There are some stories, concepts, and rumors that seem to live on blogs like this one. Most of the time, these stories deserve the “star status” that they have been given. Every now and then, however, you run into a”Brett Farve” — a report that used to be interesting, but has been driven into the ground so much that it has become downright annoying. So on today’s episode of the Free Line, we are going to take a look at five of these stories, keeping a close eye on what exactly went wrong.

5. The “Twitpocylyse” – As you might have noticed, there has been one word on the lips of every mover, shaker, and outgoing athlete in the past year: Twitter. But for every one story about the insanely popular service, there seems to be two talking about its eventual end. According to some, the end is going to come when the number of users exceed 4,294,967,295. When this happens, the sites say, many Twitter-based programs will simply stop working. Interesting? Yes. Scary? Well yes, if you’re a Twitter addict. Still, there is one small problem with this theory — it was supposed to have happened once before. See, June 12th was supposed to bring about the end of all Tweets as we know it. The actual result? Two programs stopped working, but both were fixed within twenty-four hours. Maybe take two will bring about the end. We can only wait and see.

4. Google Makes the Greatest Things Ever – If there is one thing that everyone can agree upon, it’s Google’s track record. They make good products, plain and simple. Unfortunately, that sort of reliability has the tendency to be overblown by us in the press. Chrome isn’t a promising browser and/or operating system; it’s the one-two combination that will send Microsoft into bankruptcy. Android was being called a “sure fire iPhone killer” months before anyone even saw a screen shot. The latest program on the bandwagon is Google Voice, which is supposedly poised not only to take down Skype, but Apple and AT&T as well. Praise is great, but sometimes, it can go a bit too far.

3. The Demise of… – We are all familiar of the pop culture phenomenon known as “the backlash” — an odd social  movement in which a celebrated musician, trend, or celebrity goes from hero to “public enemy number one” seemingly overnight. This happens in the tech world as well, only in a slightly different fashion. Instead of mocking the offending tech product on talk shows and the like, we talk about how the company is on the point of death. Yahoo, MySpace, and eBay have all been subject to the “web services death watch.” While all of the companies mentioned have seen better days, the suspicious timing of these articles, and well as the dubious suggestions on how to right the proverbial ship (e.g. “Do what the competition is doing … it’s not ripping them off at all!”) , have us rubbing our collective temples in frustration.

2. Is Biz Stone Going to Sell Twitter? – For media outlets such as ESPN and Sports Illustrated, the aformentioned “Brett Farve watch” is a bonafide dream story. They can spend hour after hour and page after page sitting out on the man’s lawn, hoping that he will eventually come out and say “yes, I am coming out of retirement to join the Minnesota Vikings football team.” And if he doesn’t, who cares? The simple fact that he didn’t make an appearance is a fine little story within itself. The tech crowd has their own “Farve Watch,” but it has nothing to do with “sticking it” to the Green Bay Packers. No, ours involves the looming sale of Twitter by Biz Stone. Like Farve, Stone knows exactly how to play the media to his liking. All he has to do is drop a few key words into an interview — “monetize,” “Yahoo,” “Microsoft” — and the tech crowd is talking about it for a week. No matter when or if Stone decides to set his prized creation adrift, we can almost guarantee you that like Brett Farve’s third comeback attempt, the reality of the situation will not live up to the hype.

1. Fun With Microsoft and Yahoo – Everyone loves a good “will they, or won’t they?” story. In the 1970’s, we had Satuday Night Live’s lampooning of Fransisco Franco’s deathbed drama. (Spoiler: Franco is still dead.) In the 1990’s, we had the ongoing love affair between “Friends” Ross and Rachael. In the new millennium, we have the ongoing merger talks between Microsoft and Yahoo to keep us guessing. It seems like everything is going well, but oh no! Then-Yahoo president Jerry Yang has shot it down! Everything appeared to get back on track, but then Microsoft head Steve Ballmer announced that his company wants “absolutely nothing to do” with Yahoo. Things went on … and on … and on … like this until last week, when the two companies finally worked out a search deal. While it’s great that Yahoo has gotten their company in order, we sort of wish that they wouldn’t have “teased” us for so long.

