<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="http://xml.world-of-newave.info/britney-spears.atom.xsl" media="screen"?>
<feed version="0.3" xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/ns#" xml:lang="en-us">
<title>Britney Spears - World-of-Newave.info</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://answers.world-of-newave.info/britney-spears.htm"/>
<author>
<name>World-of-Newave.info</name>
<url>http://www.world-of-newave.info/</url>
</author>
<modified>2008-08-28T19:55:56Z</modified>
<tagline>Latest news and articles about Britney Spears</tagline>
<copyright>Copyright (c)2004-2008.§/Newave SARL. All rights reserved.</copyright>
<entry>
<title>{ISSUES &gt; BIAS AND BALANCE} - Discussing Obama, Limbaugh suggests Dems, media believe "you can't criticize the little black man-child"</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/discussing-obama-limbaugh-suggests-dems-media-20080865019.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">On the August 20 broadcast of his
nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh asserted of attacks by Sen.
John McCain against Sen. Barack Obama: "[S]ee, there are Democrats -- the
drive-bys" -- a term Limbaugh uses to denote the national media -- "are just so upset with these so-called
'ferocious attacks.' These have been benign. Even the Britney
Spears/Paris Hilton ad was funny. It was
benign." He later added: "It's -- you know, it's just
-- it's just we can't hit the girl. I don't care how far
feminism's saying, you can't hit the girl, and you can't --
you can't criticize the little black man-child. You just can't do
it, 'cause it's just not right, It's not fair. He's
such a victim."

Limbaugh previously claimed that "nobody criticizes [Sen.] Hillary [Clinton]. ... Well, you might say, 'No, Michelle Obama and Mrs. [Elizabeth] Edwards are out there
criticizing her,' but, see, I finally figured this one out, too. You can't hit
the girl. You just -- you can't hit the girl." He continued: "And for
[former Democratic presidential candidate John] Edwards and Obama to go out
there and criticize Hillary would -- she would -- she plays the victim better
than anybody does, and she could make real hay out of that. So they've got
their wives out there ripping her."

From the August 20 broadcast of Premiere
Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:



LIMBAUGH:
Quickly, L.A. Times poll:
"More striking, however, is the drop in Obama's favorable rating.
Obama's favorable rating has slid from 59 percent to 48 percent since
June. At the same time his negative rating has risen from 27 to 35 percent. The
bulk of that shift stems from Republicans souring on Obama amid ferocious
attacks on the Democrat by McCain and his allies." That's it --
see, there are Democrats -- the drive-bys are just so upset with these
so-called "ferocious attacks." These have been benign. Even the
Britney Spears/Paris Hilton ad was funny. It was benign. 


Obama's
patriotism is not being attacked in an ad. McCain's just out there saying
he's putting his own personal political ambition ahead of the
country's. It's -- you know, it's just -- it's just we
can't hit the girl. I don't care how far feminism's saying,
you can't hit the girl, and you can't -- you can't criticize
the little black man-child. You just can't do it, 'cause it's
just not right. It's not fair. He's such a victim.


    
</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/discussing-obama-limbaugh-suggests-dems-media-20080865019.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-21T02:03:46Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-21T02:03:46Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Mediamatters.Org</name>
<url>http://mediamatters.org/items/200808200009</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/discussing-obama-limbaugh-suggests-dems-media-20080865019.htm"><b>Discussing Obama, Limbaugh suggests Dems, media believe "you can't criticize the little black man-child"</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/discussing-obama-limbaugh-suggests-dems-media-20080865019.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Mediamatters.Org</span> - On the August 20 broadcast of his
nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh asserted of attacks by Sen.
John McCain against Sen. Barack Obama: "[S]ee, there are Democrats -- the
drive-bys" -- a term Limbaugh uses to denote the national media -- "are just so upset with these so-called
'ferocious attacks.' These have been benign. Even the Britney
Spears/Paris Hilton ad was funny. It was
benign." He later added: "It's -- you know, it's just
-- it's just we can't hit the girl. I don't care how far
feminism's saying, you can't hit the girl, and you can't --
you can't criticize the little black man-child. You just can't do
it, 'cause it's just not right, It's not fair. He's
such a victim."

Limbaugh previously claimed that "nobody criticizes [Sen.] Hillary [Clinton]. ... Well, you might say, 'No, Michelle Obama and Mrs. [Elizabeth] Edwards are out there
criticizing her,' but, see, I finally figured this one out, too. You can't hit
the girl. You just -- you can't hit the girl." He continued: "And for
[former Democratic presidential candidate John] Edwards and Obama to go out
there and criticize Hillary would -- she would -- she plays the victim better
than anybody does, and she could make real hay out of that. So they've got
their wives out there ripping her."

From the August 20 broadcast of Premiere
Radio Networks' The Rush Limbaugh Show:



LIMBAUGH:
Quickly, L.A. Times poll:
"More striking, however, is the drop in Obama's favorable rating.
Obama's favorable rating has slid from 59 percent to 48 percent since
June. At the same time his negative rating has risen from 27 to 35 percent. The
bulk of that shift stems from Republicans souring on Obama amid ferocious
attacks on the Democrat by McCain and his allies." That's it --
see, there are Democrats -- the drive-bys are just so upset with these
so-called "ferocious attacks." These have been benign. Even the
Britney Spears/Paris Hilton ad was funny. It was benign. 


Obama's
patriotism is not being attacked in an ad. McCain's just out there saying
he's putting his own personal political ambition ahead of the
country's. It's -- you know, it's just -- it's just we
can't hit the girl. I don't care how far feminism's saying,
you can't hit the girl, and you can't -- you can't criticize
the little black man-child. You just can't do it, 'cause it's
just not right. It's not fair. He's such a victim.


