Happy Birthday Sweet Search!

Today findingDulcinea declared war on "search engine fatigue" by launching a new product called SweetSearch.

Anne Kostick writing on findingDuclinea's Blog explains, "SweetSearch is the offshoot of three years of research by findingDulcinea’s staff—an ever-growing collection of tens of thousands of Web sites, all evaluated and approved for reliability and ease of use. FindingDulcinea’s researchers use multiple search engines and databases to uncover many sites that don't routinely appear in the search engines most people use (Google, Yahoo! and MSN)."

Make sure to check out the comparison searches link on the blog. In two minutes you can see why Sweet Search offers better results than Google.

And for my own example, when you're having fun on the weekend, drinking some beers and trying to name the 44 presidents of the U.S. just for fun. (Yes, my friends are cool.) After you've spent an hour and a half trying not to look on anyone's Blackberry, you can go to Google for an answer or you can go to Sweet Search. Where the second findingDulcinea result is The US President and the Cabinet which includes results from the History Channel and the Intenet Public Library. The top results on Google's page include the White House's Web site multiple times (which Sweet Search also surfaces along with the Library of Congress) but Google suggests Wikipedia-- an encyclopedia who's credibility is always in question. Decide for yourself.

If your right-handed it's hard to brush your teeth with your left hand instead and it will be hard to switch over to SweetSearch from Google, but try it for a week and let me know what you think.

Girl Meets Boy

A friend of mine, Cathy Day, wrote an amazing books (two amazing books really), her first "The Circus in Winter" was a finalist for the Story Prize, The Great Lakes Book Award and the GLCA Book Award, you can read about it in an old post of mine. Her second book, "Comeback Season: How I learned to Play the Game of Love" published in 2008. Essentially, this is a book about trying to meet "Mr. Right" in Pittsburgh, where there aren't many single men in their 30s period and fewer still can handle dating a woman with a PhD and a novel. It's sensitive, full of raw emotion and brave confessions, but it's also wickedly funny. I am not going to spoil the book for you. Imagine discussing your match.com options with a mother who's as sweetly innocent as the mother from Bobby's World. Or having to repeatedly explain to your dad why "but we love you honey" just isn't enough. The reason it's called "Comeback Season" is because at 38, Cathy, a single professor and writer, was hoping to make a comeback, just like her favorite football team The Colts. As they trained, she trained, quitting smoking, interviewing the happily married types, watching Sex and the City, taking notes. As she was writing and dating, everybody, her friends, her agent, her family and especially Cathy's publisher (readers want a happy ending) were all rooting for her.

I won't give it all away. The book ends on a happy note, a confident note. And perhaps that is what made this last twist possible. (I hope this gets written into the back pages of future books.) While Cathy was on her book tour she did a few radio interviews, and a man she'd known in college but lost touch with was listening. He had been sent her book while he was teaching in China. His name is Eric. He googled Cathy and emailed her. They talked. They met. In October he moved to Pittsburgh. They are getting married this June. The rest is history.

Obama's New Playground

Out of laziness and fear of getting frostbitten or maybe feeling claustrophobic, I missed what is already being recognized as and will forever be considered an unforgettable event. When my children, or nieces and nephews are grown, they will be asked by their teachers to ask someone old enough to remember, "Where were you when O.J. was ruled innocent?,"(answer: phys ed class in the locker room, we heard it on the radio), "Where were you when Princess Diana died?," (answer: my basement with Megtar, sobbing over some teen drama, sorry Diana but we weren't sure if you were really gone, the newcasters kept changing their minds) and now... finally "Where were you when America's first African American president gave his inaugural address?"

For that last question the answer will be easy but not exactly exciting. While I'm sure it was much warmer and more comfortable sitting in front of a big TV surrounded by editors, writers, our outreach team, IT team, and lawyers from the office next door, some of whom were a little teary. I am a little saddened not to have been there. Having spent four years in Washington DC, the Lincoln Memorial has special meaning to me, I've slid down its "banisters" with friends until of course the police told us not to. With my running partner, Susan, I've run up the steps and stopped for water in the underground museum's bathroom a few hundred times, (Susan and I are the Where's Waldos in the back of every tourist photo). The Reflection Pool is where I stood for an anti-war vigil, my first, though I never tramped through the water as Forrest Gump, it was still pretty cool. So, yes it might have been nice to make one more memory there, to welcome President Obama to his beautiful new neighborhood, my old one, but I'll make sure to be there in 2013.