…And there you have it. On behalf of everyone here at the Free Line, good night and have a pleasant tomorrow.

As you probably have heard by now, Yahoo Search is no more. In a move that totally surprised no one everyone, Yahoo has decided to jettison the “search” end of the business in favor of Microsoft’s shiny new Bing engine. The folks at Redmond, in return, will receive complete, unfettered access to the likes of Yahoo BOSS and Search Monkey. Despite the grumblings of a few “disgruntled” stock holders, the big brass at both companies actively welcome the change, calling it “a complete game changer” and “a great day for Yahoo.” If all goes well with the government, expect to see Bing in a Yahoo search bar near you within eight to nine months.

This isn’t the first time a major tech firm attempted to play nice with another massive corporation. Anyone who remembers running Microsoft and IBM’s OS/2 operating system on their brand new desktop featuring an Intel-branded AMD 286 processor knows exactly what I’m talking about. Still, our story isn’t about the manufacturing of microprocessors or the internal bickering between Bill Gates and Big Blue. No, today’s story involves a search engine, a cartoon mouse, and a web portal that time — and the majority of the Internet – has forgotten. And what is this portal that we speak of? Go.com.

Once upon a time, the site now known as Go.com was once a search engine called “Infoseek.” Started in 1994 by prolific inventor Steve Kirsch, Infoseek was one of the first engines to actively allow users to incorporate Boolean modifiers into their searches. Because of its sheer willingness to try something a bit off kilter, “Mr. Kirsch’s pet project” became the talk of the town, both online and off . It was so popular in fact, that the company felt the need to create “Ultraseek,” an engine designed specifically for enterprise users. This success lasted until 1998, when the folks at Disney — yes, that Disney — swallowed the company whole. On the surface, the deal appeared to be a match made in heaven for everyone involved. Disney now had a world class search engine at their beckoned call, while Infoseek had a proverbial “800 pound gorilla” backing them up. The merger of the engine with the newly acquired Starwave development house helped to excite users all the more. Within months, both companies were gone. In their places sat Go.com, a web portal designed to bring the so-called “House of Mouse” into the Internet Age. The days of Infoseek were officially no more.

Needless to say, the entire project was a failure of epic proportions. Within four years, the search section was gone for good. In its place sat a box for its new “search partner,” a little site called Yahoo. (Funny the way the world works, isn’t it?) While Go.com does still officially exist, it is now little more than a host site for the likes of ESPN and ABC. The Infoseek name is still used in both Japan and Australia, but these sites have little to do with the “engine that Steve Krsch built.” (The former is run by Japanese shopping kingpins Rakuten, while the latter is controlled by design firm Orange Digital Media.) The only technology to make it out of this entire debacle alive was Ultraseek, which is still trying to deliver enterprise search to the masses. As for Yahoo, well … you know.

…And there you have it. Be sure to tune tomorrow for part two of our “Summer Travel Showdown.” Until then, we bid thee a fond adieu.

Okay gang, it’s time for yet another highly popular round of “ask me a question.” So without further adieu, let us get to it.

Where is part three of “Web Programming for Smart Phones?” – Part three, tentatively entitled “The Waiting Is the Hardest Part,” will be hitting a web browser near your within the next few days. the series is very important to us, but honestly, we also wanted to establish our other concepts as well.

Oh? Such as? – Building our own mobile site, for one. High class, high quality mobile sites should not just be limited to the likes of million dollar computer firms or folks whose personal wealth rivals that of Scrooge McDuck. We intend to prove that it is possible to build, maintain, and most importantly advertise, a mobile site without spending a ton of cash. We are so confident that we can make this happen, that we set our design budget to an unthinkable, unheard of sum of zero dollars American. That’s right. We will have a top shelf mobile headquarters, and it will not cost us a dime. And the best part? A site like this can be yours as well. It’s all about smart design, forward thinking, and a great ad campaign.