    
<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Media Matters - Discussing Obama, Limbaugh suggests Dems, media believe "you can&#39;t criticize the little black man-child" {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 21, 2008, 2:03 am - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 22, 2008, 5:49 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;18KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/">Society</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/">Issues</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/">Media</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/"><b>Bias and Balance</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{ENTERTAINMENT &gt; PUBLICATIONS AND MEDIA} - Spears racks up huge legal bill</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/spears-racks-up-huge-legal-bill-20080834721.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">Three separate legal teams are claiming more than $700,000 from Britney Spears over her child custody battle.</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/spears-racks-up-huge-legal-bill-20080834721.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-19T14:59:28Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-19T14:59:28Z</modified>
<author>
<name>News.Bbc.Co.Uk</name>
<url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7570402.stm</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/spears-racks-up-huge-legal-bill-20080834721.htm"><b>Spears racks up huge legal bill</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/spears-racks-up-huge-legal-bill-20080834721.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">News.Bbc.Co.Uk</span> - Three separate legal teams are claiming more than $700,000 from Britney Spears over her child custody battle.<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Spears racks up huge legal bill {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 19, 2008, 2:59 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 20, 2008, 10:58 am - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;44KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/">Arts</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/">Entertainment</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/"><b>Publications and Media</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{MARKETING AND ADVERTISING &gt; NEWS AND MEDIA} - Yo, Bitch! Britney is Back! And she's Looking Good!</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/yo-bitch-britney-is-back-and-she-s-looking-good-20080886512.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">

Britney Spears used to be cute. Britney Spears used to be adorable. Britney Spears used to be the hottest thing in the planet.</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/yo-bitch-britney-is-back-and-she-s-looking-good-20080886512.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-13T18:30:07Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-13T18:30:07Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Adrants.Com</name>
<url>http://www.adrants.com/2008/08/yo-bitch-britney-is-back-and-shes.php</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/yo-bitch-britney-is-back-and-she-s-looking-good-20080886512.htm"><b>Yo, Bitch! Britney is Back! And she's Looking Good!</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/yo-bitch-britney-is-back-and-she-s-looking-good-20080886512.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Www.Adrants.Com</span> - 

Britney Spears used to be cute. Britney Spears used to be adorable. Britney Spears used to be the hottest thing in the planet.<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Yo, Bitch! Britney is Back! And she's Looking Good! » Adrants {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 13, 2008, 6:30 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 14, 2008, 8:45 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;39KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/">Marketing and Advertising</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/">Advertising</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/"><b>News and Media</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{ENTERTAINMENT &gt; PUBLICATIONS AND MEDIA} - Britney considering MTV comeback</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/britney-considering-mtv-comeback-20080855312.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">Singer Britney Spears is in talks to appear at the MTV awards, a year after her disastrous comeback on the show.</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/britney-considering-mtv-comeback-20080855312.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-13T10:53:29Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-13T10:53:29Z</modified>
<author>
<name>News.Bbc.Co.Uk</name>
<url>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7558100.stm</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/britney-considering-mtv-comeback-20080855312.htm"><b>Britney considering MTV comeback</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/britney-considering-mtv-comeback-20080855312.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">News.Bbc.Co.Uk</span> - Singer Britney Spears is in talks to appear at the MTV awards, a year after her disastrous comeback on the show.<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">BBC NEWS | Entertainment | Britney considering MTV comeback {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 13, 2008, 10:53 am - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 13, 2008, 2:25 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;45KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/">Arts</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/">Entertainment</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/entertainment/publications-and-media/"><b>Publications and Media</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{MARKETING AND ADVERTISING &gt; NEWS AND MEDIA} - In a Way, Isn't Paris Hilton Already Leading the Free World?</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/in-a-way-isn-t-paris-hilton-already-leading-the-free-20080829411.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">

Paris Hilton responds to a recent McCain ad, comparing Barack Obama to Britney Spears and herself, in this Funny or Die exclusive.</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/in-a-way-isn-t-paris-hilton-already-leading-the-free-20080829411.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-11T18:48:50Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-11T18:48:50Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Adrants.Com</name>
<url>http://www.adrants.com/2008/08/in-a-way-isnt-paris-hilton-already.php</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/in-a-way-isn-t-paris-hilton-already-leading-the-free-20080829411.htm"><b>In a Way, Isn't Paris Hilton Already Leading the Free World?</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/in-a-way-isn-t-paris-hilton-already-leading-the-free-20080829411.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Www.Adrants.Com</span> - 

Paris Hilton responds to a recent McCain ad, comparing Barack Obama to Britney Spears and herself, in this Funny or Die exclusive.<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">In a Way, Isn't Paris Hilton Already Leading the Free World? » Adrants {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 11, 2008, 6:48 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 13, 2008, 2:18 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;40KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/">Marketing and Advertising</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/">Advertising</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/"><b>News and Media</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{ISSUES &gt; BIAS AND BALANCE} - MSNBC's Gregory failed to challenge suggestion that McCain's heroism during Vietnam War should bar criticism of him now</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/msnbc-s-gregory-failed-to-challenge-suggestion-2008086676.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">During the August 8 edition of MSNBC's
Race for the White House,
host David Gregory failed to challenge the suggestion by Nicolle
Wallace, senior adviser for Sen. John McCain's campaign, that McCain's
status as an "American hero, a former POW" should insulate him from
criticism of his policy proposals and Senate record. Wallace said: "I
never hear anyone put it to the Obama campaign, the internal
deliberations that they may have gone to when they made the strategic
decision to essentially fillet an American hero, a former POW, on the
stump every day, which is what comes out of their candidate's mouth
every day on the stump." Gregory later noted that Obama has
tied
McCain to
President Bush
and asked Wallace, "What else do you have in mind in terms of what
they've done?" In response, Wallace stated that "it is a blatant lie"
to call "McCain an extension of the Bush administration." But Gregory
did not ask Wallace how, as she suggested, McCain's being a former POW
exempts him from criticism that he is an "extension of the Bush
administration."

