A Few Thoughts Re: The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA)...

The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) is scheduled to be debated in the House of Representatives the week of April 23rd, 2012.

The context of this bill still encompasses broad definitions that fail to create the safeguards that the representatives insist are present, and in turn, leave the door open for unintended consequences.

Generally speaking, CISPA pertains to information sharing.  It creates very broad legal exemptions which allow the government to share Cyber Threat Intelligence with private companies and in turn, allow companies to share Cyber Threat Intelligence with the government.  The main purpose is the enhancement of cyber security. 

The problems arise from the definition of the terms Cyber Threat Intelligence.  The bill defines Cyber Security Systems and Cyber Threat Information as anything to do with protecting a network from:

(a)  Efforts to degrade, disrupt, or destroy such a system or network; or

(b)  Theft or misappropriation of private governmental information, intellectual property, or personally identifiable information.

(This definition was provided by H.R. 3523: Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act of 2011).

This definition could easily be interpreted to include copyright policing systems at any point along a network, and since one of the recipients of this shared information would be the Department of Homeland Security, this information could be used to lock down the Internet.

The insistence from the House of Representatives references foreign based attacks on domestic companies (stealing information) rather than media piracy.  Unfortunately, no definitions in the bill create any such restriction, allowing for a wide diversification of interpretations.

The bill specifically prohibits the government from mandating an individual to hand over information – sharing is voluntary.  Undoubtedly, CISPA will allow for invasions of privacy that amount to surveillance.

Moreover, the government can collect this data (including identifying information of users); they are free to use this information for the defined Cyber Security definitions or National Security purposes; and they are allows to search the information for the same aforementioned reasons.

Content for this article was derived from www.GovTrack.us, a website to monitor our representatives in Congress and/or to research pending legislation that might impact our lives and/or businesses.

What exactly are SOPA and PIPA?

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the companion senatorial version, the Protect IP Act (PIPA) are proposed bills intended to enhance the protection against intellectual property theft and copyright infringement.

The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) protects copyrighted material, and is the current enforceable law.  This law focuses on the removal of specific, unauthorized content from the internet. SOPA and PIPA target the platform – in other words, the site hosting the unauthorized content.

If passed, SOPA and PIPA empower the Justice Department target foreign websites willfully committing or facilitating intellectual property theft.  They would be able to force U.S.-based companies, like Internet service providers, credit card companies and online advertisers, to cut off ties with those sites.  Foreign website operators currently outside the bounds of U.S. law; SOPA and PIPA would help quell illegitimate Internet activity.

Under the rules SOPA or PIPA would impose, start up sites would be unable to handle the costs that come with defending their sites against possible violations. Such sites would not be able to pay the large teams of lawyers that established sites like Google or Facebook can afford.

The legislation in question targets foreign companies whose primary purpose is to sell stolen or counterfeit goods -- but opponents say domestic companies could still be held liable for linking to their content.

The most controversial aspect of the SOPA and PIPA bills was language that would have let the Justice Department force Internet Service Providers to block the domains of suspected foreign "rogue" sites. 

As an alternative, the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade (OPEN) Act would make the International Trade Commission (ITC), rather than the Justice Department, responsible for policing U.S. connections to foreign rogue sites.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 9) – Does Excessive Advertisement Distract from the Webpage Content?

In this post, I will raise some talking points with respect to advertisement distractions in a Webpage. 

Another question The Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the Webpage quality is:

Does an article have an excessive amount of advertisements that distract from or interfere with the main content?

The Google Search Engine will analyze the credibility of a Webpage by analyzing the number of advertisements in a Webpage.

Placing advertisements is very common for many of our Webpages.  When advertisements are placed to a normal degree, the Google algorithm varies only slightly; however, Webpages that excessively use too many advertisements make it very difficult for a reader to find the actual page content.

Google support states:

“If you decide to update your page layout, the page layout algorithm will automatically reflect the changes as we re-crawl and process enough pages from your site to assess the changes.  How long that takes will depend on several factors, including the number of pages on your site and how efficiently Googlebot can crawl the content.”

Clearly, too many advertisements will result in a decrease of traffic, and unfortunately, Google will decrease your entire site and not just particular pages.  When we make modifications to decrease the amount of advertisement in the Webpage, Google makes a note of it when it next visits our Webpages; however, it can take several weeks until the new changes are implemented and integrated into their overall ranking system.