PS. If you missed any part of the inauguration or want to relive the celebration, including reading Obama's inaugural address. Find the best sites for doing so here.

Atlantic Writer Says to NYT Print Edition DNR

In early January, Atlantic writer, Michael Hirschorn, wrote that the New York Times was battling to stay afloat. While he conjectured that David Geffen, Michael Bloomberg, Carlos Slim or Rupert Murdoch had the ability to throw the paper a lifeline, Hirschorn doubted that anyone, after seeing Sam Zell's invest in the now bankrupt Tribune Company, would take such a risk. In the end, he determined that the print version of the New York Times was on its death bed: "The Times is destined for significant and traumatic change. At some point soon—sooner than most of us think—the print edition, and with it The Times as we know it, will no longer exist. "

Moreover, Hirschorn while expressing some regret over ending the ritual of gathering one's paper off the stoop and measured sympathy for the journalists-- who have, until now, lived semi-charmed kinds of lives of the mind"--he views the transformation from print to digital-only distribution as hardly tragic. After all but the most talented writers have been laid off the new reporters/bloggers will see more traffic to their stories. He envisions this new nytimes.com as "a bigger, better, and less partisan version of the Huffington Post,"

Unsurprisingly, The New York Times publishers refuted Hirschorn's predictions, saying "With regard to the specific point made about the demise of the print edition of The Times in May, it may make for a good a story but it is poor analysis. " Since Senior Vice President of Corporate Communications' Catherine Mathis' response on January 12, The NYT has found its Superman, selling $250 Million worth of stocks to Carlos Slim, a Mexican billionaire. Slim, the owner of a telecommunications company is allegedly the 2nd richest man in the world! So what does this mean for the paper. Should we be worried that despite that stories of kidnappings and murders, Mexico might be suddenly be whitewashed from the paper's pages. Perhaps not. According to findingDulcinea, "Despite becoming one of the largest single shareholders in the company, Slim will not get representation on the Times’ board and would have no special voting rights."

Let's hope not. As publishers and journalists alike shoulder the blow of the recession, what other last resort solutions will have to happen for print journals to stick around?

It's mom's fault?

I read another post from The Psychology Today Blog called "Tears of a Clown"which has been pinballing around my brain for a few weeks.

In a nutshell, the writer, Scott Barry Kaufman, writes that some researchers have argued that comedians have chosen their career and essentially adapted their humor, as a survival trait. They needed to be funny. Why? Well, it all goes back to the parents, mothers specifically. It's mom's fault. Again.

According to the article, Seymour and Rhoda Fisher, two researchers who studied the personality, family background, and motivations of 40 "professional humor producers," (comedians and clowns) then compared them with those of 41 professional actors.

Curiously, the Fishers found that many comedians, landed in comedy via after first exploring music and that professional comedians were forced by their circumstance to grow up faster than other professional actors, taking on heavier "responsiblities" (read problems) at earlier ages. And what might be there most controversial finding was that comedians while generally fond of their fathers, viewed mom as a "disciplinarian, an aggressive critic, non-nurturing, and non-maternal."

It may be significant that the majority of the comics were from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, while the background of the professional actors was unclear. However, their finding about distant mothers repeated itself in a different study at the college level.

I don't know any professional comedians, not well at least, but I do know a few very funny guys. I tried asking one of them, whether his father or mother was more strict, but he ducked and parried. Ultimately, admitting that perhaps is mother was more strict. But does every comedian have to have a mean mother or a hard upbringing. I'd like to know. What's the rule? Does whatever doesn't kill you, make you funnier?

And the reason, I'm mostly asking men and not women is because I'm trying to see if the Fishers were right. Since most of the comedians in all of the studies mentioned were men, I need to ask men to get a fair comparison. So, we still don't know anything about what experiences or traits motivate women to be comedians, or if they share similar family dynamics.

On second thought, maybe I will ask women. While it was too late for me to get Barbara Walters to ask Tina Fey about her childhood and her parent's child-rearing style.
Barbara Walters did come out with this zinger, all on her own:

BW: (You're a comedian.) How come you're not neurotic?"
TF: (Nervous laugh) The women that I've met in comedy are much less of that. They're good daughters. They were good students. Their only act of rebellion is doing sketch comedy.