Wallace's
claim that connecting McCain to Bush policies is "a blatant lie" is
contradicted by statements by officials in the Bush White House and the
McCain campaign, as well as an independent study of voting records.
While appearing with McCain during a March 5 White House

endorsement ceremony, Bush

said that McCain is "not going to change when it comes to taking on the enemy." In an article about Bush's endorsement,
The Washington Post 
reported that White House officials said that "McCain and Bush are on the same page on the big issues, such as terrorism,
Iraq, immigration and taxes." As
Media Matters for America has 
noted, 
according 
to a 2008 study by
Congressional Quarterly,
 a nonpartisan publication that tracks legislators' votes, McCain voted with the president 95 percent of the time in 2007.

During the June 8

edition of ABC's
This Week, host George Stephanopoulos
asked McCain campaign national co-chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC):
"You said the tax policy and the health care policy were essentially,
Senator Graham -- John McCain is calling for
 an extension or maybe even enhancement of the Bush policies." Graham replied: "Yeah, absolutely."

From the August 8 edition of MSNBC's
Race for the White House: 


GREGORY: Let's talk about this campaign
--

WALLACE: Sure.

GREGORY: --
and talk about McCain campaign strategy. You have tried, the campaign has recently, to tarnish Obama's credibility
 and his image in a couple of 
ways. On the one hand, it is to describe him as a celebrity, to
use Britney Spears, Paris Hilton to suggest he's sort of famous for
being famous, that he's a lightweight. That's on the one hand.

On
the other hand, it is to reduce his energy plan to the idea of the tire
gauge, to suggest that his whole energy plan is really about whether
there's enough air in the tires.

So the question is, are these ambush political tactics? And is
that consistent with the original maverick that you
[unintelligible] John McCain is?


WALLACE:
You know, two quick things here, David. One, I never hear anyone put it
to the Obama campaign, the internal deliberations that they may have gone
to when they made the strategic decision to essentially fillet an
American hero, a former POW, on the stump every day, which is what
comes out of their candidate's mouth every day on the stump.

And two, Barack Obama tarnished himself. We didn't paint him as anything that he isn't. He certainly
 -- you know, he went overseas; we were pleased that he was finally going to visit the war zone. But their campaign made a decision -- and they obviously did it to gain advantage,
 because you don't do things in campaigns for other reasons -- to hold a 200,000 person rally in
Europe in the midst of a presidential campaign. So it was obviously
a decision to celebrate his celebrity with a crowd of screaming Europeans. And it's -- you know, by pointing it out, it's not our effort to tarnish
 him. It's shining a light on something that his campaign spent a lot of time and money trying to shine a light on themselves.

GREGORY: And when you talk about trying to tarnish McCain's image or fillet
his image or his reputation, certainly there's been a very aggressive
attempt to tie him to President Bush and say he's a third Bush term.
What else do you have in mind in terms of what they've done?

WALLACE:
Well, look, let's not gloss over that. I mean, you covered this White
House. I worked at this White House. John McCain used to make major
news every time he ended up at odds with the Bush White House,
whether it was attacking the
secretary of 
defense for the conduct of the
war, whether it was a very high profile disagreement that he had with
the Bush White House over torture and other aspects of the war on
terror. So it is a blatant lie when Barack Obama stands in front of his
supporters and calls John McCain an extension of the Bush
administration. It's simply not true. So, it's not something to gloss
over.

And
you know, on the other hand, Barack Obama is someone who's -- the two
pillars of his candidacy are a politician who's going to do things
differently, change we can believe in, and the other is judgment that
he pointed to in his race against Hillary Clinton when he said,
"I gave a speech in 2002 in which I had better judgment than you did on Iraq."

So, I think that Barack Obama's wounds are self-inflicted. And I think it's the job of any campaign to highlight a candidate's
weaknesses. So that's all that we've done. And really, our focus is on
communicating John McCain's vision for the future for making this
country energy independent and getting people working again.

GREGORY:
But clearly, the McCain campaign has made a calculated decision to turn
up the heat on Obama, to go on the attack to try to have a different
narrative frame for this campaign. In fact, Senator McCain told [Washington Post columnist] David Broder that he laments the tone of this campaign and what's happened over the past several weeks.


    
</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/msnbc-s-gregory-failed-to-challenge-suggestion-2008086676.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-09T22:06:15Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-09T22:06:15Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Mediamatters.Org</name>
<url>http://mediamatters.org/items/200808090001</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/msnbc-s-gregory-failed-to-challenge-suggestion-2008086676.htm"><b>MSNBC's Gregory failed to challenge suggestion that McCain's heroism during Vietnam War should bar criticism of him now</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/msnbc-s-gregory-failed-to-challenge-suggestion-2008086676.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Mediamatters.Org</span> - During the August 8 edition of MSNBC's
Race for the White House,
host David Gregory failed to challenge the suggestion by Nicolle
Wallace, senior adviser for Sen. John McCain's campaign, that McCain's
status as an "American hero, a former POW" should insulate him from
criticism of his policy proposals and Senate record. Wallace said: "I
never hear anyone put it to the Obama campaign, the internal
deliberations that they may have gone to when they made the strategic
decision to essentially fillet an American hero, a former POW, on the
stump every day, which is what comes out of their candidate's mouth
every day on the stump." Gregory later noted that Obama has
tied
McCain to
President Bush
and asked Wallace, "What else do you have in mind in terms of what
they've done?" In response, Wallace stated that "it is a blatant lie"
to call "McCain an extension of the Bush administration." But Gregory
did not ask Wallace how, as she suggested, McCain's being a former POW
exempts him from criticism that he is an "extension of the Bush
administration."