Wait … I thought you said you were for tailoring your existing site to fit the needs of mobile users. What gives? – We still are. Still, it doesn’t mean that we cannot explore other options.

Will this be programming intensive? I hate programming. I have guys who do it for me. – Nope. This will be about theory, content, advertising, marketing, and overall presentation. Not one line of code will be printed in this blog. I assure you of that.

Works for me. How’s the text advertising project coming along? – As we said last Friday, it usually takes a little while for this kind of thing to register. Ask us again in a few days.

I hate the “geek” stuff. More advertising news, stat! – We hear you. We here at the Free Line promise that there will be more talk about marketing your site and/or product in the future.

Great. Do you have anything that I can check out right now? – I do, actually. For those interested in the emerging world of mobile advertising, I highly suggest reading “Mobile Marketing Without Being Annoying” by Chris Crum. Essentially an expanded interview with Yahoo’s Tom Foran, the article explains the ins and of out of advertising on the so-called “mobile web” without being too confusing or geeky. While some of his suggestions and tactics are not exactly “free,” the piece is still worth the old “once over.”

…And there you have it. Until tomorrow, we here at the Free Line bid you all good day.

As many of you already realize, there’s more to advertising your site, brand, or genuinely “hilarious” YouTube video than just posting a note on Digg. No, if you want your media project of the future to be a true success, you’ll have to do more than hang out at social hot spots. Mastering the basics (and possibly the intermediate level) of search engine optimization is always a good thing to do. Making sure that you understand the “ins and outs” of various browsers, hardware platforms, and programming languages doesn’t hurt, either. Still, there is even more that you could be doing to draw new faces to your site. And what is this magic fix that I speak of? Viral advertising.

Now I know what you’re thinking. “Is he crazy? I can’t pull that off! It’s too expensive and time consuming!” Now before you call the nice young men in the clean, white coats to take me away, hear me out. Not everyone who sets up a viral campaign is trying to pull off a J.J. Abrams style Alternate Reality Game or is trying to sell a badly put together ring tone to teenagers. In reality, most viral marketing campaigns are rather small, low-key affairs that deliver their pitch to prospective users with a minimal amount of trouble or annoyance. Simply put, it’s targeted advertising done right.

To prove the ease that I speak of, we will engage in our own campaign. Yes, that’s right. The Free Line is going viral. At the present moment, our campaign will rely heavily on SMSDelivery, a handy little service that allows us to create text message campaigns for free. Everything we do — our successes, our failures, and so on — will be reported here. Before we call it a day, allow me to answer a few questions.

So … which plan are you going for: free or paid? – Free, of course. We wouldn’t be able to call ourselves the Free Line if we actually paid for things like this. It’s against the rules.

I want to get in on the action. What do I text where? – Our account is still firmly in the “setup” phase right now. According to the official website, it sometimes takes as long as two business days to get things working properly. As soon as we get a number, we will definitely pass it along to you.

…And there you have it. Be sure to come back Monday for part three of “Web Programing for Smart Phones.” Until then, we bid thee adieu.

The search through our “virtual basement” — also known as the wiki — is almost finished. Needless to say, it just gets stranger and stranger from here…

Service #1: Broong

Website: http://www.broong.com/
Wiki Link: http://www.freelinereport.com/wiki/Office_and_Productivity_Software
Service: Social note taking
First Impression: “I am not familiar with the thing that I’m seeing.”
Ease of Use: N/A — Just type in your email address and your set.
Positives: It’s a community bulletin board that just happens to be online. Broong also has one major advantage over said “message boards” of old: each user gets five gigs of storage space for free. It’s hard to go wrong there.
Negatives: It’s a community bulletin board that just happens to be online.
Overall: 7; “It really is a nice service. It just looks a little odd.”

