Where in the World is Whitey Bin Laden?

In the scheme of qualifications, I'm not qualified to be very much. But I am an authority on the question of how humans and search engines tend to talk over one another when they share the same screen.

Here it is -- the number one communicado non-starter. We over-specify what we want when we talk with search engines. We want it so bad we expect to bear witness to its materialization on our doorsteps and driveways. For commerce this works out fine. I want a size XXL horsepower in the original casing and want it to hit my cash rewards program before the arrival of my free shipping. But then it falls to fragmented pieces:

1. It's not an exact match of fallen-out-of-Facebook-is-this-Sally-really


2. It's not the exact place and time the package was designed to arrive


3. It's not the exact  same set of challenges you expected to be up against the next time

If there's only one-of-a-kind out there, we have an infinite loop of errors that send us to the land of the correctionless -- the placeholder Google's algorithm has reserved for our habitation. Are we surprised? Is an ulcer coming on? Perhaps, then our surprise should be worn and not masked? That's how we remember why we Googled in the first place. No chicken-and-egg problem about that. It has to do with yanking our minds out of our rabbit holes. It's about seeing the world from a broader perspective than our in-boxes and portfolios.

This tendency to over-specify is not our proudest achievement as disgruntled Googlers. It's really the natural extension of our need to dumb reality down for the sake of simplicity. It's not that we can't absorb the complexities. It's that we want a clear set of instructions. We want to be told what to do. That's not going to happen without a price, a catalog, and the certainty of a transaction about to happen.

For capital goods and tangible services we either share an understanding or will come to one. For everything else we have our own hunches or the eerie suspicion that we can't find what we're looking for. The hope is not for better search technology but for the ability to think more abstractly in order to expand a useful range of outcomes. This reminds me of the search troubles of some former PI students. Some were comfortable with directories and specialty databases for scouring public records. Others never left their search boxes, repeating the names of the same criminal suspects and eliciting the same three hits from the same three thousand sites. That's a fixation well worth escaping.

These same search dynamics surround the recently solved capers of our most wanted 1-2 on the post office walls of an American generation. In both cases the criminal was under our unsuspecting noses and free from under our fumbling thumbs. The more wanted they became, the more convinced we seemed were the vanishing tricks played on us by their deceitful legends. But sooner or later the steely resolve of wanted-dead-or-alive gives way to the intricacies of  an expanding drag net. There were choice bits of bait on a coterie of lures:

• Was it the delivery man as the whistle-snitch?


• Where in her jam-packed appointment book was the girlfriend penciled in next?

The only way these men could be brought to justice was to meet them out in a cavernous world of their own design. That takes theory of mind, extrapolation, dexterity, and perspective taking. And while we're piling onto what lands well clear of the Google radar, let's remember that sound taxonomy and our own search architectures are our best bet for deploying Google in its non-shopping glory.

This is an abstraction to the average "user." This is something perhaps only a Google "customer" might insist on.

Lessons Learned as a PI Instructor

I did something last week that I've never done in my professional life. I fired myself from a job -- not just any job but the one that pays me back on a reciprocal level that is far more nurturing than my average pay day. I resigned from my five year-long gig as an adjunct in Boston University's Center of Professional Education. That's the school within BU that awards certificates to mid-career adults looking to cut a new career path. My students were aspiring PIs. Unlike them I was never into CSI or apprehending alleged perps. Maybe I see too much good in the bad guy and visa versa to carry that moral clarity which captivates crusaders of all stripes (and many capes).

But the one thing that justice seekers and knowledge planners share in spades is an insatiable appetite for evidence. Not just smoking guns in the firing lines of law enforcement but any shred that could piece together the mysteries surrounding how people act on what they know, a.k.a. "why people do what they do" -- especially of an unspeakable vintage that only deepens both the mystery of the case and the resolve of the investigator.