Wallace's
claim that connecting McCain to Bush policies is "a blatant lie" is
contradicted by statements by officials in the Bush White House and the
McCain campaign, as well as an independent study of voting records.
While appearing with McCain during a March 5 White House

endorsement ceremony, Bush

said that McCain is "not going to change when it comes to taking on the enemy." In an article about Bush's endorsement,
The Washington Post 
reported that White House officials said that "McCain and Bush are on the same page on the big issues, such as terrorism,
Iraq, immigration and taxes." As
Media Matters for America has 
noted, 
according 
to a 2008 study by
Congressional Quarterly,
 a nonpartisan publication that tracks legislators' votes, McCain voted with the president 95 percent of the time in 2007.

During the June 8

edition of ABC's
This Week, host George Stephanopoulos
asked McCain campaign national co-chairman Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC):
"You said the tax policy and the health care policy were essentially,
Senator Graham -- John McCain is calling for
 an extension or maybe even enhancement of the Bush policies." Graham replied: "Yeah, absolutely."

From the August 8 edition of MSNBC's
Race for the White House: 


GREGORY: Let's talk about this campaign
--

WALLACE: Sure.

GREGORY: --
and talk about McCain campaign strategy. You have tried, the campaign has recently, to tarnish Obama's credibility
 and his image in a couple of 
ways. On the one hand, it is to describe him as a celebrity, to
use Britney Spears, Paris Hilton to suggest he's sort of famous for
being famous, that he's a lightweight. That's on the one hand.

On
the other hand, it is to reduce his energy plan to the idea of the tire
gauge, to suggest that his whole energy plan is really about whether
there's enough air in the tires.

So the question is, are these ambush political tactics? And is
that consistent with the original maverick that you
[unintelligible] John McCain is?


WALLACE:
You know, two quick things here, David. One, I never hear anyone put it
to the Obama campaign, the internal deliberations that they may have gone
to when they made the strategic decision to essentially fillet an
American hero, a former POW, on the stump every day, which is what
comes out of their candidate's mouth every day on the stump.

And two, Barack Obama tarnished himself. We didn't paint him as anything that he isn't. He certainly
 -- you know, he went overseas; we were pleased that he was finally going to visit the war zone. But their campaign made a decision -- and they obviously did it to gain advantage,
 because you don't do things in campaigns for other reasons -- to hold a 200,000 person rally in
Europe in the midst of a presidential campaign. So it was obviously
a decision to celebrate his celebrity with a crowd of screaming Europeans. And it's -- you know, by pointing it out, it's not our effort to tarnish
 him. It's shining a light on something that his campaign spent a lot of time and money trying to shine a light on themselves.

GREGORY: And when you talk about trying to tarnish McCain's image or fillet
his image or his reputation, certainly there's been a very aggressive
attempt to tie him to President Bush and say he's a third Bush term.
What else do you have in mind in terms of what they've done?

WALLACE:
Well, look, let's not gloss over that. I mean, you covered this White
House. I worked at this White House. John McCain used to make major
news every time he ended up at odds with the Bush White House,
whether it was attacking the
secretary of 
defense for the conduct of the
war, whether it was a very high profile disagreement that he had with
the Bush White House over torture and other aspects of the war on
terror. So it is a blatant lie when Barack Obama stands in front of his
supporters and calls John McCain an extension of the Bush
administration. It's simply not true. So, it's not something to gloss
over.

And
you know, on the other hand, Barack Obama is someone who's -- the two
pillars of his candidacy are a politician who's going to do things
differently, change we can believe in, and the other is judgment that
he pointed to in his race against Hillary Clinton when he said,
"I gave a speech in 2002 in which I had better judgment than you did on Iraq."

So, I think that Barack Obama's wounds are self-inflicted. And I think it's the job of any campaign to highlight a candidate's
weaknesses. So that's all that we've done. And really, our focus is on
communicating John McCain's vision for the future for making this
country energy independent and getting people working again.

GREGORY:
But clearly, the McCain campaign has made a calculated decision to turn
up the heat on Obama, to go on the attack to try to have a different
narrative frame for this campaign. In fact, Senator McCain told [Washington Post columnist] David Broder that he laments the tone of this campaign and what's happened over the past several weeks.


    
<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Media Matters - MSNBC&#39;s Gregory failed to challenge suggestion that McCain&#39;s heroism during Vietnam War should bar criticism of him now {...} On Race for the White House , McCain campaign senior adviser Nicolle Wallace said: "I never hear anyone put it to the Obama campaign, the internal deliberations that they may have gone to when they made the strategic decision to essentially fillet an American hero, a former POW, on the stump every day, which is what comes out of their candidate&#39;s mouth every day on the stump." David Gregory did not challenge this suggestion that McCain&#39;s status as an "American hero, a former POW" should insulate him from criticism of his policy proposals and Senate record. {...}</blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 9, 2008, 10:06 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 10, 2008, 1:28 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;24KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/">Society</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/">Issues</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/">Media</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/"><b>Bias and Balance</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{ISSUES &gt; BIAS AND BALANCE} - Wash. Post uncritically repeats McCain's false suggestion that Obama didn't visit wounded troops on overseas trip</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/wash-post-uncritically-repeats-mccain-s-false-suggestion-2008081348.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">After writing that Sen. John McCain had
"launched a string of increasingly personal attacks on" Sen. Barack
Obama, Washington Post writers
Jonathan Weisman and Perry Bacon Jr. reported in an August 7 article that McCain
"accused him [Obama] of going to a gym rather than visiting wounded
troops" while overseas. But Weisman and Bacon did not note that McCain's accusation
is false:
Obama did in fact visit wounded troops during his recent trip, according to NBC
chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell, who was covering the trip. Mitchell reported
in a July 25 appearance on
MSNBC's Morning Joe that
Obama "visited a casualty unit in the Green Zone." On July 28, Mitchell again said that Obama had visited troops while
overseas, reporting: "I can attest to the fact that he did visit troops in Iraq
only four or five days earlier, that there was no notice of it, that I
confirmed that it happened, but they had no video of any type and no reporters.
And that he's been to Walter Reed. So let's at least get that off the
table."

