corigin.com

In this era of data smog, the knowledge worker who can act like an agile ninja by consuming vast quantities of information, synthesizing it and getting it in the hands of the right people at the right time is invaluable. For knowledge worker ninjas, RSS is your shuriken.

I have been using various RSS readers for nearly five years now - I’ve tried them all. However, none matches the power of Google Reader. I have found that if you tap into all of its features, it’s the Holy Grail of Personal Knowledge Management.

So as 2007 winds down and thoughts turn to productivity and prosperity in the new year, I offer these tips to help. Share your own thoughts in the comments. (Some of these may work with RSS readers from Newsgator, Bloglines and others but they are written with Google in mind.)

This post has several parts …

* The Core Philosophy: Google Reader is a database and a feed reader
* Continually add tons of feeds in organized, methodical way
* Establish a taxonomy that makes retrieval and sharing easy using on-the-fly tagging
* Annotate your data by connecting Reader to Gmail or Blogger
* Putting it all together - sorting, searching and sharing

The Core Philosophy: Google Reader is a database and a feed reader

Most people who use RSS readers do so with the intent of subscribing to an aggregated river of news feeds, persistent searches and blogs. However with the recent addition of search, the Google Reader became much more. Like Gmail, Reader should be viewed as a database that you can build from scratch and continually hone. I wrote about this in September when the feature launched, but I see far more potential now than I did then. This philosophy is key - Google Reader = news aggregator + custom feed database.

Continually add tons of feeds in organized, methodical way

Second, I encourage you to throw as many feeds as you can at the Google Reader just so you can capture and mine it. This should include relevant feeds that you never have any intention of reading or even scanning. For example, I subscribe to high volume streams like Twitter timelines, AP news syndicates, various digg feeds and more. These generate a torrent of posts but I don’t let them get in my way. The key is to add them to a special folder that is separate from other feeds that you actually read or scan. This way, with a click of a button you can clear these items but still cache ‘em. However, the great news is that you can always go back and search and/or retrieve them later, as you can see below.

For those feeds you do want to read or scan, I would also suggest filing them away by context as Daniel Miessler recommends here. The great thing that Google Reader does is a allow feeds to sit in multiple folders. This allows me to store some feeds in a “mobile” folder that I have bookmarked on my mobile phone, even as they also reside in a “blogs” folder. Set up folders by context - including computers, contexts (online/offline/etc) and devices.

Establish a taxonomy that makes retrieval and sharing easy using on-the-fly tagging

One of Google’s best, yet underutilized features is tagging. This differs from folders. As I mentioned earlier this week, Google let you tag individual posts/items and then easily retrieve these later using the keyboard shortcut. Lifehacker covers all of this here.

Tagging is an incredibly powerful tool for becoming a knowledge management ninja - especially in PR. As you’re reading feeds you can tag them for sharing with a select group or for easy retrieval in the future.

For example, let’s say your job is to compile a report to your boss at the end of the week. As you scan, simply tag all of the potential items you want to include with “report.” Now you can easily retrieve these posts. However, there’s more. You can search them too! This is powerful because you are adding a layer of structure to what is basically a giant pile of information that someone else decided to organize for you when the feed was established.

Anotate your data by connecting Reader to Gmail or Blogger

Other than simple tags, Google Reader doesn’t let you add notes to your posts or feeds. However, when you email items out of Google Reader you can add up to 1,000 characters. I recommend sending these into your Gmail Personal Nerve Center so that they get filed away with a certain tag. Another option is to email them into a private Blogger blog using their post by email function. Ruud Hein suggests another way of doing this with Feedburner. I would suggest coupling this with tags as opposed to starred items.

Putting it all together - sorting, searching and sharing

Now that you have your personal knowledge management system up and running, you can begin to pull it all together. For example, start filing away items under tags. Share the tag (privately) with colleagues and get this information out more widely. If you want to make this less kludgy, run the feed through Feebdurner as Ruud describes above and let every one subscribe via email.

Here’s another idea. If you are tagging items by client name or project name, you can later go back and run a scoped search within that tag. Even better, you can do the same with specific feeds and folders. So if your boss calls you up and asks you how many times The New York Times used the name of your company in a headline, you can easily give him or her an answer.

This is all just the beginning but you can see where I am going. Set this system up in a way that works best for you. Don’t be afraid of too much information. Embrace it. Revel in it. But wrangle it like cattle to make it truly work for you. Be a ninja in 08. Go forward and good luck.

There’s been an uproar in the blogosphere and elsewhere this week over who - by default - can see your Google Reader Shared Items (a new feature). The short answer is anyone you have chatted with over Google Talk.

If this spooks you out there are two widely reported workarounds: a) don’t share any items or b) make sure you hide anyone that you don’t want to share with. However, there is a third undocumented trick that lets you share items with a private group and no one else. I plan to expand on this with a post later this week about how I am now using Google Reader as a Personal Knowledge Management System to complement my Gmail Personal Nerve Center.

