Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

The 7 Ways That People Search the Web

Posted by Zonk on Mon Aug 14, 2006 01:47 PM
from the seven-stages-of-search dept.
SpaceAdmiral writes "After the recent release of AOL search logs, Paul Boutin used the site splunkd.com to analyse the logs. His analysis groups searchers into seven categories: The Pornhound, the Manhunter, the Shopper, the Obsessive, the Omnivore, the Newbie, and the Basketcase. My favorite example search is in the Basketcase category: 'i hurt when i think too much i love roadtrips i hate my weight i fear being alone for the rest of my life.'"

Related Stories

[+] Your Rights Online: AOL Releases Search Logs of 657,427 Users 346 comments
An anonymous reader writes "AOL has released the search logs of over 650,000 users for research purposes. This looks like it may become a public relations disaster for AOL, as well as a privacy nightmare for the users involved as Michael Arrington of TechCrunch notes: "AOL has released very private data about its users without their permission. While the AOL username has been changed to a random ID number, the ability to analyze all searches by a single user will often lead people to easily determine who the user is, and what they are up to. The data includes personal names, addresses, social security numbers and everything else someone might type into a search box." This is also being covered on The Paradigm Shift and Oh My News." fantomas adds " Looks like they've just taken it down but it's still available on The Pirate Bay; not sure why but some of the academic researchers are going crazy musing the ethical aspects of letting the world know who's searching for how to kill their wives ..." Update: 08/07 21:32 GMT by T : amromousa writes "AOL is now apologizing for the release ..., calling it a "screw-up," which they're upset and angry about."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • They missed out the Googler (Score:1, Insightful)

    by CDMA_Demo (841347) on Monday August 14 2006, @01:48PM (#15904710)
    (http://alien.dowling.edu/~rohit/wiki)
    Another reason to believe AOL is biased.
  • Moo (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chacham (981) * on Monday August 14 2006, @01:50PM (#15904727)
    (http://tkatch.com/ | Last Journal: Monday October 29, @02:09PM)
    The seven ways that people post on Slashdot.

    The First Poster - Although this phenominon has been addressed and has somewhat lessened, there are still echoes of "First Post". These people wait on a "Mysterious Furure" story as post stupidities just to get in first.

    The Fisher - These posters, rarely named Bobby, check-in with a kingly posts to generate replies and nothing more. Their posts, perhaps at first, seem to make sense, but on closer review contain mnay misstakes, intentionally designed to garner replies.

    The old-timer - These posters, who hang around slashdot land, have forgotten to move on. They post just to show off their low slashdot id. This makes some druel, and others comment that low id does not mean more intelligent. However, they're all wrong anyway.

    The reposter - Reposters wait for old stories to come up again and find modded-up comments from the old stories to repost. If this is the first time such a story is up, they post a bunch of old buzzwords that realign synergistic paradigm shifts.

    The soap stander - Soap-Standers have what to say, and don't care where they say it, such as about why Bush is beery good, and that the UN and its anonymous leader are drunkards, and no amount of coffee will help.

    The idiot - Idiots can't count, post moronic comments, and quickly type in useless garbage to fill in a little more space.

  • So what? (Score:1)

    by Fred Porry (993637) on Monday August 14 2006, @01:51PM (#15904734)
    Im obsessive, but dont blame me! Great analysis...
    • Re:So what? by Jesus_666 (Score:2) Tuesday August 15 2006, @07:14AM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • On that note (Score:5, Interesting)

    by smclean (521851) on Monday August 14 2006, @01:56PM (#15904785)
    (http://pio.longstair.com/)
    Somethingawful posted what is presumably the first part in a series of gold from the AOL search logs: http://www.somethingawful.com/index.php?a=4016 [somethingawful.com] These would definitely fit in the 'basketcase' category...
  • Is this like a Slashdot poll where we whine about missing options?
    Where does Cowboy Neal fit into the 7?

    Are politicians their own category, or are they basketcases, or Pornhounds?
  • The Truth is out There (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mignon (34109) <satan@programmer.net> on Monday August 14 2006, @01:58PM (#15904803)
    I know why you're here, Neo. I know what you've been doing... why you hardly sleep, why you live alone, and why night after night, you sit by your computer. You're looking for him. I know because I was once looking for the same thing. And when he found me, he told me I wasn't really looking for him. I was looking for an answer.