From Weisman and Bacon's August 7 Washington Post
article: 


The parries
come more than a week after his Republican opponent launched a string of
increasingly personal attacks on Obama. McCain has said that his rival would
lose a war in order to win a campaign, accused him of going to a gym rather
than visiting wounded troops, and, while aides asserted that he had
"played the race card," hinted that Obama has a messiah complex and
portrayed him as a celebrity comparable to Paris Hilton or Britney Spears. That
final line of assault continued yesterday with a new McCain ad, again mocking
Obama as "the biggest celebrity in the world."

    
</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/wash-post-uncritically-repeats-mccain-s-false-suggestion-2008081348.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-07T22:02:15Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-07T22:02:15Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Mediamatters.Org</name>
<url>http://mediamatters.org/items/200808070006</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/wash-post-uncritically-repeats-mccain-s-false-suggestion-2008081348.htm"><b>Wash. Post uncritically repeats McCain's false suggestion that Obama didn't visit wounded troops on overseas trip</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/wash-post-uncritically-repeats-mccain-s-false-suggestion-2008081348.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Mediamatters.Org</span> - After writing that Sen. John McCain had
"launched a string of increasingly personal attacks on" Sen. Barack
Obama, Washington Post writers
Jonathan Weisman and Perry Bacon Jr. reported in an August 7 article that McCain
"accused him [Obama] of going to a gym rather than visiting wounded
troops" while overseas. But Weisman and Bacon did not note that McCain's accusation
is false:
Obama did in fact visit wounded troops during his recent trip, according to NBC
chief foreign affairs correspondent Andrea Mitchell, who was covering the trip. Mitchell reported
in a July 25 appearance on
MSNBC's Morning Joe that
Obama "visited a casualty unit in the Green Zone." On July 28, Mitchell again said that Obama had visited troops while
overseas, reporting: "I can attest to the fact that he did visit troops in Iraq
only four or five days earlier, that there was no notice of it, that I
confirmed that it happened, but they had no video of any type and no reporters.
And that he's been to Walter Reed. So let's at least get that off the
table."

From Weisman and Bacon's August 7 Washington Post
article: 


The parries
come more than a week after his Republican opponent launched a string of
increasingly personal attacks on Obama. McCain has said that his rival would
lose a war in order to win a campaign, accused him of going to a gym rather
than visiting wounded troops, and, while aides asserted that he had
"played the race card," hinted that Obama has a messiah complex and
portrayed him as a celebrity comparable to Paris Hilton or Britney Spears. That
final line of assault continued yesterday with a new McCain ad, again mocking
Obama as "the biggest celebrity in the world."