The key is to make use of Google’s underutilized tagging feature. At the bottom of any item in your reader you will spot a small link that says “tags.” This system overlaps with, yet complements Google Reader folders. Click on the field to create a new tag. To illustrate for this blog post, here I have added the tag “myteam” to a cool post by Paul Stamatiou (which borrows one of my favorite photos of all time).

Next, click on “Settings” at the the top of the Reader interface, then click on Tags. Find the tag you just created and make that tag - and only that tag - public.

Finally, and this is key, share the tag page only with people you trust. They can subscribe to this tag page in Google Reader. Further, this page will not be spidered by any of search engines. What’s more, even if someone should find your private Google Reader number (which shared items does expose when you hover over profiles), no one will be able to find this page unless they know the secret tag name.

It would be great if Google would tell people this so I wouldn’t have to (and simplified the whole process). Right now, they make it too hard to find. Still, there is a workaround that lets you have your cake and eat it too. UPDATE :: The psychic gang at Google posted this just as I wrote this post.

Thinking about the future is fun. It’s what I am paid to do. However, I never contemplate the days ahead without the context of the past. After all, the future is always grounded in history. That’s why I have become a heavy user of Google Trends.

The tool is closest thing we have to a global rear-view mirror. Blog search and conversation charts only go so far. They capture what a small subset of the most vocal, tech-savvy users are saying. Search engines, on the other hand, show us what’s on everyone’s mind - including the giant underwater iceberg of silent users.

Like 2006, this was a big year for Web 2.0. Here are Google Trends charts I pulled looking at three broad 2007 Web 2.0 trends, along with my comments. I chose to focus here on broad trends, as opposed to the gyrations of individual sites, which always change with fickle users. (Micro blogging is an exception because the term is rarely used so I looked at Twitter instead.)

All of the data is global in scope and only as current as mid-December. Of course, all of this is just directional. Ideally, it would be great to cross-reference all of this with other sources, like Compete.com. Still, they do provide perspective.

Trend I: Social Networking

* Data: Searches for social networking and news volume both doubled in 2007. However, more recently, the volume has started to show some signs of weakness. Meanwhile, geographically, interest in social networking from India and Singapore is skyrocketing. Search volume for individual sites, like Facebook, appear to track the broader meme.

* Insight: Social networking is evolving from a group of sites into several competing platforms that power thousands of sites. Eventually, we won’t think of social networks as sites but as a feature. This data might just be the first sign of such a progression.

Trend II: Micro Blogging

* Data: Micro blogging doesn’t register on Google Trends, so I chose to compare Twitter and blogging (as opposed to “blogs” which is a much broader term). What’s fascinating here is that searches for Twitter surpassed for “blogging” in April and never looked back. Meanwhile, news volume for the two are neck and neck. Twitter is particularly strong in Japan. That said, interest in micro blogging has dropped off dramatically this (nearly 50% off their peak in the spring).

* Insight: Blogging is work and the payoff (emotional or monetary) can be hard to come by, particularly for those of us who want to see a rapid return on our investment in time. Meanwhile, personal publishing is evolving because of the increasing sophistication of mobile devices and the Attention Crash. Micro blogging fosters connection with less work all while working well with mobile devices. Blogging remains important, however, as the traditional press rapidly embraced blogging, it has encouraged individual publishers to find new ways to spread their influence.

Trend III:: Web Applications

* Data: Google searches for web apps doubled in the second half of the year. That said they are dwarfed by stalwarts like Microsoft Office or Apple’s iWork suite. Interest in Google Docs has flattened since they rolled out their presentation application. The US leads the way in web based applications.

* Insight: The search data seems to reflect what others have said - that web applications are not on most people’s radar. This data is consistent with what Microsoft and Apple have said - people like their desktop apps. Web applications are in their infancy. It should be interesting to see if they will remain a niche category in the years ahead. The lack of the ubiquitous connectivity could be a major stumbling block.

Google announced last night they are starting a project called knol that will allow anyone to create wiki-like pages on topics. In particular, Google is encouraging people who know a particular subject to write an “authoritative” article about it. The search engine will not vet any of the content, however, they will prioritize the most credible entries and rank them first in search results. It remains unclear how Google is measuring credibility - a scary thought.

Still, with this move Google is clearly targeting Wikipedia (which is perhaps their biggest rival) and quite possibly is trying to ensure that Jimmy Wales’ forthcoming social search engine, Wikia, is dead on arrival. Consider the timing of this announcement. It comes just days before Wikia is set to launch in beta and when Google doesn’t even have any site we can poke at.

My initial take on this is that knols are going to kill Wikipedia - but it will take time. This theory, however, hinges on whether people actually start creating knols, but I believe they will. Here are several reasons why Wikipedia and Wikia are dead …

1) The fame factor - Google prioritizes knols over Wikipedia

In theory, Google no longer needs to rely on Wikipedia for fresh content. The search engine will prioritize content from its own system and rank the most credible articles more highly than anything in the open source encyclopedia. This alone will encourage people to add to the commons. It will take time though for Google to reach a critical mass with its knols. Do not underestimate the power of fame.

2) Official sources and experts are welcomed, not spurned.