    So was Neo a manhunter, an obsessive, or just an omnivore?

  • Categories (Score:2, Funny)

    by The Zon (969911) <thezon@gmail.com> on Monday August 14 2006, @01:58PM (#15904805)
    I'm not sure what category I fit in. I live in a padded cell, and just used AOL search for the first time to obsessively shop for Manhunter porn while eating a meat-and-vegetable stew.
  • Just a note on the Obsessive (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Red Flayer (890720) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:00PM (#15904833)
    (Last Journal: Friday November 10 2006, @02:16PM)
    I know that I often can't recall websites I've been to once but want to revisit. I will, however, often remember the search terms that got me there -- sometimes very specific search terms, since I've narrowed it down from my first wide-net search.

    For some reason I stubbornly don't use bookmarks often (as when you have too many, they quickly become worthless) so that obscure search term might be in my profile 300 times over the course of a year if it's a site that I visit daily from the office.

    Then again, I post on Slashdot a ton... I'm sure it's pretty obsessive anyway.
  • They're all just people (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Billosaur (927319) * <wgrother&optonline,net> on Monday August 14 2006, @02:00PM (#15904841)
    (Last Journal: Wednesday November 07, @10:09AM)

    Ok, a lot of this AOL search data is quite amusing, in a sad, pathetic way. Too many people are having their jollies over it, while secretly being scared someone's going to get a peek at their searching record when Google finally loses its mind and makes the data available. It's easy to laugh, and be downright frightened, but in the end, we type our searches in, click the button and don't give it another thought. People wish to judge (myself included); it was a survival instinct in a far distant past and now it manifests itself as a morbid curiosity with the lives of other people.

    People come in all colors, size, and mental states, AOL users undoubtedly more so. SO in their you'll find your fair share of freaks or freak wannabes, but mostly you'll just find people trying to find out things. What makes them freakish is not what they type in, but what they do with the information.

  • The 8th way (Score:3, Funny)

    by daranz (914716) <daranz@gmaiTOKYOl.com minus city> on Monday August 14 2006, @02:00PM (#15904843)
    The people who switch Tor nodes for every search they perform, so that later, then don't end up having articles written about them calling them weirdos and porn-freaks. Sheesh, what's wrong with horses?
  • by cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:01PM (#15904846)
    "For we are all the Pornhound, the Manhunter, the Shopper, the Obsessive, the Omnivore, the Newbie, and the Basketcase, sincerely, the Breakfast Club"

    Probably most people on this board are too young to remember anyway....
  • nice splunk spam (Score:2, Flamebait)

    by asdfghjklqwertyuiop (649296) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:03PM (#15904866)
    The article is written by someone that works for splunk and has a bunch of links to a splunk server (currently responding too slowly to use) to show you the logs, and pointlessly mentions numerous times how he clicked something in Splunk(tm)(C) to get some results...
  • This is Fascinating, But ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ThomMust (174974) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:03PM (#15904867)
    (http://www.grabbingsand.com/)
    ... it is nothing compared to the tremendous fallout that would befall the Interweb, should AOL ever unleash accidentally almost 13 years of collected AOL chatroom dialogue. It's one thing to see the search strings of User #24601, but quite another to see just what he says when emboldened by conversational anonymity. Of course, AOL would say now that they don't have that kind of data, that they haven't been logging chat since the earliest days of version 2.0 ... but come on, would you throw away all of that beautiful demographic fodder?
  • Uh-oh (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2006, @02:04PM (#15904879)
    One of the search results from the famous pornhound.

    69 927 3d molestation and rape porn 2006-05-20 17:20:16 9 http://slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org]

    Now we know why this site is so popular.
  • Very interesting... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Skynet (37427) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:07PM (#15904899)
    (http://www.zombo.com/)
    Although AOL represents a certain niche market. i.e. it's heavily skewed towards n00bs.

    I wonder if a similar Google sample would show different results or identify other archetypes?