Webpages with excessive advertisements are:

• A nuisance;

• Perceived as spam and cluttered;

• Decreases the advertisement value and hurt advertisement sales;

• Result in lower click-through rates;

Our visitors probably will dislike the use of advertisements over content, and the probability of returning to our Webpage will be quite low.

On the other hand, it would be a waste to under-utilize your website real estate. You do not want to be too apprehensive about having more than one ad on your website either.  Once we determine the optimum balance of content and advertisement, our advertisers and readers will be more content - especially if the advertisements are services and/or products that interest them.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 8) – How Do We Compose Authoritative Articles?

In this post, I will raise some talking points as to the authoritative nature of an article when referenced by an author.  Another question The Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:

Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?

The Google Search Engine will analyze the credibility of an Article/Webpage using the authority of the article – in other words, is the content contain therein reliable and trustworthy?

I have been working on this specific article for about (3) days and it has been very difficult to compose; henceforth, I will do my very best to methodically explain how our articles can become reliable and subsequently, a point of reference for other individuals to use as a source of reference material.

As a starting point, I will use a definition referenced by the Department of Defense as a foundation:

“An authoritative source is a source of data or information that is recognized by members of a Community of Interest (COI) to be valid or trusted because it is considered to be highly reliable or accurate or is from an official publication or reference.” 

The source of data or information is our article content, and the members of a Community of Interest are simply our readers and visitors.  We should ask ourselves how correct, available, accessible, and updated our content is, and also, will other individuals be able to use our information for their respective research and derive subsequent information?

Many search engines, Google included, rank material according to their idea of what is relevant.  This does not automatically imply the content is relevant – this is just an algorithmic program inherent to the respective search engine.
Through my research for this article, I found a few guidelines and questions that will help us all in familiarizing ourselves with various types of Web resources and the reliability of the information.

1. Does the author have authority in the field in which he/she is writing about?  Attributes such as author qualification, credentials, and connections should be taken into account.

2. What institutions and/or organizations is the author associated with?  A link to an association does not necessarily mean that the organization approved the content.

3. Does the author have other publications?  Perhaps these will be in the form of professional or educational publications; however, if the author does not have other publications, this only indicates that the author’s authority has not been subjected to review.

4. Is the author biased?  A common bias indicator is a reader obtaining an impression that the author is trying to sell and item, product, or service.  Personal opinions are not negative; however, and as I have previously written about, keeping an impartial objective approach allows for readers to interpret the article from various perspectives.

5. Is the Web information current? If outdated links are referenced, ask yourself what this indicates about the credibility of the information.


6. Are the referenced sources properly recognized?  If the information is not backed up with sources, what is the author's relationship to the subject to be able to give an "expert" opinion?

7. Can the subject we are researching be fully covered with WWW sources or should print sources provide balance?

8. On what kind of Web site does the information appear? The site can give us clues about the credibility of the source.

It is safe to assume that if we have limited background in a topic and have a limited amount of time to do our research, we may not be able to get the most representative material on the subject.  We all need to be cautious in making unsubstantiated conclusions based on a narrow range of sources.

This may be the most arduous article I have written to date.  All too often, I see information copied; sources not recognized appropriately; individuals using articles as a source of selling rather than educating; and credibility misplaced.  To all of all the individuals who read this article, I remain humbled that each of you takes an interest and my hope is that we all can learn more from each other.

These are but just a few suggestions and as always, I am welcome to all feedback and discussion as appropriate.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 7) – Do Our Articles Describe Both Sides of a Story?

Continuing our commentaries with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article; I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  

In this post, I will raise some talking points as they relate to Article Impartiality.  Another questionThe Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:

Does the article describe both sides of a story?

Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar quoted:

“A historian ought to be exact, sincere and impartial; free from passion, unbiased by interest, fear, resentment or affection; and faithful to the truth, which is the mother of history the preserver of great actions, the enemy of oblivion, the witness of the past, the director of the future.”

Whether it is history, describing a story, or composing an article for publication, being impartial will ensure a level playing field, if you will.  Simply explained, we take an unbiased stance and/or position – not favoring one side over the other and discussing an opinion accurately and fair.

The Google Search Engine will analyze the credibility of an Article/Webpage based on impartiality – in other words, determining the meaning behind the Article/Webpage.

Might I suggest a few thoughts to consider when composing an impartial article?

• Provide a fair balance of issues and views;

• Include a wide range of opinions and commentary;

• Honesty explore conflicting views;

• Treat each thought equally and not under-represent one thought against another;

• Avoid bias and/or an unbalanced viewpoint.