    
<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Media Matters - Wash. Post uncritically repeats McCain&#39;s false suggestion that Obama didn&#39;t visit wounded troops on overseas trip {...} The Washington Post reported that Sen. John McCain "accused" Sen. Barack Obama "of going to a gym rather than visiting wounded troops" during his recent overseas trip, but the Post did not note that the accusation is false. {...}</blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 7, 2008, 10:02 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 8, 2008, 11:57 am - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;16KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/">Society</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/">Issues</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/">Media</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/society/issues/business/media/bias-and-balance/"><b>Bias and Balance</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{LITERATURE &gt; RSS FEEDS} - Celebrity News</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/rss-feeds/celebrity-news-2008085704.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">Xenite.Org has now expanded and redesigned its celebrity news resource section.  Stay up to date with the latest headlines from around the world about your favorite celebrities like Jessica Simpson, Britney Spears, Vida Guerra, Lindsay Lohan, and others.  New pages have been added and we now feature slide shows from selected Flickr topics!</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/rss-feeds/celebrity-news-2008085704.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-06T23:33:52Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-06T23:33:52Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Celebrity-news.Xenite.Org</name>
<url>http://celebrity-news.xenite.org/</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/rss-feeds/celebrity-news-2008085704.htm"><b>Celebrity News</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/rss-feeds/celebrity-news-2008085704.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Celebrity-news.Xenite.Org</span> - Xenite.Org has now expanded and redesigned its celebrity news resource section.  Stay up to date with the latest headlines from around the world about your favorite celebrities like Jessica Simpson, Britney Spears, Vida Guerra, Lindsay Lohan, and others.  New pages have been added and we now feature slide shows from selected Flickr topics!<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">About Celebrity News | Xenite.Org Celebrity News {...} Celebrity News from Xenite.Org provides news about celebrities  including Britney Spears news, Lindsay Lohan news, Jennifer Aniston news, Angelina Jolie news, and others.... {...}</blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 6, 2008, 11:33 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;12KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/">Arts</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/">Literature</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/">Genres</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/">Science Fiction</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/arts/literature/genres/science-fiction/rss-feeds/"><b>RSS Feeds</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{INTERNET &gt; GOOGLE} - Search quality, continued</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/search-quality-continued-2008085153.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">A few weeks back Udi Manber introduced the search quality group, and the previous posts in this series talked about the ranking of documents. While the ranking of web documents forms the core of what makes search at Google work so well, your search experience consists of much more than that. In this post, I'll describe the principles that guide our development of the overall search experience and how they are applied to the key aspects of search. I will also describe how we make sure we are on the right track through rigorous experimentation. And the next post in this series will describe some of the experiments currently underway. Let me introduce myself. I'm Ben Gomes, and I've been working on search at Google since 1999, mostly on search quality. I've had the good fortune to contribute to most aspects of the search engine, from crawling the web to ranking. More recently, I've been responsible for the engineering of the interface for search and search features. A common reaction from friends when I say that I now work on Google's search user interface is  "What do you do?  It never changes." Then they look at me suspiciously and tell me not to mess with a good thing. Google is fine just the way it is -- a plain, fast, simple web page. That's great, but how hard can that be?" To help answer that question, let me start with our main goal in web search: to get you to the web pages you want as quickly as possible. Search is not an end in itself; it is merely a conduit. This goal may seem obvious, but it makes a search engine radically different from most other sites on the web, which measure their success by how long their users stay. We measure our web search success partly by how quickly you leave (happily, we hope!). There are several principles we use in getting you to the information you need as quickly as possible:     A small page.  A small page is quick to download and generally faster for your browser to display. This results in a minimalist design aesthetic; extra fanciness in the interface slows down the page without giving you much benefit.         Complex algorithms with a simple presentation.  Many search features require a great deal of algorithmic complexity and a vast amount of data analysis to make them work well. The trick is to hide all that complexity behind a clean, intuitive user interface.  Spelling correction, snippets, sitelinks and query refinements are examples of features that require sophisticated algorithms and are constantly improving.  From the user's point of view search, almost invisibly, just works better.      Features that work everywhere.  Features must be designed such that the algorithms and presentation can be adapted to work in all languages and countries. Consider the problem of spell correction in Chinese, where user queries are often not broken up into words or Hebrew/Arabic, where text is written right to left (interestingly, this is believed to be an example of first-mover disadvantage -- when chiseling on stone, it is easier to hold the hammer in your right hand!).        Data driven decisions - experiment, experiment, experiment.  We try to verify that we've done the right thing by running experiments. Designs that may seem promising may end up testing poorly.There are inherent tensions here. For instance, showing you more text (or images) for every result may enable you to better pick out the best result. But a result page that has too much information takes longer to download and longer to visually process. So every piece of information that we add to the result page has to be carefully considered to ensure that the benefit to the user outweighs the cost of dealing with that additional information. This is true of every part of the search experience, from typing in a query, to scanning results, to further exploration.The start of your search is typing in a query. A common cause of frustration is if you don't know the correct spelling of a word! Spell correction -- which seems like a simple and obvious feature -- hides many technical challenges. No common English dictionaries would ever include the correct spelling of Britney Spears, for instance (who, probably completely unbeknownst to her, has become the poster child example for this feature). We do a huge amount of   analysis of the billions of pages on the web and our query logs to determine what are "real words" on the web, and what are likely to be misspellings. The system that gives you the spell correction has to, in a fraction of a second, consider a huge number of possible words you might have meant (vastly greater than any dictionary ever manually constructed) and determine if there is a more likely query you meant to type. When we are confident that you actually meant to type something else, we take a rare liberty with our search results: we try to distract you from looking at the top result on the page.  The spelling correction is in your line of sight and colored a bright must-see red.  Furthermore, we now make sure that nothing else on the page is red, unless it is as important to you as spelling! (so far, nothing is). The algorithms involved in spell correction are constantly getting better.  They now work in a large number of languages and are even better at detecting when you have made a spelling mistake. Getting the spelling of your query right is so important that we are considering showing you the results of the spell-corrected query in the middle of the page (just in case you missed our bright red text at the top and bottom!).    Having formulated your query correctly, the next task is to pick a page from the result list. For each result, we present the title and url, and a brief two line snippet.  Pages that don't have a proper title are often ignored by users. One of the bigger recent changes has been to extract titles for pages that don't specify an HTML title -- yet a title on the page is clearly right there, staring at you. To "see" that title that the author of the page intended, we analyze the HTML of the page to determine the title that the author probably meant. This makes it far more likely that you will not ignore a page for want of a good title. Below the title comes the snippet, and a key early innovation was in what Google showed for the snippet. At the time, search engines showed you the first two lines of the web page; Google, instead, showed you parts of the page where your actual search keywords showed up (information retrieval experts call this "keywords-in-context"). Showing keywords-in-context is visually simple and virtually indistinguishable from the simpler style of snippets, but vastly more useful in helping you decide which page to visit.  This simplicity belies underlying complexity: when we create a snippet we have to go through the actual text from each result to find the most relevant part (which contain your keywords) rather than just giving you the first few lines.     We have been making improvements to our snippets over time with algorithms for determining the relevance of portions of the page. The changes range from the subtle -- we highlight synonyms of your query terms in the results -- to more obvious. Here's an example screenshot where the user searched for "arod" and you can see that Alex and Rodriguez are bolded in the search result snippet, based on our analysis that you might plausibly be referring to him:As a more obvious example, we now extract and show you the byline date from pages that have one. These byline dates are expressed in a myriad formats which we extract and present uniformly, so that you can scan them easily:For one of the most common types of user needs, navigational queries -- where you type in the name of a web site you know -- we have introduced shortcuts (we refer to them as sitelinks).  These sitelinks allow you to get to the key parts of the site and illustrate many of the same principles alluded to above; they are a simple addition to the top search result that adds a small amount of extra text to the page.For instance, the home page of Hewlett-Packard has almost 60 links, in a two-level menu system. Our algorithms, using a combination of different signals, pick the top ones among these that we think you are most likely to want to visit.What if you did not find what you were looking for among the top results? In that case, you probably need to try another query. We help you in this process by providing a set of query refinements at the bottom of the results page -- even if they don't give you the query that you need, they provide hints for different (likely more successful) directions in which you could refine your query. By placing the query refinements at the bottom of the page, the refinements don't distract users, but are there to help if the rest of the search results didn't serve a user's information need.I've described several key aspects of the search experience, including where we have made many changes over time -- some subtle, some more obvious. In making these changes to the search experience, how do we know we've succeeded, that we've not messed it up? We constantly evaluate our changes by sharing them with you!  We launch proposed changes to a tiny fraction of our users and evaluate whether it seems to be helping or hurting their search experience. There are many metrics we use to determine if we've succeeded or failed.  The process of measuring these improvements is a science in itself, with many potential pitfalls. Our experimental methodology allows us to explore a range of possibilities and launch the ones that work the best. For every feature that we launch, we have frequently run a large number of experiments that did not see the light of day.So let me answer the question I started with: We're actually constantly changing Google's result page and have been doing so for a long time. And no, we won't mess with a good thing. You won't let us.In the next post in this series, I'll talk about some of the experiments we are running, and what we hope to learn from them.Posted by Ben Gomes, Distinguished Engineer
 