    I definitly fall into the "Omnivore" type. I would imagine most Slashdotters do.

    Actually, maybe the Basket Case one is a better fit for most Slashdotters.

  • Why TIA is a bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2006, @02:07PM (#15904901)
    From TFA: The searches of AOL user No. 672368, for example, morphed over several weeks from "you're pregnant he doesn't want the baby" to "foods to eat when pregnant" to "abortion clinics charlotte nc" to "can christians be forgiven for abortion."

    That, right there, tells you why we need to worry about "Uncle Sam" having access to *everyone's* search logs - search terms alone contain an implicit picture of what should be some of the most private aspects of your life. Now imagine if user number 672368 turns out to be, say, John McCain's daughter, and Karl Rove got his hands on this just before the Republican presidential primaries...

    what do you think would happen? what do you think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_McCarthy [wikipedia.org]Joe McCarthy could have done with this kind of data? Write to your elected official and ask them these questions, and what safeguards they are putting in place to prevent any such abuse - and tell them you will be voting this fall. Then call your local news channel, and ask them to run a story on it, and ask the candidates for comment. The big networks won't start a story like this, but if a small station is lucky enough to get a clip of a politician stumbling over an answer, it'll be syndicated faster than you can say "feeding frenzy".

    (and for those of you naive enough to think that Karl Rove doesn't have access to the equivalent government databases through some back-room contact or another, I have a bridge you might be interested in buying...)
    • Re:Why TIA is a bad idea (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ewhac (5844) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:30PM (#15905111)
      (http://ewhac.best.vwh.net/ | Last Journal: Saturday August 18 2001, @10:28PM)
      From TFA: The searches of AOL user No. 672368, for example, morphed over several weeks from "you're pregnant he doesn't want the baby" to "foods to eat when pregnant" to "abortion clinics charlotte nc" to "can christians be forgiven for abortion."

      That, right there, tells you why we need to worry about "Uncle Sam" having access to *everyone's* search logs - [ ... ]

      Write to your elected official and ask them these questions, and what safeguards they are putting in place to prevent any such abuse - and tell them you will be voting this fall. Then call your local news channel, and ask them to run a story on it, and ask the candidates for comment. [emphasis mine]

      Uh, no.

      If you push the "mainstream media" (which is a profit-seeking sensationalism machine) to run with this, the story will not be, "The Government can spy on the most intimate details of your life." Rather, it will be, "Searching for The Searcher: Hunt for Abortion-Seeker Grips Nation." Unholy amounts of money and media resources will be devoted, not to checking Government excesses and lawlessness and preserving the integrity of the Republic, but instead to trying to determine the identity of this mysterious woman, abandoned by a lothario, and left to agonize over the moral quandary of leading an exemplary Christian life (whatever that might mean) and terminating a pregnancy she knows she can't handle. The media circus around this story would make the stories surrounding Terri Schiavo look like a 30-second Public Service Announcement.

      Face it: It's the perfect American "news" soap opera. And it also has the beauty of urgency: "Can she be found before she has the abortion?" (Never mind the fact these search queries are fairly old.)

      So, no. You don't want to push this in front of CNN. They will spin it completely the wrong way. Why? Because that's what'll make them the most money. And the poor unfortunate woman in the middle of all this will be totally fucked. Again.

      Schwab

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Why TIA is a bad idea by p0tat03 (Score:2) Monday August 14 2006, @03:13PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Now.. (Score:2)

    by Tracer_Bullet82 (766262) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:10PM (#15904920)
    what we need to know is how much 1 type cross section with one another.

    Example : Obsessive Pornhounds(typical behaviour: spends inordinate times in usenet, loves tenta..)

    or Manhunter Shopper(typical behaviour : posts on craiglists under 10 different profiles, e/n queen at somethingcrappy or somethinsomething)

    or perhaps Newbie Basketcase (typical behaviour: reloads /. like crazy, trying to desperately be NOT terrible)

    or heck maybe Newbie Pornhounds or Basketcase Omnivore..

    Purely in the name of research of course.
  • I thought this was going to be a George Carlin skit.

