In theory, online search is expected to expose us to new experiences and vistas. There’s no limit to what we can explore and discover. But in practice, people universally restrict themselves to searching for things familiar to them.  People with peculiar preferences and tastes, who were previously shy about openly expressing them, tend to assemble around online water coolers which cater to their interests. Once in the company of the likeminded, the middle ground soon vanishes in the echo chamber where everyone reinforces the increasingly strident voices being raised.

PERSONALISATION MUDDIES THE GAME
The problem of echo chambers is worsened by the personalization route adopted by Search Engines.

Google and other Search Engines now return different search results for the same terms searched by different users. This is because these searches are customized and personalized for the user.  Many critics have raised the valid concern that this personalization is at the cost of creativity.

For instance, if you were to search in Amazon for a book, you will find it recommending other books which you might like. Very rarely would you be surprised by some original recommendation, since the suggested books are often based on data from your previous searches.

Providing a narrow and relevant information environment makes search useful, no doubt. But the absence of randomness can hurt in other ways. Creativity is often given a boost by the introduction of totally random ideas or stimuli. Think about the apple and Isaac Newton!

Eli Pariser argues in the book Filter Bubble that the search for perfect relevance and the kind of serendipity that promotes creativity, push in opposite directions. He says that ‘if you like this, you’ll like that’ can be a useful tool, but it’s not a source for creative ingenuity. Because, “by definition, ingenuity comes from the juxtaposition (placing side by side) of ideas that are far apart, and relevance comes from finding ideas that are similar”.

What is relevant may not always lead you to serendipity or happy chance finding which is foundational for creativity. So let your search lead you to explore new experiences occasionally. There’s the cost of time, no doubt. But you might strike gold once in a while.

THERE’S enough room for a vertical search engine for eBooks. The few out there are mostly amateur efforts by individuals. As of now, no big corporation has poured good money into developing one. And for a variety of reasons, including the litigation and uncertainties over Google’s book scanning project, the search engine giant has not gone all out into eBook search and incorporated it as a vertical, just like it has done for flights and hotels, after acquiring or cutting deals with sites offering vertical searches. As of now, Google Books is primarily a source for copyright-free eBooks, and Google Play books are restricted to the Android and iOS platforms.

But that could change in the foreseeable future. In the meanwhile, Amazon’s Kindle Store remains the most powerful eBook store for the simple reason that it stocks almost every eBook available. Not to forget its global reach. Though there are more eBook stores on the industry standard ePub platform, by its sheer heft in the market, Amazon with its Kindle eBooks packs a punch.
All ePub bookstores are search constrained
Barnes and Noble’s eBook store which stocks ePub books with DRM comes next. Kobo, eBookmall, diesel-eBooks, and ebooks.com are the other biggie eBook stores out there. From my experience, all of them have limitations in search. Discovering even eBooks which are available are often a problem. The stores reveal them only after repeated searches, enough to deter all but the most determined. Diesel and eBooks.com have particularly bad in-house search engines.

But by vertical search engine for eBooks, we are primarily referring to search engines specialized in retrieving information about eBooks from all major eBook stores. Basically, here customers are looking out for price comparison, details about formats and devices on which they’re available, etc. There are a handful, and as mentioned before, most of them are amateur efforts.

This post will restrict itself to listing them out. A fuller review of their strengths and weaknesses has to wait for a later post.

These are the eBook search engines which I have come across:

• ·         Inkmesh  http://inkmesh.com
  
• ·         AddAll Ebooks  http://ebooks.addall.com
  
• ·         Luzme: http://luzme.com
  
• ·         Leatherbound: http://leatherbound.me/
  

In the next post, I will analyze their pluses and minuses.

THE past year was a tough one for SEO practitioners with Google drastically curtailing information on the keywords used to access websites made available through Google Analytics.
Keywords are still available for AdWords users through the Keyword Planner as well as for Webmasters through the Google Webmaster Tools, but the quality of the keywords returned are not comparable with those returned by Google Analytics. SEO practitioners will surely perfect workarounds to tide over the situation. But what's not discussed much is that the move could end up benefiting internet analytics companies like Hitwise, Comscore, Compete, Quantcast, etc.
The competitive analysis packages by these companies already cost an arm and a length. Now it looks like Google has indirectly made it more lucrative for them to charge for keywords too.
ISPs STILL PACK A PUNCH
Many people think that only search engines have access to the keywords used by searchers on the Web. But consumer connectivity to the Web is provided by the internet service providers (ISPs), and although they're now well past their heydays, the ISPs still pack a punch when it comes to accessing user search data.
Hitwise Global research head Bill Tancer has revealed how the process works through his book Click. He says the company collects search data on 10 million-plus users in the US alone. The company collects it from both ISPs as well as opt-in panels. The break-up is 7.5 million-plus from multiple ISPs across the country, and the remaining from opt-in panels. Opt-in panels are groups of internet users who have agreed to be monitored, and whose demographic details are made available to analytics companies, all for a price.
ISP and opt-in data about usage are updated every day. Search-term data is updated on a weekly basis. Tancer claims data privacy is protected by anonymizing and aggregating data, and by scrubbing search data terms off personally identifiable information. After Edward Snowden’s revelations, all such assurances have to be viewed skeptically.
So with internet analytics companies having access to search data in such a comprehensive manner, surely they have the wherewithal to step in and provide commercial solutions to any dearth of keyword data on account of Google's shift in policy?
Let's wait and see as to who will be the ultimate beneficiaries of Google's move. Will it be rival search engines like Bing? Or will it be these internet analytics companies?

(392 words)