Our articles need to clearly separate our opinions from the facts.  We need to carefully interpret our research; ensure all facts contained therein are respected; and not dilute the meaning of the article by making our opinions too one sided.
Keep in mind, our readers have every right to respond to our articles - they are entitled to agree, disagree, and express their comments, and the diversified range of their perspectives should be given due consideration.

Rather than receiving a disagreement personally, we should view these viewpoints as an angle of understanding and promote constructive debate.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 6) – How Well is the Article/Page Edited?

Continuing our commentaries with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article; I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  

To date, I have addressed five questions that the Google Quality Filter uses in Page/Article analysis:

1.    What are the Trustworthiness, Quality Content, and Redundancy of an Article/Page?

2.    Why Provide Credit Card Information?  Also, what is the Significance of Grammatical Errors and Reader Interest of an Article/Page?

3.    How Important is Original Content?

4.    What Defines Insightful and Interesting Content?

5.    Why Would We Recommend an Article/Page?

In this post, I will raise some talking points as they related to editing tips of an article/page.  Another question The Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:

Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?

When we are composing articles, a few questions we should ask ourselves are:

• Does the article make sense and will our readers understand what we are expressing?

• What is the interest level from beginning to end?

• Does the article include all of the pertinent information?

A few writing tips to keep in mind are:

• Make your writing error-free – meaning perfect spelling and no typographical errors.

• Double check for the correct usage of homonyms (for example, their, there, and they’re).

• Confirm that all names are correctly spelled – it can become embarrassing by not doing so.

• Format the margins, spacing, and style of headings consistently (for example, font style, bold or not bold, italic, capitalization, etc.)

Sleep on it and wait at least a night before starting your editing.  Many times, errors occur because our minds are filled with ideas, examples, and arguments related to our topic.  When we approach our writing with a clear mind, the mental connections are gone, and only what we’ve actually written counts.


I have previously discussed adding white space between paragraphs, bold subheads and (where appropriate) bullet points.  Also, after the revisions have been made, print your article and read it again – we tend to catch many errors when we do not edit on screen.

Concise writing is more powerful and easier to read than lengthy prose.  Every point, statement, question, joke, even every word should have a reason to be in your piece – if does not, remove it.

For most readers, the language of journalists is a much more appropriate model — and that means aiming for at best a smart eighth-grader’s reading level.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 5) – What Factors Contribute to Article/Page Recommendation?

Continuing our commentaries with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article; I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  

In this post, I will raise some talking points as they related to article/page sharing and/or recommendation.

Another question The Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:

Is this the sort of page you would want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?

For a moment, if we stop and think about why we recommend something, what questions do we ask ourselves?  The answer to this question is a difficult one – usually, we like something as a matter of personal preference, and without knowing quite why, we just like it and want to recommend it to a colleague, friend, and/or fellow professional.  What then, is the average reader drawn to?  Some areas are:

• Appearance
• Content
• Ease of Navigation
• Page Ranking
• Accessibility
• Feedback

Clearly, there are other factors; however, most individuals will be drawn to these areas.  I would like us to take a step back, obtain a different perspective, and explore each of these areas a little more in detail:


Appearance

This is the first thing we see.  Is the article/page visually pleasing or too distracting?  True, we each have our own interests and tastes; yet, an aesthetically attractive article/page is, in the vast majority of cases, a professionally design one, and as such, professionally designed websites are usually more reliable.


Content

Is the content updated, high quality, and useful?  A thought to keep in mind is this – when reading an article/page, are we happy and have an inclination to want to return?  True, the article and/or page content could be products, services, and/or information, and as such, we should try to create content that our readers are looking for.

Navigation

Ease of navigation by far will ensure repeat readers in lieu of difficulty finding a word or topic.  If the navigation is difficult, the likelihood of repeat readers will be minimized substantially.  It is quite frustrating not being able to access the information we need.

Page Rank

This criteria is important in that your article and/or page will rank higher in the search engines, and essentially, the more sites link to an article and/or page, the higher the Page Rank.

Accessibility

Pages that load slowly; disallow access to other pages; have pop-up windows; and/or has difficulty progressing forwards (or backwards) will dissuade readers.  Our articles/pages should flow easily; follow coherent thought; and make sense to the average reader.  Lest we be reminded, for each individual who is technically savvy, there are twice as many who are not.


Feedback

An article and/or page with positive feedback are a great indicator of the quality of the article and/or page.