    In a way, it sort of is.
  • Assumptions (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dbc001 (541033) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:13PM (#15904942)
    This guy makes a lot of assumptions in his analysis. I often search for a single topic multiple times - not out of obsession, but to refine my search. Sometimes I didn't get what I was looking for the first time, so I'll go back and sift through the 2nd and 3rd pages. Sometimes I search again because I can't remember where the best page was. Each new search for the same topic may lead me to change my search target - at first I might be looking to buy a product at a major retailer, only to realize later that it might be available used. These are all reasons to repeat a search that have nothing to do with obsession. Also, the author may have labelled someone as "Obsessive" when they are searching for "texas real estate" when in fact they work in the real estate industry.

    The article is an interesting read but I'm not buying into his category system.
    • Re:Assumptions by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Monday August 14 2006, @02:56PM
    • Re:Assumptions by p0tat03 (Score:2) Monday August 14 2006, @03:15PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Slashdotted (Score:2)

    ... the first link in the article is to a porn site.

    The porn site has now been slashdotted.

    Get off my born, bitches!
  • Not "obsessive", but lazy (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2006, @02:25PM (#15905060)
    I think the interpretation of why users google the same words over and over again is wrong. It's not obsessive or OCD at all.

    For me, I will goggle words that I know that will contain links that I want to see, but never remember to bookmark. It's much easier to just go to a search engine and type a keyword and scroll for the link in the first 10 hits, rather than go through your hundreds of bookmarks to find exactly the one you're looking for.
  • I bet I'm a basketcase (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by quantum bit (225091) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:26PM (#15905065)
    (Last Journal: Thursday April 28 2005, @06:02PM)
    Based on some of the wacky and random things that have gotten sent to google by me. Mostly happens when I'm trying to middle click on a link to open it in a new tab, accidentally miss and end up activating that stupid middle click search thing that tries to find whatever was selected last.

    Finally found the pref to kill that but it was annoying as hell.
  • Was it strategic ? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by himanshuarora (881139) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:26PM (#15905071)
    The search data released by AOL could be great for research purpose. Even a stupid person will never release such kind of data. This seems very strategic.
    If you analyze the search data you'll know that video market is growing rapidly. Search engines are surely driven by porn market. It explains why google was fighting for that data. It could have bought down their revenue. As search engines are useful for the development of internet, user data is useful for the development of future product because you know in advance who are the potential customers for the new product.
  • 2281868 is the winner... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2006, @02:27PM (#15905078)
    "Do niggers have x-ray vision" Truly frightening. Also note the large religious influence in a lot of the searches.
  • Basketcase (Score:2)

    by owlstead (636356) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:34PM (#15905148)
    My favorite example search is in the Basketcase category: 'i hurt when i think too much i love roadtrips i hate my weight i fear being alone for the rest of my life.'"

    I don't know for who I feel more sorry. The people that use that as a search string, or the ones that find it enjoyable.
  • by fm6 (162816) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:44PM (#15905227)
    (http://picknit.com/ | Last Journal: Saturday July 29 2006, @03:58PM)
    ...that nobody knows how to spell "beastiality"?
  • Best. Search history. Ever. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Phanatic1a (413374) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:46PM (#15905247)
    Selected highlights from this poor user [aolstalker.com]:

    losing your virginity
    signs that a woman may be pregnant
    how long does it take for the symptoms to show up that you are pregnant
    can you not get pregnant by having sex without a condom
    missed period
    negative home pregnancy test and positive blood test why
    christian love
    how to love your enemies
    inmate lookup at rikers island
  • Big news... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by poliopteragriseoapte (973295) on Monday August 14 2006, @02:53PM (#15905296)

    The analysis denotes an astoundingly low level of understanding of how people actually use the web. What the author is seeing is absolutely normal and obvious. The only abnormal thing is his surprise.

    The Pornhound. The fact that people search for porn on the web must rank as the discovery of the year!

    The Manhunter. Who ever bookmarks other people's web pages? I just type the people's names in Google, and most people I know do just that. We are all manhunters I guess.

