Presenting Twitter in Search Results

by Hutch Carpenter

In a recent post, I described some ways in which tweets should be ranked in search results. A good follow-on question is...

How should tweets be presented in search results?

It's an interesting question - how exactly would you want to see tweets in your Google and Bing search results? And it's an important question, as searches are critical bases for discovering information and huge drivers of traffic.

Tweets are different from web pages. They are more ephemeral, but also much more current. They're short nature means we can consume them much more quickly than fuller web pages. In many ways, their brevity reduces their "burden of interestingness". Read, move on. Read, move on. Read, move on.

Tweets are small nuggets of insight, and pointers to good content. Web pages are the foundational information components. The value of the two digital forms is different. Thus, it makes sense to consider options for presenting these different types of information to people.

Three different designs for presenting tweets in Google and Bing search results come to mind:

• Separate tweets-only search page
  
• Tweets displayed in a box on the same page with web pages
  
• Tweets integrated into the overall search results

Let's take a look at the options. For added context, I've included appropriate musical selections.

At the bottom of this post, I've set up a poll asking which approach you'd prefer.

Tweets-only search results

Musical theme: Gotta keep 'em separated.

This is the Bing way. A separate URL for tweets. It's an acknowledgment that tweets really are different from web pages. The graphic below conceptualizes this approach, with a search on 'Madrid':


The graphic above puts tweets searches more in line with overall searches. Right now Bing has no link to tweet searches on its home page. You just have to know the URL exists. Of course, the Microsoft Bing team is working on incorporating the firehose into its search experience, so that may change.

Positives

• Dedicated page allows for much more creativity with presenting tweets, as Bing has shown
  
• Visible link/tab keeps tweet searches more in-the-flow of searchers' actions
  
• Users could easily toggle between the tabs for different types of information
  
• Minimizes risk of disruption to current "golden egg" of web searches

Negatives

• Forces an extra step to see potentially relevant information - click the tweets tab
  
• Somewhat diminishes the awareness of tweets' real-time, up-to-date nature by using same tab structure applied to more static web pages

Tweets in same-page box

Musical theme: Man in the box.

The presentation of real-time tweets on the same page is something Google is experimenting with currently. The philosophy here is that you're looking for multiple types of information in a search. Google already displays web page links, images, YouTube videos, maps, PDFs and other types of content. Tweets are just another type of content.

Something I'd like to see is a separate box of the tweets on the search results page, as shown below:


This design effectively distinguishes tweets from other types of content, while preserving the "all information on one page" philosophy. This is important for Google and Bing advertising, making the search results page even more engaging.

Open question: what's better for ad click volumes? Multiple pages of different content (e.g. separate tabs described previously)? Or a single page with more engaging content?

Aside from the information aspect of tweets, there is also a people aspect. Tweets are as much about the person as they are the content. The separate presentation of tweets distinguishes them from web pages, PDFs, videos and the like.

Positives

• Relevant, up-to-date content improves value of searches
  
• In-the-flow of existing search behavior
  
• Real-time nature is engaging
  
• Find people as well as content

Negatives

• Smaller space constrains presentation options
  
• Potential for a too-crowded visual presentation

Because of the volume of searches run through Google and Bing, there will be a premium on ensuring the quality of the tweets presented. This is important regardless, but even more so here with the number of times people will see the tweets. See Search Engine Tweet Ranking Algorithms for thoughts on how to do this.

Tweets integrated with overall search results

Musical theme: Happy Together

There is a third design option. Why not put the tweets right in the mix of overall search results? Treat them less as exotic new forms of content, and more as just another type for searchers to click on. The graphic below conceptualizes this:


A tweet is just another URL that can point searchers to relevant content. The challenge is that Google and Bing need to alter their ranking algorithms to allow tweets to be served up high in search results. Something like a pagerank for the twitter account itself. If it has relevant content and a high "Twitter pagerank", it gets served up higher in the search results.