Recommending an article/page is not an exception, it is a choice.  If we locate an article/page that we like, the more we will want to browse it, resulting in a higher probability of recommendation.  I would ask those who are reading this article to stop and think about "why" you would recommend an article/page and what were the contribution factors in that decision.

For me, I have an open mind with respect to the obtainment of information, and I have been brought up embracing a belief that our level of wisdom is depedent upon the practical application of knowledge.  Acquiring knowledge implies an interest in a diversified range of subjects, and if I am drawn to a subject visually and/or through the content, I choose to make the time to read it.As much as I dislike the saying, "Do not judge a book by it's cover", I see everyday online and in social media, a link and/or reference that appears plain, copied, and not well thought out will not get read, and as such, will remain undisturbed.

I have stated on prior occasions that I am far from knowing how exactly Google assesses article/page content.  Common sense tells me more visits to an article/page is an attribute Google prefers, and perhaps it regards the popularity as a positive influencing factor in Page Rank calculations.  I can say unequivocally that approaching our social campaigns methodically and fundamentally takes time, and we are creating online relationships whether we realize it or not.

As always, I humbled and grateful for all of the individuals who have contributed their thoughts, time, and encouragement to this effort.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 4) – Insightful and Interesting Article Content

Continuing our commentaries with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article; I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  

In this post, I will raise some talking points as they related to composing articles that are insightful and interesting.

Another question The Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:

Do our articles/pages contain insightful analysis and/or interesting information beyond the obvious?

What is insightful analysis?  Basically, it is providing a clear, concise explanation.

• When providing our readers with in-depth information relating to a specific topic, we must decide who our target audience is – by doing so, our content has a higher probability of being acknowledged and read, as opposed to being generally addressed to anyone and everyone (individuals may find this intrusive).

• We need to thoroughly research our topic to obtain a sound understanding.  I have commented before about the importance of us understanding material before we can explain that material to someone.  Composing an article using a real-time story and how it has assisted an individual will provide interest to our readers.

• Using a bold sentence headline drawing the curiosity of our readers will draw attention to our article.  Do not be afraid to pose questions in which the article will address – of course, each individual has their own unique interests, and what may be interesting for one individual may not be interesting to another individual.

• Does the content of our article address potential solutions to the questions?  Differentiating each solution as a talking point; using separate paragraphs; and sharing personal experiences of how your proposed solutions assisted another individual will create uniqueness and interest to our readers.

• Providing a brief summarization initiating the reader to take action and/or providing potential solutions to the questions will enhance the chances for a call to take action.

How do we generate interest?  The choice of words makes a difference – intersecting words and maintaining conciseness is more beneficial than big, impressive words that many people do not understand.  The use of short sentences and paragraphs create engaging, compelling articles.  Staying on point and teaching/educating our readers will provide a refreshing interest and a personal connection that will maintain their engagement.

Also, deviating from the norm and discussing unique topics will draw attention.  Such as these articles are structured to be educational, many individuals respond due to their explanatory nature.  My readers are gaining a little bit more knowledge – and for me, that is what matters.  All it takes is one shared idea and/or thought for someone to create an interesting concept; document it; receive responses; and create a business relationship.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 3) – Original Content

A few days ago, I began an editorial with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article.  I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  In this post, I will address one imperative question with respect to Original Content.

The Google Quality Filter uses the below listed question in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality:

Do our articles/pages provide original content, information, reporting, research, and/or analysis?

Robert C. Williams, the author of The Historian’s Toolbox: A Student’s Guide to the Theory and Craft of History” states:

“A Primary Source is a document, image, or artifact that provides evidence about the past.  It is an original document created contemporaneously with the event under discussion.  A direct quote from such a document is classified as a primary source.  A secondary source is a book, article, film, or museum that displays primary sources selectively in order to interpret the past.”

Using this thought as a guideline, the content of our material should reflect our viewpoints, thoughts, and emotions – not copied from someone else.  Some examples of original content are: email correspondence; personal letters; meeting minutes; and autobiographies.  Simply stated, original content is created in real-time, and not a reflective after-thought of another individual’s opinion.

When conducting original research on a specific topic, our objective is to expand one’s understanding and knowledge of that topic through such endeavors as data analysis, observation, and experimentation (to list a few).  We reach our own conclusions.  Much like in middle school at the Science Fair, we had to prepare a 3-section board with photographs; our own summarizations and conclusions; and prepare notes for discussion that were judged accordingly.