    The Shopper. Same as above, who uses bookmarks? If I am interested in a treo 700 and I type it 37 times in 3 days, this just means that I find it more convenient to type treo 700, then select from the search results, that bookmark the result pages that I am interested in. And this is reasonable: why should I create bookmarks that become useless once I do buy the treo?

    The Obsessive. See above. People that search often for A are simply people who don't bother creating a bookmark for some results about A. Big discovery.

    The Omnivore. Ok, so when the pattern is complex, the author gives up. This is a really informative category.

    The Newbie. Again, it must rank as one of the big discoveries of the year that there are newbies on AOL...

    The Basket Case. This seems to be a repeat of "the omnivore", except that the author found these queries weirder.

    Who posted this on Slashdot? It's not interesting research at all! It's junk!

  • We have a winner (Score:1)

    by zabbey (985424) on Monday August 14 2006, @03:02PM (#15905357)
    927 3d molestation and rape porn 2006-05-20 17:20:16 9 http://slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] ------ I'd run that search to see why slashdot popped up but I'm too scared that in the next AOL search release list there I'll be searching for 3d pr0n
  • The Pirate (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Experiment 626 (698257) on Monday August 14 2006, @03:13PM (#15905440)

    While the pr0n crowd gets its own category, it would seem those who use the Internet to illicitly acquire copyrighted materials would simply fall into a subcategory of the Obsessive, and not an important enough one to be mentioned in the article. What of those brave souls who search for cracks, keygens, nocd patches, torrents, dvd rippers, and the like? Are they less prevalant than some would have us believe, or perhaps because AOL appeals to a less tech-savvy demographic, its searches might underrepresent them.

  • Omnivore subcategory: ouch! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Tumbleweed (3706) * on Monday August 14 2006, @03:27PM (#15905539)
    (http://tumbleweed.smugmug.com/)
    Okay, the bit about Omnivores who hit IMDb all the time hits a little too close to home here. :)

    I use IMDb as much as I use Google. A merging of those two would be quite convenient for me.

    Oh, and let's throw in Wikipedia while we're at it. While it may not be as accurate as a paper-published encyclopedia, it's still a zillion times more accurate than the average one-off webpage you're likely to find on any given topic.
  • Self-selection (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dkleinsc (563838) on Monday August 14 2006, @04:21PM (#15906029)
    Notice one key factor here: These people all use AOL. That's naturally going to self-select your data towards certain segments of the population which might exhibit different inclinations than rest of the group.
  • Omnivore! (Score:1)

    by newsong (995230) on Monday August 14 2006, @04:36PM (#15906175)
    (http://www.twylacentral.com/)
    My personal opinion is that list would have been funnier if "pornhunters" were called "carnivores" to go with the theme... I object to being listed as an omnivore just because I know how to use a search engine, though. For everything, that is. Though I guess I haven't been labelled because this has to do with AOL and I knew to steer clear of them since I was a total newbie to the internet.
  • Art (Score:1, Interesting)

    by dupper (470576) <adamlouis@gmail.com> on Monday August 14 2006, @04:40PM (#15906200)
    (Last Journal: Monday October 11 2004, @12:46PM)
    This AOL search log leak, as experienced by me through some cynical-mindedness and xGryph's simple search tool [homeip.net], is fucking Poetry. The best Found Art in history. There's nothing that bares the soul of modern man more honestly than search logs.


    At least, before this leak -- as beautiful as it is, this might finally be the tipping point in getting Joe Average AOLer to understand the gravity of the drastic erosions of privacy the Western world has experienced since 9/11, and stop trusting the unencrypted text submission these logs prove we often so completely and utterly, soul-baringly do. And no one acts anywhere near the same when they have even the slightest feeling they're being watched (and, more importantly, judged). In a world where Diaries are implicitly public, who have you ever trusted more than your search bar?

    Especially as, judging by these search logs, Joe Blow has a lot more to hide than even my cynical ass ever imagined. Might make some people realize the terr'rists aren't the only ones who'll be caught, charged, sentenced and executed for having something to hide.