</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/search-quality-continued-2008085153.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-06T23:25:48Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-06T23:25:48Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Googleblog.Blogspot.Com</name>
<url>http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/search-quality-continued.html</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/search-quality-continued-2008085153.htm"><b>Search quality, continued</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/search-quality-continued-2008085153.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Googleblog.Blogspot.Com</span> - A few weeks back Udi Manber introduced the search quality group, and the previous posts in this series talked about the ranking of documents. While the ranking of web documents forms the core of what makes search at Google work so well, your search experience consists of much more than that. In this post, I'll describe the principles that guide our development of the overall search experience and how they are applied to the key aspects of search. I will also describe how we make sure we are on the right track through rigorous experimentation. And the next post in this series will describe some of the experiments currently underway. Let me introduce myself. I'm Ben Gomes, and I've been working on search at Google since 1999, mostly on search quality. I've had the good fortune to contribute to most aspects of the search engine, from crawling the web to ranking. More recently, I've been responsible for the engineering of the interface for search and search features. A common reaction from friends when I say that I now work on Google's search user interface is  "What do you do?  It never changes." Then they look at me suspiciously and tell me not to mess with a good thing. Google is fine just the way it is -- a plain, fast, simple web page. That's great, but how hard can that be?" To help answer that question, let me start with our main goal in web search: to get you to the web pages you want as quickly as possible. Search is not an end in itself; it is merely a conduit. This goal may seem obvious, but it makes a search engine radically different from most other sites on the web, which measure their success by how long their users stay. We measure our web search success partly by how quickly you leave (happily, we hope!). There are several principles we use in getting you to the information you need as quickly as possible:     A small page.  A small page is quick to download and generally faster for your browser to display. This results in a minimalist design aesthetic; extra fanciness in the interface slows down the page without giving you much benefit.         Complex algorithms with a simple presentation.  Many search features require a great deal of algorithmic complexity and a vast amount of data analysis to make them work well. The trick is to hide all that complexity behind a clean, intuitive user interface.  Spelling correction, snippets, sitelinks and query refinements are examples of features that require sophisticated algorithms and are constantly improving.  From the user's point of view search, almost invisibly, just works better.      Features that work everywhere.  Features must be designed such that the algorithms and presentation can be adapted to work in all languages and countries. Consider the problem of spell correction in Chinese, where user queries are often not broken up into words or Hebrew/Arabic, where text is written right to left (interestingly, this is believed to be an example of first-mover disadvantage -- when chiseling on stone, it is easier to hold the hammer in your right hand!).        Data driven decisions - experiment, experiment, experiment.  We try to verify that we've done the right thing by running experiments. Designs that may seem promising may end up testing poorly.There are inherent tensions here. For instance, showing you more text (or images) for every result may enable you to better pick out the best result. But a result page that has too much information takes longer to download and longer to visually process. So every piece of information that we add to the result page has to be carefully considered to ensure that the benefit to the user outweighs the cost of dealing with that additional information. This is true of every part of the search experience, from typing in a query, to scanning results, to further exploration.The start of your search is typing in a query. A common cause of frustration is if you don't know the correct spelling of a word! Spell correction -- which seems like a simple and obvious feature -- hides many technical challenges. No common English dictionaries would ever include the correct spelling of Britney Spears, for instance (who, probably completely unbeknownst to her, has become the poster child example for this feature). We do a huge amount of   analysis of the billions of pages on the web and our query logs to determine what are "real words" on the web, and what are likely to be misspellings. The system that gives you the spell correction has to, in a fraction of a second, consider a huge number of possible words you might have meant (vastly greater than any dictionary ever manually constructed) and determine if there is a more likely query you meant to type. When we are confident that you actually meant to type something else, we take a rare liberty with our search results: we try to distract you from looking at the top result on the page.  The spelling correction is in your line of sight and colored a bright must-see red.  Furthermore, we now make sure that nothing else on the page is red, unless it is as important to you as spelling! (so far, nothing is). The algorithms involved in spell correction are constantly getting better.  They now work in a large number of languages and are even better at detecting when you have made a spelling mistake. Getting the spelling of your query right is so important that we are considering showing you the results of the spell-corrected query in the middle of the page (just in case you missed our bright red text at the top and bottom!).    Having formulated your query correctly, the next task is to pick a page from the result list. For each result, we present the title and url, and a brief two line snippet.  Pages that don't have a proper title are often ignored by users. One of the bigger recent changes has been to extract titles for pages that don't specify an HTML title -- yet a title on the page is clearly right there, staring at you. To "see" that title that the author of the page intended, we analyze the HTML of the page to determine the title that the author probably meant. This makes it far more likely that you will not ignore a page for want of a good title. Below the title comes the snippet, and a key early innovation was in what Google showed for the snippet. At the time, search engines showed you the first two lines of the web page; Google, instead, showed you parts of the page where your actual search keywords showed up (information retrieval experts call this "keywords-in-context"). Showing keywords-in-context is visually simple and virtually indistinguishable from the simpler style of snippets, but vastly more useful in helping you decide which page to visit.  This simplicity belies underlying complexity: when we create a snippet we have to go through the actual text from each result to find the most relevant part (which contain your keywords) rather than just giving you the first few lines.     We have been making improvements to our snippets over time with algorithms for determining the relevance of portions of the page. The changes range from the subtle -- we highlight synonyms of your query terms in the results -- to more obvious. Here's an example screenshot where the user searched for "arod" and you can see that Alex and Rodriguez are bolded in the search result snippet, based on our analysis that you might plausibly be referring to him:As a more obvious example, we now extract and show you the byline date from pages that have one. These byline dates are expressed in a myriad formats which we extract and present uniformly, so that you can scan them easily:For one of the most common types of user needs, navigational queries -- where you type in the name of a web site you know -- we have introduced shortcuts (we refer to them as sitelinks).  These sitelinks allow you to get to the key parts of the site and illustrate many of the same principles alluded to above; they are a simple addition to the top search result that adds a small amount of extra text to the page.For instance, the home page of Hewlett-Packard has almost 60 links, in a two-level menu system. Our algorithms, using a combination of different signals, pick the top ones among these that we think you are most likely to want to visit.What if you did not find what you were looking for among the top results? In that case, you probably need to try another query. We help you in this process by providing a set of query refinements at the bottom of the results page -- even if they don't give you the query that you need, they provide hints for different (likely more successful) directions in which you could refine your query. By placing the query refinements at the bottom of the page, the refinements don't distract users, but are there to help if the rest of the search results didn't serve a user's information need.I've described several key aspects of the search experience, including where we have made many changes over time -- some subtle, some more obvious. In making these changes to the search experience, how do we know we've succeeded, that we've not messed it up? We constantly evaluate our changes by sharing them with you!  We launch proposed changes to a tiny fraction of our users and evaluate whether it seems to be helping or hurting their search experience. There are many metrics we use to determine if we've succeeded or failed.  The process of measuring these improvements is a science in itself, with many potential pitfalls. Our experimental methodology allows us to explore a range of possibilities and launch the ones that work the best. For every feature that we launch, we have frequently run a large number of experiments that did not see the light of day.So let me answer the question I started with: We're actually constantly changing Google's result page and have been doing so for a long time. And no, we won't mess with a good thing. You won't let us.In the next post in this series, I'll talk about some of the experiments we are running, and what we hope to learn from them.Posted by Ben Gomes, Distinguished Engineer
 