Google is continually improving their parameters with respect to filtering republished content and WebPages who republish material without prior permission and/or appropriated credits.  Interestingly enough, through my research on this question, I learned there are WebPages whereas an individual could purchase what is called “Copyscape-Passed” articles – immediately I asked myself why an individual would do this and would it not undermine the point of composing our own original content?

Let’s face it – copying material rather than taking time to think and compose takes less time; it provides a perception that everyone is an expert in their field; and the adage of quantity over quality is better.  I see this everyday in posts and links.  It takes time, energy, patience, and an understanding of the material in which we compose – who has that kind of time?  Why make the time when there is an abundance of information at our fingertips?

When we compose original material, we take ownership of it – we take pride in our work.  True, not everyone will agree; however, uniqueness of content and integrity is something I will not compromise.  It is a shame that an easy avenue exists for individuals who claim originality only to purchase the works of others at a personal gain.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 2)…

A few days ago, I began an editorial with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article.  I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.  In this post, I will address the areas of the confidence of using credit card on a site; spelling/grammatical errors; and site content as it relates to search engine ranking.

Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?

Before using a credit card online, make sure the Webpage address uses an “https” rather than an“http” address.  HTTPS stands for Hyper Text Transfer Protocol with Secure Sockets Layer (SSL).  This is another protocol developed with secure, safe internet transactions in mind.

Also, verify that the browser displays the secure lock – this is usually in the bottom right hand corner or toward the top of the page on other browsers.  Moreover, the Webpage should display a Certification from a trusted site, such as VeriSign.

Does this article have spelling, grammatical, and/or factual errors?

Spelling is important to the credibility of an article and/or Webpage.  Visitors observing an article and/or Webpage with language errors do not inspire trust in our visitors.  They may think if we cannot spell and/or compose sentences correctly, how could anyone trust us to keep their information private and secure?  It would be wise to hire an editor to proofread. 

Are the article/page topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?

Authentic, credible content matters to search engines.  Individuals respond emotionally to information, and a user’s online experience factors into their decision making – those factors being habit, memory, trust, consistency, credibility, expertise, accuracy just to name a few.

With all the individuals claiming their expertise, how do they validate their claims?  The decision to decide accurate content and credibility lies with the user – they are hoping to trust the author, and point in fact; many individuals marketing online ignore the value of providing substantive information to their target markets.  In forums, blogs with active user comments, LinkedIn group discussions and article-driven web sites, certain cues help determine trust in information: Accuracy, authority, and objectivity (to name a few) are cues that can help a user trust our information.  Sites that are moderated do well because they demand quality discussions by well-intentioned members willing to share expertise and knowledge.

Successful search and social marketing strategies must include understanding how to create and deliver information that is judged to be accurate, trustworthy and authentic. Understanding user intent helps marketers and search engines present relevant information.

A Few Thoughts Re: Google Quality Content (Part 1)…

When analyzing the content of a page and/or article, Google incorporates the use of quality filters. 

What is a Quality Filter?  The simple answer is evaluating the quality of a page or article.  What questions does Google ask to assess the quality of a page or an article?  I have found numerous points of reference and generally, there are a couple dozen questions, of which I will address a few at a time per post.

Is the page/article information trustworthy?

Everyone has an opinion - most reliable sources are direct in how and why they are reporting.  Books are considered more trustworthy due to their stability – online articles can be edited at any given moment while a book is published with a specific identifiable time and date. 

Is this article written by an expert or is it shallow in content?

We could see if the article provides a list of sources; is published by a reputable research organization; and/or a respected professor at a reputable university.  Peer-reviewed articles are trustworthy.

Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?

Pages and articles with duplicity and redundancy will likely be demoted in search rankings. Page #1 sites are pushed down several spots, perhaps several pages – being replaced with sites that are rich with quality, original content.

How can we apply this to our Web Pages and articles?  Different people absorb information differently – perhaps through the About Us page; Testimonials; or Products/Services.  We should think about supplemental methods of communicating our message to increase the odds the message is received by your audience.  Redundant Web Page navigation systems and task completion (such as ordering products) will help our visitors find their way and achieve their (and our) goals. 

Another suggestion is to discuss and eliminate any redundancy in the programming code wherever possible with your Web Page developer – doing so will improve system performance and maintainability.

Again, these are just a few suggestions – clearly there are others who will have differing opinions.  I will try my best to forward a supplemental article within the next couple days highlighting a few more questions.  For now, I hope this helps and as always, I encourage input and comments…