Service #2: Gnu Privacy Guard (GnuPG)

Website: http://www.gnupg.org/
Wiki Link: http://www.freelinereport.com/wiki/Security%2C_Spyware%2C_and_Viruses
Service: Security
First Impression: “Where did it go? I honestly cannot find it on my system.”
Ease of Use: -4; “What’s going on? What is it doing? Why do I have to type a message?”
Positives: Well … it probably is a really, really powerful privacy protector. Too bad that we could not figure out how to use the darn thing. We may or may not have to compile it ourselves.
Negatives: This is honestly the most difficult, most cryptic program that we have attempted to run in Windows. Case in point: once we finally found the root GnuPG file, it told us to “type a message.” We still have no idea what that means.
Overall: N/A, as we didn’t have a chance to do anything of merit.

Service #3: Websnpr

Website: http://www.websnapr.com/
Wiki Link: http://www.freelinereport.com/wiki/Web_Apps
Service: Online screen capture
First Impression: “Aww … that’s cute. It’s tiny!”
Ease of Use: N/A; All you have to do is type in a web address. The actual service does the rest.
Positives: It’s different.
Negatives: We are still trying to figure out what purpose this application serves. Who out there would exactly want a small little “snapshot” of their favorite website, anyway? Wouldn’t it be more productive to actually, you know, go to the website in question?
Overall: 6; “It’s a well put together program. We just do not see the point.”

Service #4: MixedInk

Website: http://mixedink.com/
Wiki Link: http://www.freelinereport.com/wiki/Social_Media
Service: Collaborative news
First Impression: “What’s with the logo? It looks like the ‘I’ is giving the ‘M’ a back breaker.”
Ease of Use: 8; “Setting up your account is easy. Posting your opinions is even easier.”
Positives: It is incredibly simple to use. It makes the likes of Digg and Reddit look like the Gnu Privacy Guard by comparison.
Negatives: It seems as if most the topics are about politics. While that’s great for political junkies, it’s bound to annoy everyone else within earshot.
Overall: 6

Service #5: Domainr

Website: http://domai.nr/
Wiki Link: http://www.freelinereport.com/wiki/Website_Creation
Service: Domain naming service
First Impression: “There’s a domain search service out there that isn’t ‘WhoIs?’ Neat.”
Ease of Use: 9
Positives: The results given by the service can be very creative at times. A search for the “Free Line Report,” for example, netted us such gems as “freel.in/ereport,” “freeline.re/port,” and “fr.ee/linereport.”
Negatives: …On the other hand, some of the suggestions can be a bit “odd” for daily use.
Overall: 9; “It’s entertaining.”

As we have established before, we live in a society that is growing increasingly dependent on information. When things work the way that they are “supposed” to work, no one complains. When several major “news sources” come up dry and ultimately bring nothing new to the table, however … things seem to break down fairly quickly. It is at this point that we in the blogging community try to make something — anything — interesting and unique. A few days ago, the major tech sites were all abuzz about the Chrome operating system and the surprising success of Bing. Today, on the other hand, the sites were overflowing with stories about several “minor” Twitter updates and a merger of two companies that, quite frankly, no one has ever heard of. If you got lucky, you just might have “stumbled” upon a discussion about Steve Ballmer or the various health issues facing Steve Jobs. It doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes or Lenny Briscoe to notice that their just might be a problem here.

The obvious solution to this “problem,” of course, is simply to turn off our monitors, put down the keyboards, and wait for something to happen. Be it right or wrong, life does not exactly work in that way anymore. So we fill the void with various media sources, hoping that it will fill the “dead space” of a slow news day. Some watch Brock Lesnar beat poor Frank Mir until he cries on YouTube for the five hundredth time. Others go to TMZ in order see the “forgotten” footage of Michael Jackson’s hair catching fire. Still others figure out a way to watch the Senate confirmation hearings for Supreme Court hopeful Sonja Sotomayor. While all of these activities do give us our “media fix,” they are about as productive as watching paint dry. One can only watch a former professional wrestler insult everyone within earshot, burning hair, or politicians yell at each other for so long before going completely insane. So we decide to go back to work on our pet projects, hoping that one day it — and by extension, we — will become successful enough to be covered the likes of Michael Arrington and Henry Blodgett on a slow news day.