I love the openness of Wikipedia. However, I have long chided its lack of openness toward corporations and other sources of authority. As much as we would like to think people don’t want corporations playing in our sandbox, most average users welcome organization and multiple perspectives. This is why we still have a thriving profession called editors. When it comes to corporations, Google is open, Wikpedia is closed.

3) Infinite Resources

Wikipedia has been trying to raise money for a long time now. Meanwhile, Google has infinite resources and the most powerful marketing vehicle on the planet to push it.

I am excited about the launch of this initiative. It is my hope that corporations and organizations that play by the rules will be able to unleash their subject matter experts to add content to the commons in a way the community accepts. There’s no reason they should be excluded, provided there is some degree of counter balance.

What’s even more exciting is that it reinforces the role of PR in this new wild and wooly online world. Now granted, we will have to play by the knol rules and be transparent. Still, this is all very exciting and in the process it might even get Wikipedia to change some too - for the better.

Google Reader has added a feature that recommends feeds for you. Recommendations for new feeds are generated by comparing your interests with the feeds of users similar to you as well as by looking at your web history. A help page explains the process…

The “Top Recommendations” section lists a few feeds you might be interested in, but aren’t subscribed to yet. You can get more recommendations by clicking the View all link next to those recommendations, or by clicking the Discover link in the sidebar.

You can preview a feed in Reader before making a decision to subscribe or not; just click on the feed in the list of recommendations. There’s also some extra information about the number of subscribers to the feed and approximate posts per week. If you find a feed you like, just click the Subscribe button to add it to your reading list. If you’ve decided you’re not interested in one of the feeds, just click No thanks to take it off your recommendations list.

Your recommendations list is automatically generated

Here’s a screen shot of what this looks like in my reader. Though it’s not very controversial since all of the data is anonymous, it would be great to see Google give you an opt-out choice since some people may not want to share their reading habits with the world - even anonymously.

The following is also my column in this week’s Advertising Age.

Search is broken. Of course, with Google at more than $600 a share, 91% of us using search engines and studies showing we’re largely satisfied with their results, it’s easy to discard this statement. The problem, however, is that search engines can bring back too much information. With content becoming a commodity, it can be difficult to separate the diamonds from the duds.

Thankfully, a number of smart entrepreneurs recognize this, and they are on the case. They see an opportunity to create a new, blended approach to search that allows us to scour the web just as we do now but with more guidance from community curators.

Mahalo, which means “thank you” in Hawaiian, is among the most notable of these upstarts. The site, which launched with a great deal of fanfare in May, is the brainchild of serial entrepreneur Jason Calacanis.

Mahalo blends wiki technology with search. The site has a small team of editors and even more volunteers who work to pull together frequently updated pages that point users to high-quality links for the top 10,000 searches in popular categories. These curated pages cover topics such as how-to articles, the latest gadget reviews and more. Pages are updated frequently as news breaks.

If a page does not exist in its database, Mahalo will aggregate results from all of the major search engines, including Google, Live.com and Ask, as well as Wikipedia and YouTube. Further, users can apply to become a guide or suggest pages and links. The only way to advertise is through contextual search ads placed through Google AdSense.

While anecdotal data shows that Mahalo may be getting some traction, it has a lot of competition in the same genre. Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales is preparing his own social search engine, Wikia. It promises to be more open. About, which is owned by New York Times Co., has long taken a similar approach. Finally, Google too is showing signs of becoming more social. Just recently it started allowing users to edit maps or collaborate in the open to build complete travel guides.

Google News in the US has added a new feature that, while promising, is sure to be controversial. Google plans to roll it out globally once they iron out the kinks.

Any person mentioned in a news story that Google News indexes can email in their comments to news-comments@google.com. Those who do so will be asked to verify their identity and organizational affiliation. There’s more in the Google FAQ here and here.

Once Google approves the comments, they are posted and are attached to the story as an addendum, as you can see from the image above or live on the web here. It’s unclear if these comments will also roll up into Google Universal Search results.

This is certainly a boon for PR professionals who have longed for a way to respond to what is largely an automated system. Wikipedia needs a similar mechanism. Google is also fairly liberal in the sources it aggregates. It includes lots of homegrown sites and blogs. This approach, while managed manually, certainly gives companies and subjects a voice on a critical site that is increasingly a big gateway for lots of news/blog content.

Still, there are some big outstanding questions. For example: can a PR agency comment on a source’s behalf (assuming they represent them) and if so how is our affiliation verified?

Beyond these questions, the move is even more significant because it turns Google News into an editorial product rather than simply an aggregator. The Google News team now makes decisions about what responses go up and what gets left behind. Think about that. What if Google somehow gets scammed with an email spoofer and posts a comment they shouldn’t, for example.

Google gets points for opening up their platform to comments from sources but I would had rather have seen them make it more democratic and have this open to everyone. In being selective, the move is more fraught with risk as Google begins to make editorial decisions that might not be popular. A better way to manage this might be to have a system that lets everyone comment, yet also delineates those from official sources that are mentioned in a particular story.