
 Less than half a year ago 
  I attempted to examine how internet searching has become a defining aspects 
  of our lives. Ordinarily I rather consciously try to make these columns somewhat 
  behind the wave - I try to avoid bandwagoning and don't jump onto every internet-related 
  issue that makes headlines. It seems, however, than in this 
  particular case, I may have been before the wave. Though I'm quite sure 
  that these aren't a result of my Boidem column on the 
  subject making the rounds, a flurry of articles in the popular press telling 
  us how important search has become to us have recently 
  been published. Many of these are quite fascinating to read, and have interesting 
  examples, and even points to raise. But they also seem to avoid dealing with 
  one of the most glaring, and distressing, issues related to search. Yes, people 
  are conducting searches right and left, daily, hourly, almost every minute. 
  But they're not searching for anything worthwhile.
  
  Every year, the National Football League Super Bowl rates 
  among the highest rated programs on television. This year, however, it was the 
  halftime show that made the headlines. That's the halftime show that gained 
  instant notoriety when at its end Janet Jackson displayed one of her breasts. 
  Considering the amount of exposure stars permit themselves today, I doubt that 
  we could claim that Jackson's act skyrocketed her to the top of the list of 
  most-exposed stars. But the resulting flurry of web-searches around the incident, 
  or at least around the breast, certainly won her exposure of a different sort. 
  Lycos 
  reported that searches for Janet and her breast 
  became the all-time record holder for most searches in a 24 hour period, certainly 
  a record of some sort.
  
  It's not hard to conceive of numerous possible research 
  projects that might revolve around Janet Jackson and her breast, but something 
  gives me the feeling that the vast number of searches conducted on the subject 
  weren't exactly done with research in mind. What's more, though much can most 
  certainly be said about the beauty of breasts, the fact that Janet Jackson's 
  breast ranks as the most searched for item ever 
  on the web doesn't exactly suggest that those who searched for it had aesthetic 
  considerations in mind. A review of the other items that fill the ranks of the 
  Lycos 50 and similar sites leaves us with a similar 
  impression - research (or aesthetics) isn't what's behind the vast majority 
  of these searchers. Of course we shouldn't be surprised by this, but neither 
  should we take any special pride in it.
  
  There's nothing new about the argument that there's nothing 
  useful on the internet. People have been making that claim for about as 
  long as it's been around. It showed up long ago in cartoons 
  about the internet. Eight years ago Clifford Stoll published one of the 
  first critical books about the internet, Silicon Snake Oil. On Amazon.com's 
  pages 
  on that book we read: 
In Silicon Snake Oil, Clifford Stoll, the best-selling author of The Cuckoo's Egg and one of the pioneers of the Internet, turns his attention to the much-heralded information highway, revealing that it is not all it's cracked up to be. Yes, the Internet provides access to plenty of services, but useful information is virtually impossible to find and difficult to access. Is being on-line truly useful? "Few aspects of daily life require computers...They're irrelevant to cooking, driving, visiting, negotiating, eating, hiking, dancing, speaking, and gossiping. You don't need a computer to...recite a poem or say a prayer." Computers can't, Stoll claims, provide a richer or better life.Even considering, however, that at some point along the line people actually do place high hopes on technologies, it's a fair guess that not too many internet users are going to expect that their computers are going to make their lives more satisfying. Is having a photograph of Janet Jackson's breast arrive right in front of you on your computer screen a factor in achieving that satisfaction? If yes, it would undoubtedly be a rather minor one. Still, it also has a role to play in the overall scheme of things. Stoll was, of course, right about that richer or better life, but he was also arguing a relatively moot point. As, I suppose, am I.
Return to Communications & Computers In Education - Main Page