<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Official Google Blog: Search quality, continued {...} </blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 6, 2008, 11:25 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;87KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/computers/">Computers</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/">Internet</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/">Searching</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/">Search Engines</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/computers/internet/searching/search-engines/google/"><b>Google</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
<entry>
<title>{MARKETING AND ADVERTISING &gt; NEWS AND MEDIA} - Paris Hilton Responds to McCain's Anti-Obama Ad</title>
<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/paris-hilton-responds-to-mccain-s-anti-obama-ad-2008088095.htm"/>
<summary type="text/plain">Socialite Paris Hilton has released her own mock ad after John McCain used her image in an anti-Barack Obama commercial. McCain's ad uses about two seconds of Britney Spears video...</summary>
<id>http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/paris-hilton-responds-to-mccain-s-anti-obama-ad-2008088095.htm</id>
<issued>2008-08-06T02:15:09Z</issued>
<modified>2008-08-06T02:15:09Z</modified>
<author>
<name>Advertising.About.Com</name>
<url>http://advertising.about.com/b/2008/08/06/paris-hilton-responds-to-mccains-obama-ad.htm</url>
</author>
<content type="text/html" mode="escaped" xml:lang="en-us" xml:base="http://www.world-of-newave.info/"><![CDATA[
<table cellspacing="4" cellpadding="0" border="0" style="margin:9px;">
<tr><td colspan="2" style="font:bold 12pt Arial;vertical-align:top;"><a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/paris-hilton-responds-to-mccain-s-anti-obama-ad-2008088095.htm"><b>Paris Hilton Responds to McCain's Anti-Obama Ad</b></a> <sup style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;">{<a href="http://articles.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/paris-hilton-responds-to-mccain-s-anti-obama-ad-2008088095.htm" target="_blank">new window</a>}</sup></td></tr>
<tr>
<td style="font:6pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;text-align:center;vertical-align:top;">&nbsp;</td>
<td width="100%" style="font:9pt Verdana,Arial,Sans-serif;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;font-variant:small-caps;">Advertising.About.Com</span> - Socialite Paris Hilton has released her own mock ad after John McCain used her image in an anti-Barack Obama commercial. McCain's ad uses about two seconds of Britney Spears video...<blockquote style="background:#FAFAFA;border:1px dotted #E6E6E6;font:italic 10pt Times New Roman;padding:9px;">Paris Hilton Responds to McCain's Anti-Obama Ad {...}</blockquote><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Published:</span> August 6, 2008, 2:15 am - <span style="color:#808080;">Indexed:</span> August 6, 2008, 11:46 pm - <span style="color:#808080;">Page Size:</span>&nbsp;23KB</div><div style="font:8pt Verdana,Arial;vertical-align:top;"><span style="color:#808080;">Category:</span> <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/">Business</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/">Marketing and Advertising</a> &gt; <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/">Advertising</a> &gt;  <a href="http://www.world-of-newave.info/business/marketing-and-advertising/advertising/news-and-media/"><b>News and Media</b></a></div></td></tr></table>
<br/>
]]></content>
</entry>
</feed>