Or maybe they had better relationships with mom? Who knows.

(The dialogue happens at around 3:30)



PS. This shout out goes to Wicked Witch of the Web, for helping me post my first video. I'm not exactly tech-savvy, but I'll get there.
PPS. If you consider yourself a comedian, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Environmental Autism: The Girl in the Window

I read this piece called "The Girl in the Window" from the St. Petersburg Times a few weeks ago and have not been able to shake free of it, so instead I'll share it.

The writer, Lane DeGregory describes the horrible circumstance of one young girl's life. Police entering the cockroach infested house, whose walls and carpets were covered in human and animal excrement, discovered a young girl locked in a closet, wearing only a diaper. A neighbor had reported seeing a girl in an upstairs window of a house. The girl turned out to be a seven year-old, feral child, who had never been brought outside, talk to, held, or cared for in any way. She weighed only 46 pounds.

The girl seemed incapable of eye contact. DeGregory writes, "The insertion of an IV needle elicited no reaction ... With a nurse holding her hands, she could stand and walk sideways on her toes, like a crab. She couldn't talk, didn't know how to nod yes or no. Once in a while she grunted."

The police took her immediately to the hospital. She was not deaf or autistic. There was no reason for her behavior other than the fact that she was deprived of the love and attention a parent is supposed to provide. Her condition was labelled "environmental autism."

Fortunately, the story gets better. The girl, Danielle, now called Dani, was adopted by a couple, Bernie and Diane, who admitted that she was not at all the daughter they were looking for, but they took her in anyway. And the kindness their son, her brother William showed Dani. I'm not going to steal any more of the story. You'll just have to read it.

Learning to Stumble

So, a few months ago. I joined the social networking site Stumble Upon. The site exists so that you can locate hard to find Web sites in every category, for example, humor, politics, music, and books then share them with others. The stumble upon tool bar works like a remote control for the Internet, you simply click the bar and start flipping through channels. There are a few preselected channels like Funny or Die, the Onion, the Huffington Post, and PBS, or you can search by your preferred interests (chosen when you complete a profile). You can make friends, join groups, and send the best links to people you know will like them. If you get addicted to stumbling, you may even become a top stumbler.

To get started visit the sign in page and register. You will be asked to download the stumble buttons. Make sure you have the tag and review buttons as well as the thumbs up, thumbs down, and of course the stumble bar.

• Build out your profile, choose your preferences, post an image and a short bio

• Invite your friends to join by uploading them from your email address books

• Make friends with top stumblers and people who are new to stumble

• Review other peoples' profile pages and stumble them. Tag them as "stumblers"
• If you find a page you really like, see who else likes it and friend them

• Look at the What's New page from time to time and make friends with anyone who has viewed your site (you can see this on the what's new page)
  

• Add all your suggested friends (these are chosen based on your preferences)
  

• Before you add a friend stumble a few of his/her sites
  

• Join suggested groups and add other members as your friends

• You get the poin. MAKE FRIENDS. There is a special button where people can stumble only friends' stuff instead of the general stumble population that means your sites will come up randomly as others stumble through pages. It also means you get to limit your view to only the sites that people you think are cool like.
  

• Categorize your links with broad tags (and 1 or 2 specific ones-just my preference, so you can find them later)

• Try messaging people. If someone gives your page a positive review thank them.
  

• Make sure your page has interesting, bizarre or beautiful photos

• If you're trying to promote your own Web site or blog, just be practical about it. If you stumble and review only your own work, your your page will be looked at as spam. If you're going to thumb up one of your pages do so only every 25 or 30 stumbles and make sure it's stumbe-worthy.
  

• Mix it up. Use videos, images, and articles.

• Thumb something down occasionally. I'm not certain of this, but i hear it improves your algorithm.
  
• Learn a new trick/tip. Find a good guide to stumbling. TELL ME ABOUT IT.

For more advice about stumble upon check out Xineann's guide to stumbling.
This answers nearly every question you can think of about stumbling.

For advice specifically on how to promote your site, how to make it "sticky," read David Risley's blog.

Besides finding great sites about your hobbies and interests Stumble upon is a great way to break up your day with a laugh.

And when you join stumble, make me your friend.