    And this leak has finally given credence to the long-cynically-mocked, longer-held Sci-Fi ideal that, in teh big, unknowable futar, all Art will be on, be of, Technology. And this horrific breach of privacy is also the greatest set of Artistic and statistical data to have ever been released to the public. I would say, since it's raw data and not just a single interpretation, it's more important than the Kinsey Report. Which is tragic, because it can never be allowed to happen again, if we want any semblance of a feeling of privacy and freedom in our civilization. It's becoming unexpectedly apparent that this will be the form of major (mainstream, big-A-)Art of the future.

    Don't believe me? Read 'The Search Engine Confessions of AOL User 23187425' [lot49.com] and tell me it expresses any smaller torrent of hte raw, beautiful essense of what it is to be human than any Keats or Basho;. And that's only one piece among the very many a quick search can reveal. Many more at SomethingAwful's special edition of the Weekend Web [somethingawful.com], one of the primary progenitors, whether it was intended to be or not, of this kind of art.

    • Re:Art by skinfaxi (Score:1) Tuesday August 15 2006, @08:38AM
  • Seven Deadly Search habits? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by not-enough-info (526586) on Monday August 14 2006, @04:55PM (#15906346)
    (http://variableaspect.com/)
    And now, for a baseless comparison:
    {
            The Pornhound: Lust,
            the Manhunter: Envy,
            the Shopper: Greed,
            the Obsessive: Gluttony,
            the Omnivore: Sloth,
            the Newbie: Anger,
            the Basketcase: Pride
    };
    *This is my post-RTFA relational array.

    My favorite example search is in the Basketcase category: 'i hurt when i think too much i love roadtrips i hate my weight i fear being alone for the rest of my life.'"
    I don't know... those kinda look like lyrics...
  • by grudan (974070) on Monday August 14 2006, @05:35PM (#15906654)
    So maybe some of the Obsessive A A A B A B C A A B B behavior (describing people who type the same searches in again and again) represents people using the search bar as an easier way to get back to a specific page or set of pages than remembering and typing the entire URL.
  • 7 deadly sins? (Score:1)

    by kn0tw0rk (773805) on Monday August 14 2006, @06:21PM (#15906981)
    (Last Journal: Monday March 07 2005, @09:21PM)
    I would have thought that the seven deadly sins would have been better categories for grouping searchers by. eg Pr0n hunter == Lust.
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by mpeg4codec (581587) on Monday August 14 2006, @08:14PM (#15907523)
    (http://www.lacklustre.net/)
    Try this fun search [aolstalker.com] to see who searched for their SSN.

    It's amazing the kind of information [click link to see, it's not just SSN] people put into a public search engine.
  • by Wry Cooter (899317) on Monday August 14 2006, @09:32PM (#15907881)
    Even among AOL accounts, I doubt the use of AOL search field or its browser is that huge a percentage. You could use an outside browser with AOL dialup before there even were the first creaky attempts to rig a browser into the AOL client itself, around version 3 or so. Although clicking on an URL in email will use the AOL browser. Just saying the population being spunkd is even a smaller subset.
  • selected group (Score:1)

    by trzjr (995388) on Monday August 14 2006, @09:58PM (#15907973)
    it's really hard to say that the AOL data released is representative of the larger search search habits of the Internet population as a whole, not only because it hewed strictly to AOL users, but also because it included only AOL users who were using the AOL client software -- an even more rarefied sub-species of the online animal, and one that is typically (although probably with some exceptions) a bit more novice, a bit more unsophisticated, and/or a bit less familiar with all the untended parts of the WWW outside the garden walls of AOL's manicured interface. that's not to say that they don't use the Web, but if their home base and persistent point of departure is always the AOL client, they are unique in so many ways that make it hard to extrapolate.
  • Seven is a good number. We like Seven. But sometimes we need Eight. Or Nine...

    It would appear that either the analysis indicates AOL is truly the onramp for the Information Superhighway (i.e., they're all actually Newbies), or it draws a faulty conclusion.

    There are as many uses for search engines as there are results. One could wish to verify a fact - or learn something new - by looking for it in a variety of ways; this would falsely look like the Omnivore category.

    The fact that a Researcher or Fact Checker category was not included indicates Mr. Boutin may need to continue analyzing the data.
  • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.