I was chatting to another Tweeter recently about the Ford I-Max, and decided Iâd have a hunt for its brochure online. After all, this car was in production from 2007 to 2009, the World Wide Web was around, so surely it wouldnât be hard to find something on it?
I found one image, at a very low resolution. The webâs not a repository of everything: stuff gets removed, sites go down, search engines are not comprehensiveâin fact, search engines favour the new over the old, so older posts that are still currentâsuch as this post about the late George Kennedyâcanât even be found. This has been happening for over a decade, so it shouldnât surprise usâbut we should be concerned that we cannot get information based on merit or specificity, but on novelty. Not everything new is right, and if weâre only being exposed to whatâs âinâ, then weâre no better at our knowledge than our forebears. The World Wide Web, at least the way itâs indexed, is not a giant encyclopĂŚdia which brings up the best at your fingertips, but often a reflection of our bubble or what the prevailing orthodoxy is. Moreâs the pity.
I canât let this post go without one gripe about Facebook. Good news: as far as I can tell, they fixed the bug about tagging another page on your own page, so you donât have to start a new line in order to tag another party. Bad news, or maybe itâs to do with the way weâve set up our own pages: the minute you do, the nice preview image that Facebook extracted vanishes in favour of something smaller. Iâll check out our code, but back when I was debugging Facebook pages, it was pretty good at finding the dominant image on a web page. Lesson: donât tag anyone. It ruins the ĂŚsthetic on your page, and it increases everyoneâs time on the site, and that can never be healthy. Time to fight the programming of Professor Fogg and his children (with apologies to Roger McNamee).
Top: The post Facebook picks up from an IFTTT script. Above: What happens to a post that once had a proper image preview after editing, and tags added.