It’s a nice afternoon and I’m in a coffee shop working with friends. The “work party” in a non-work location is by far my favorite way to work. I picked up a cup of tea and mentioned to the barista that it must be tea time. So he asked me when tea time is. I have no idea. My first idea is to consult The Oracle. However, there’s some remodeling going on here and the router is temporarily disconnected. So I mention to my friends that the barista asked about tea time and immediately I discovered that (at least in Australia) tea time is around 3:30. It’s a bit late for tea time, however, I realized that I just inadvertently and successfully performed a social search.
Combining social and algorithmic searching is one of the more brilliant moves on the part of search engines. Folks will start delving for information either by consulting a search engine or calling a friend with some level of expertise. The process is almost completely situational. However, according to the Pew Internet & American Life Project:
For help with a variety of common problems, more people turn to the internet than consult experts or family members to provide information and resources.
The variety of common problems is broad and the decision to tap into a social network versus consulting a search engine is subjective. However, some new projects are popping up that look promising. They give the social search a new, more efficient execution, or try to integrate social and algorithmic search. Google Profiles are one step Google is taking to make searching more human. I believe the most notable project at this time is Aardvark: (vark.com). Aardvark actually “lives” in your instant messaging program and seeks out the person who can best answer your question. This is no Yahoo Answers.
From their site:
Why use Aardvark?
A real conversation with a friend (or friend-of-friend) can provide much better information than a web page. After all, there’s much more knowledge and experience in people’s heads than there is written on web pages.
Aardvark routes questions within your social network, so the network is as big as you make it.
With more friends on Aardvark, you get faster and better responses. (You can connect Aardvark to your existing social network on Facebook, MySpace and other popular sites — you may have friends already using Aardvark.)
I like the idea that searching is moving in a more networked, human direction.
This has everything to do with libraries, and more importantly, the place of libraries in peoples’ lives. Reference question statistics continue to rise at PLCH irregardless of the rising number of home computers, and hence, search engine users. The library provides an added value to customers. Asking a library worker is a social search with the power of the algorithmic search behind it. I’m curious how libraries can use these new ways to find information within the institution. We’ve talked about using IM on the public desk to alert co-workers at their cubicles that we need help. What about using a service like Aardvark within the whole library system to better answer reference questions?
Read more:
Brynn Evans writes about the issue
Web Worker Daily reviews Aardvark
Google’s Profiles page
Pew Internet and American Life Project’s research on the topic
I also had the pleasure of meeting a fellow I’d connected with over the internet in person. We were able to talk about some of the nuts and bolts of web work. He had some interesting things to communicate; I’m getting excited about all the possibilities. I have a big potential project in the works, but it’ll be a month or two before I’m in a position to work with it.