Positives

• Searchers get tweets in a highly familiar way
  
• Minimizes risk of disruption to current "golden egg" of web searches

Negatives

• Undermines the fresh, up-to-date nature of tweets
  
• Will limit presentation of relevant tweets due to inadequate "Twitter pagerank"
  
• Reduces the people aspect of the tweets
  
• Lack of real-time flow diminishes engagement of the results page

Of course, tweets are served up in search results today. But that generally happens with very specific multi-word searches that match the tweet, or including the word "twitter" in the search. The design above brings tweets more fully into the pantheon of content, displaying them highly in search results for basic keywords.

I imagine smart folks can come up with other designs for displaying tweets. Leave a comment on these three or any other designs you think might be interesting.

Also, take a second and vote in the poll below. I'm curious what people think about the different possibilities for displaying tweets.

Thanks.

---

Hutch Carpenter is the Vice President of Product at Spigit. Spigit integrates social collaboration tools into a SaaS enterprise idea management platform used by global Fortune 2000 firms to drive innovation.

Twitter Search to Challenge Kumo and Google?

I came across an article on TechCrunch that got me thinking. I have been writing for a while now that the main functionality of Twitter, really is just a product feature that can and is being copied Facebook, Plaxo, Windows Live, and probably everyone else out there.

For Twitter to survive they have to find a way to turn it into a platform. Finding a way to create value-added search is probably their best bet.

After all, what is the number one thing that people share, other than what they are having for breakfast?

Links...

Links tweeted by Twitter users are more valuable because they (for the most part) have been added to the search database by people who found their content to have value.

One of the biggest challenges that traditional search engines like Kumo and Google have is that they have to warehouse everything, and most of the Internet is full of garbage that is of no use to people.

For Twitter to maintain any value in search over and above Kumo and Google, they will have to constantly be looking for creative ways to block robots from posting 140chars automatically stuffed with links and keywords.

Without naming names, I have the feeling that one of the people I am following has found a way to automatically post tweets. This means that spammers can and will start attacking Twitter with automated tweets for their viagra and weight loss treatments for all kinds of keywords - reducing the value of Twitter search.

Are Twitter engineers up to the job?

@innovate

Follow-up: Other People's Money

Just came across a Seattle Times article talking about how Microsoft is going to produce digital short films for Xbox Live.

Buried in the article in a single sentence was the following:

"The pilots will also be distributed over MSN and Zune."

So, Microsoft is halfway home by starting to produce content that people might find interesting.

Now they should leverage the infrastructure they are putting in place to produce content and partner with Microsoft Advertising to make and distribute content that site owners will find useful.

As we discussed in the original article, producing and syndicating useful content in key verticals then might encourage small site owners in those verticals to switch from Google Adwords, and lead to a larger query share for Live Search down the road...

What do you think?

Other People's Money

As Google's share of the search business approaches 70%, Microsoft is left needing a bold move to remain relevant.

While Live Search is a good product, Cashback will not save them from the Google monster.

Let's look at the problem that they are trying to solve. Or rather, let's look at what Microsoft is trying to achieve in the search business. Ultimately, Microsoft is trying to become the ad platform of choice. Being the search engine of choice would be nice too, but it is not their primary goal.

So if Microsoft wants to be the ad platform of choice, what do they need to do?

Well, first they need to become the number one choice for contextual advertising distribution. This should be the primary goal. Moving up in search engine popularity should be a secondary goal. If Microsoft marshalled their resources towards dominating contextual advertising, search popularity would follow as a byproduct. Why?

Well, if you run a blog or some other kind of site, and Microsoft is sending you a check every month, are you not at least a little more likely to use Microsoft Live Search as your default search engine?

What then happens if Microsoft offers to add cashback from personal Live Search behavior to contextual advertising syndication payment accounts?

What then happens if Microsoft partners with Amazon or NewEgg to offer discounts on Microsoft merchandise to contextual advertising distributors through a gift certificate conversion scheme?

Finally, what then happens if Microsoft tries to help solve the content creation challenge that millions of small site operators face?

It costs money to create content for your site. What if Microsoft offered site owners relevant ad-supported content for their site for free (possibly focusing on key verticals)?

Mmmm.... It's starting to add up...

More content on site... More visitors...

Would that be a bad thing? Wouldn't everyone win?

So, what are you waiting for Microsoft?

Your opportunity is here, your opportunity is now...

What do you think?