals. Now, before you come at me and say that those reviewers might be paid to say something good, I can say from experience that bought opinions aren't as prevalent as you think and least come without a slew of spelling and grammar mistakes.
It's the wave of the future, like it or not. ve3d.com is fast becoming the unofficial hub of gaming news, despite the fact that you could fit its in-house content in a thimble and their admins' lack of journalistic ability is exposed on a daily basis.
And honestly, how many of you have /. as your primary info source? It's great, don't get me wrong, but it's another example of a meta-site...one where many people don't even take the time to RTFA. Content is not king once you realize the threshold of human consumption. You just end up bowling people over with sound and fury.
I don't have a cell phone, pager, or use IM, but I'm still overloaded by email. I have my primary email, my site registration email, my new primary since the old primary's shot through with spam, my work email, a website email, an alias for that website email...Then there are stock tickers, weather reports, sports scores, online banking...
I think, however, that the worst element is spam. Not just unsolicited email, but telemarketing calls, junk mail, door-to-door, etc. Then there are TV commercials, radio commercials, print media commercials. It's advertising that kills. Something like 80% of all email in the US is unsolicited. How many dinners have you completed without a sales call? How many days have you gone without another credit card in the mail? Yadda, yadda, yadda, and I wonder how many even read this far.
Something about this article really set me off. Read if you're interested.
First off, the only way to solve the "too much crufty information" is to implement a central planning system of some sort. This doesn't have to be a "central committee" or anything like that. It can be as simple as marketing types deciding what's cool and what's not. Then you'd have to deny people the ability to put up (or at least have linked to) what you consider "uncool."
You'd have to do this to reduce the amount of cruft.
Of course, we've seen the success of these restrictive planning systems.
The funny thing is that the internet does this, after a fashion. Things that people aren't interested in are not linked to, and thus are far less likely to be found by search engines. If you wanted to eliminate cruft, you might just not pay attention to anything below a certain linking threshhold. It wouldn't be perfect, but it wouldn't be bad.
Also, a note about receiving crufty emails. Yes, it happens. People send you the strangest, most useless crap all the time. We have a situation where I work where two or three secrataries dominate my inbox by inundating it with "word tips," "lost and found notices," and seminar announcements. It makes up about 1/4 of my non-automated email every day. Can't delete it because important stuff is sometimes in there.
The problem is because the sender thinks that these things are important. Most likely, in her little microcosm, it is. If you ask a secretary the most important things about running an office, you'll probably get answers like "office supplies and appointments," or "maintaining a friendly atmosphere" (which they interpret to mean everyone helping everyone else).
Of course, she's not alone. All of us have different priorities for running the business. I think that keeping the main fileserver and code repository running is a big thing. Surprise, surprise, that's my main job.
I think the solution to many of these problems is not to filter the emails (though that certainly helps), nor is it to disallow the emails. I think the best solution is to provide an appropriate forum. A private usenet server is an excellent place to post seminar announcements. A web page or wiki is a great place to have end-users help end-users. Might also be a good spot to have that lost-and-found list.
We've put up a wiki, and I'm introducing people to it, especially the serious email bombers (or maybe they're strafers?). We'll see how it works out.
Another problem, of course, is making all of these tools available and usable in the right way without the tools consuming all of your work time. I don't know the solution to this, but I do think that proper tools and proper integration are the future path of the information world.
Anyways, let me know what you think.