And therein lies what makes this moment in time different than the media controlled dystopia of Max Headroom: power. We are ultimately in control of the content given to us, not some cryptic television network run by Charles Rocket and Jeffery Tambor. The New York Times doesn’t decide what news is “fit to print,” we do. While it’s great to scope out The Drudge Report or Mashable for new things to read and/or learn about, it is more important in our society to “create” that next big idea. So we work on our blogs and fiddle with our various web 2.0 applications, all with the hope that our contributions will turn the “information tide” our way. This is our time, and we will make damn sure that we get every last second out of it. Biz Stone did it. Tim Brenners Lee did it. Now it’s our turn.

…And there you have it. On the behalf of everyone at the Free Line, we sincerely hope that you have enjoyed our three-part series about the future, media, and everything in between. Be sure to tune in tomorrow for more of that web 2.0 news you can use. Until then, we bid thee adieu.

It seems that everyone has a thought or two on Google’s new Chrome operating system. In our continuing effort to cover the best of the tech world, allow us to present the top ten comments about the much talked about — and highly controversial — OS of the (near) future.

1. “Who knows what this thing is. To me, the Chrome OS thing is highly interesting (in) that it won’t happen for a year and a half and they already announced an operating system.” – Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer
2. “[Chrome] is an extraordinary market play. And an unsettling one. For it seeks to place Google, which already collects vast amounts of data about our Internet use, at the very center of our information experience.” – John Paczkowski, All Things Digital
3. “If the Chrome OS can help change consumer perceptions about the utility of online applications and cloud storage, it could be a big success for Google, even without wide adoption.” – John Timmer, ArsTechnica
4. “Google’s decision to create its own Linux distribution and splinter the Linux community decisively once again can only be seen as foolhardy and self-obsessive.” – Renai LeMay, Silicon.com
5. “Google wants to see multiple devices connected to the web in every household. A web device in your pocket, one on your wrist, in your car, on your boat and in every room of your house; not to mention computers in homes in the developing world. The Microsoft tax ($50 per unit for instance) has hindered the market adoption of these types of devices.” - Amanda McPherson, The Linux Foundation
6. “It’s disappointing that they’ve chosen to go it alone this far rather than working with the existing [Linux] communities.” – Joe Brockmeier, Community Manager for openSUSE
7. “As the long-foretold ‘Internet of Things‘ emerges — allowing everyday objects to be addressed via online queries — Chrome OS will be well positioned to help Google organize even more of the world’s information than the company already handles.” – Thomas Claburn, Information Week
8. “Nobody seems to appreciate how hard it is to make an operating system. You don’t just wake up one day and fall out of bed and make one. Not even the smarty pants kiddies at Google can do that. These things take years. Decades, even… Whatever Google might release in the second half of next year, it will just be a starting point.” – Dan Lyons, aka The Fake Steve Jobs
9. “If Google wants to succeed in its boldest product launch to date, the Chrome OS, the company needs to focus on its success with the same intensity it once dedicated to search. If it doesn’t, Chrome OS will end up just like Chrome: yet another irrelevant skunkworks [sic] project used by a handful of digerati and Microsoft-haters and ignored by everyone else.” – Henry Blodgett, Silicon Valley Insider.
10. “If anyone thinks that the recent attention being paid to Microsoft’s new search engine, Bing, and the sudden announcement of a free OS from Google is a coincidence, then you haven’t been following the tech business closely. Everything is strategic.” – John C. Dvorak, MarketWatch.com

…As for us, it all comes down to a very concise list of pros and cons.

Pros:

• Google starting small. Honestly, no one would give them the time of day if they immediately targeted traditional desktop and laptop systems. It would just be another small fish living in a pond inhabited by the likes of Windows, OS X, Ubuntu, and Fedora. By going to the comparatively uncharted world of netbooks first, Google has the opportunity of making considerable headway in a relatively short amount of time.

Cons:

• Google seems to have a hard time picking good hardware providers. Their “temporary alliance” with mediocre phone manufacturer HTC is proof of that. Now the folks at the “big  G” could always surprise us by linking up such heavy hitters as Asus and Dell. They could even go with an “under the radar” firm with a stellar reputation, such as Cowon or Archos. Unfortunately, we do not see that happening any time soon.
• Despite what many might think, the original Windows lineup — 3.1, 95, 98, and ME, etc –  were not operating systems in the strictest sense of the word. They were actually specialized suites called “extender programs” designed to make the aging DOS system structure more user friendly. As it stands now, Chrome OS is that very thing, only for Linux instead of DOS. While being a fancy extender program isn’t a “bad” thing, it doesn’t necessarily make it a true operating system, either.
• The thoughts of having to rely exclusively on cloud-based applications such as Zoho Office makes us want to cry. Now don’t get us wrong here — we love online apps just as much as the next person. Still, man cannot live on Google Docs and Adobe Acrobat Online alone. Even if there is a way to load external, offline programs onto the operating system, the bulk of these apps will have been designed specifically for Linux. In the minds of many, Konqueror, KOffice, and GNUCash are not adequate replacements for the likes of Safari, Microsoft Office, and the Peachtree Accounting Suite.

Our Verdict: Too soon to tell. I guess we will have to wait until the Chrome source code is released in November before we immediately start jumping to conclusions. Until that time arrives, consider the Free Line’s involvement in the matter to be officially closed.

If there is one thing that everyone knows about, it’s advertising. No matter where we look, there always seems to be a thirty-second television spot, billboard, or conveniently placed Coke can within eye shot. While that sort of bombardment does have the tendancy to be annoying at points, it could always be worse. We could be living in the media obsessed dystopia of Max Headroom. In the series, advertising is present in three unique, highly diverse ways. On today’s installment of Twenty Minutes into the Future, we will take a look at three techniques and discuss how each are being used in today’s culture.

Technique #1: The Cheviot Method

Championed By: Ben Cheviot (George Coe), founder and president of Network 23.
Thesis: People first, ads second.
Explanation: According to the “Cheviot Method” of advertising, it is imperative to remember that it isn’t robots and/or lemmings watching these ads. It’s people. If “advertiser A” uses their predetermined ad time to insult the viewer, or if they try to do to much, the viewer is less likely to return. If such behavior keeps up over time, the viewer will simply “give up” and simply stop caring about your product or service. By treating people like people, not only do you get the viewer to care about the product, you make hem more willing to investigate other products or services that have your name on it.
In-Show Result: Network 23 is consistently number one in the ratings.
Real-World Example: Anyone who tows the Free Line concept practices this advertising method.

Technique #2: The Grossberg Method

Championed By: Ned Grossberg (the late Charles Rocket), the president of Network 66 and Cheviot’s mortal enemy.
Thesis: People exists to buy things, so they might as well be buying those things from us.
Explanation: When this particular advertising method is employed, the consumer essentially becomes secondary to the items that are being shown on the screen. Although the company involved might see a initial spike in “audience participation,” the numbers will actually be lower overall. To compensate for this, the advertiser/network is forced to employ a variety of gimmicks in order to coerce people into coming back for more. In the show, these gimmicks ranged from ridiculous (“Watch 66 in your sleep! You can do that now!”) to horrifying (one second long “blipverts” that had a nasty habit of making fat people explode) to the downright bizarre (a reality show about the life and times of super genius infants).
In-Show Result: Grossberg is made to look like a fool on a fairly regular basis; network ratings go down sharply.
Real-World Example: Any company labeled as an “evil corporation” has been accused of using this advertising method at least once in their existence.

Technique #3: The Zik Zak Method

Championed By: A fairly mysterious, multi-national corporation called “Zik Zak.” While it is implied that Zik Zak makes everything from furniture to prescription drugs, the company’s main products are soft drinks and fast food.
Thesis: People?! Who cares about people! Buy our stuff and quit complaining!
Explanation: People who employ this kind of advertising structure simply do not care about anyone or anything other than their product. It really doesn’t matter if people get “inconvenienced” or even find themselves in a sticky situation. They still bought the product. The “in-world” example of this tactic is the NeuralStim, a “free bracelet” that caused people to crave cheeseburgers. In the case of our hero, Edison Carter, the bracelet made him nearly die from overspending.
In-Show Result: The “faulty” bracelets cause Zik Zak to nearly go bankrupt.
Real-World Example: In a fictional TV show, it’s called a “NeuralStim.” In the real word, it’s called “malware.”
Special Note: During my research, I ran across three very different organizations that call themselves “Zik Zak.” Please keep in mind that the comments above only apply to the fictional corporation, not to the these real-life entities.

Our Advice: The “Cheviot Method” is the only way to go. As I said a few days ago. These are your people. Never forget that. Your customers (and everyone else, for that matter) will thank you in the long run.

Anyone who lived through the late 1980’s ought to remember Max Headroom, the hyperactive, pseudo-CGI “head in the box” portrayed by actor Matt Frewer. The Max Headroom character was everywhere in those days, from music videos to ads for Coca-Cola and seemingly everything in between. What many people don’t remember, however, is the science fiction program that bared the character’s name. This was not the lovable, wacky Max that called Cinemax and England’s Channel 4 home. This Max exists in a world where the major television networks are in charge. Because of this, such every day items as the off switch and the mute button are deemed to be illegal. Televisions are everywhere, including bathrooms and junk yards. Simply put, no one could ever escape the grip of the mass media, and the people like it that way.

Working within the confines of this odd, “Network-meets-The Matrix” world is Edison Carter (also portrayed by Matt Frewer), ace reporter for the highly-rated Network 23 and the “basis” for Max Headroom. It is his mission to bring his viewers the truth, no matter the situation. In the show’s fourteen episodes, Emerson and company does everything from thwart a sentient supercomputer to blowing the lid off of a dangerous subliminal advertising scheme run by Bill Maher, using nothing more than quick thinking and a heaping helping of brutal honesty. The viewer, both physically in the show and otherwise, are constantly reminded that the world is a better place thanks to people like Emerson Carter and his “computerized” alter ego. As long as there are people fighting for the truth, there really is nothing to worry about.

In many ways, we are approaching this basic existence, only with a different concept serving as our vice. Instead of thriving on a flashing picture, we are addicted to information. I don’t just mean the “TMZ/Perez Hilton” style celebrity gossip columns. I mean anything. Pick your topic — President Obama, professional wrestling, U2 — and I bet there is someone, somewhere talking, tweeting, or blogging about it at this very moment. We need to know about what is going on, and we need to know it now. Take the recent “best of seven” series between the Los Angeles Lakers and the Orlando Magic for example. Five years ago, we would have had to wait two to three days to hear former Laker Shaquille O’Neal talk about his former team. Thanks to Twitter, we heard it minutes after the Lakers cliched the NBA title. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that this kind of “instant feedback” can become addictive.

Now despite what some might be thinking, things really aren’t all that dire. Our world isn’t based upon the idea of two-way television sets or networks that can make commercials so compact that they make people’s heads literally explode. We’re simply talking about the delivery of information, not a re-creation of 1984. It’s human nature to want to know what is going on around us. Exploiting that desire, on the other hand, is something else entirely. It all comes down to priorities. Those who put more effort into their advertising than their content are more likely to alienate their audiences than the people who put their “product” front and center. By ignoring the very thing that got you into this very situation to begin with, the writer/blogger/YouTube “star” is actually sending a message that your fan base’s mouse click means more than their physical presence. Who cares if the content is good nor not? You clicked the link. It’s your loss.

While it might seem like a good idea now, turning your audience into a group of mind-numbed automatons randomly clicking things will not help you become a success in the long run. The trick, if you want to call it that, is to adopt what I like to call the “Edison Carter” approach to content creation and maintenance. It all breaks down to three basic principles:

1. Your users are more than just a group of random mice clicking a white box. They’re people. Your people. Always keep that in mind when developing your content.
2. Stay genuine to your cause.
3. Stay open to the needs and concerns of your user base.

Do this, and the world just might become a better place. If you don’t, well … let’s just say living in an “off switch-free world” is not anyone’s idea of a good time. Be sure to come back tomorrow for part two of our three part series. Until then, this is Brad Fallon signing off for Network 23 the Free Line.

What do cherries, Microsoft, and the Irving Berlin classic “White Christmas” all have in common? Despite what you might be thinking right now, the answer is not ice cream sundaes, anti-trust suits, or Danny Kaye. It’s Bing. For those unaware, Bing is Microsoft’s new “do it all” search portal that will supposedly change the way we look at search portals. Does it live up to the hype? We are about to find that out.

First Impression: “Why does the welcome picture have little ‘hot spots’ in it?”

Search (Term: “Open Source Browsers”)

Number of Hits
Bing: 57.2 million hits
Google: 62.6 million hits
Yahoo: 35.8 million hits

Search Quality
Bing: Although devoid of both repeating links and blatant advertising, Bing seems to be focused on one thing and one thing only: Chrome. Out of the ten links on the first page, four deal with Google’s controversial browser. Mozilla and Firefox, meanwhile, are left out in the proverbial cold.
Google: Google results seem to be a bit more diverse than that of Bing. Chrome, for example, only appears once, while Mozilla makes its presence felt twice.
Yahoo: Yahoo’s results are a tad more redundant than both Bing and Google, but it’s not anything to really write home about. Mozilla appears only once, while Chrome isn’t mentioned at all.

Video Search (Term: “Photoshop Tutorials”)

Number of Hits
Bing: 34,700
Google (YouTube): 73,600
Yahoo: 6,215

Search Quality
Bing: Every video on the first page actually corresponded with the keywords in question. While the difficulty and intended audience might differ from one clip to another, the overall theme remains steady.
Google (YouTube): Same as Bing, only with less links.
Yahoo: A few of the links seem to go a bit off-topic, but most stay on-point.

Bing On…
News: When you first arrive, you will notice a few videos sitting at the bottom of the screen. Those videos can be turned on by either clicking the link (as per tradition) or running your mouse over the “play” button. While it isn’t suited for watching whole stories, the Bing News mouse over feature makes grabbing a “sneak preview” as painless as possible.
Maps: For the life of us, we just could not get the map feature running properly. Instead of getting a map full of roads, rivers, and landmarks, we received a desolate beige blob full of orange arrows. After a little while, we were able to turn the beige blob in a grid similar to the one found in the science fiction film Tron. The actual turn-by-turn directions, however, are a completely different story. Every set we tried were incredibly detailed and extremely easy to read. We especially appreciate the “if you see ___, then you’ve gone too far” note that appeared at the end of every page. It makes exploring new places a bit less taxing.

Final Thought: While it isn’t exactly perfect, it’s much better than we expected. Microsoft supposedly put a ton of time and effort into this project, and it shows. Yes, it’s still “rough around the edges,” but it isn’t just a rebranded “Live Search” either. In short, Bing just might be the “web portal powerhouse” Redmond has always wanted. Whether it actually lives up to hype, however, remains to be seen.