If I shy away from moral judgements I'm certainly not on the fence about my participation in this worthy program. The students taught me more than I could ever learn in someone else's classroom about the tenacious and painstaking business of assembling a reliable accounting. Their case work tested by the slippery sequencing of tangled outcomes from competing versions of self-selecting interpretations. Now that's a complexity that only Mother Research could love and take under her watchful spyglass. But that's the education I got from teaching these budding detectives how to tackle the web as a research medium.

If my role was restricted only to this thrill of the hunt, such gratitude would have sustained my participation for years to come. But over time the experience began to shift, particularly in the online version of the course. A vocal and growing minority of students lacked both the personal confidence and institutional support to put their fears aside and reconnect with the same bold exploratory spirit that led them to sign up in the first place.

Too often my teaching (or facilitation as it's called in the distance learning segment) consisted of talking time-starved students down from their isolated towers of despair. It's trying hard enough that they juggle family and work schedules with their online education. But when the curriculum's too hard to grasp? That's when the sinking ship comes to anchor on the feeling that everyone else "gets it." The rest of one's virtual classmates are all on the same page.

The inconsolable student is in need of an immediate emotional rescue. It's 2 am. There's no life line. They are catastrophizing, big time. All sympathy aside, this routine sapped me dry. It consumed the energy I had been able to invest through the luxury of eye contact and 1:1 consults with my classroom students.

In addition to the lack of real-time human interaction, the course materials for the Internet Research section were treated the same as the other program components. This is not a minor omission. The world of surveillance, fingerprinting and case management doesn't require new readings, war stories or legal updates just because the program is cycling through a new class of students. I might not know my way around a crime scene barricade but I do know I could do a whole class on FaceBook -- a phenomenon that wasn't even a glimmer on horizon when our course materials went to press.

Internet Research not only warrants but demands a blanket refresh to stay in step with changing capabilities, rewritten interfaces, and expired resources. The course text predates social media. Even the online materials were produced three years ago, further alienating the virtual classes that call online their home, not just their subject matter.

I believe with a little more attentiveness the program can provide the stewardship that comes with a commitment to continuous improvement. Either way it's been an affirming, valuable experience and I thank CPE Director Ruth Ann Murray, Program Director Tom Shamshak, and curriculum manager Nancy Ahern for the opportunity to have helped pour the original foundation. That grounding will continue to establish BU's Certificate in Professional Investigations as a nesting bed for what Brendon Perrone calls the truth seekers among us -- the "modern day dragon slayers" with the courage to carry a questioning nature into the lines of battle.

To my former students thanks ... so much for inspiring me in your PI quest and your determination to engage a distracted, confusing, and often uncooperative set of circumstances that will ultimately answer to the justice you seek.

Lessons Learned as a PI Instructor

I did something last week that I've never done in my professional life. I fired myself from a job -- not just any job but the one that pays me back on a reciprocal level that is far more nurturing than my average pay day. I resigned from my five year-long gig as an adjunct in Boston University's Center of Professional Education. That's the school within BU that awards certificates to mid-career adults looking to cut a new career path. My students were aspiring PIs. Unlike them I was never into CSI or apprehending alleged perps. Maybe I see too much good in the bad guy and visa versa to carry that moral clarity which captivates crusaders of all stripes (and many capes).

But the one thing that justice seekers and knowledge planners share in spades is an insatiable appetite for evidence. Not just smoking guns in the firing lines of law enforcement but any shred that could piece together the mysteries surrounding how people act on what they know, a.k.a. "why people do what they do" -- especially of an unspeakable vintage that only deepens both the mystery of the case and the resolve of the investigator.

If I shy away from moral judgements I'm certainly not on the fence about my participation in this worthy program. The students taught me more than I could ever learn in someone else's classroom about the tenacious and painstaking business of assembling a reliable accounting. Their case work tested by the slippery sequencing of tangled outcomes from competing versions of self-selecting interpretations. Now that's a complexity that only Mother Research could love and take under her watchful spyglass. But that's the education I got from teaching these budding detectives how to tackle the web as a research medium.

If my role was restricted only to this thrill of the hunt, such gratitude would have sustained my participation for years to come. But over time the experience began to shift, particularly in the online version of the course. A vocal and growing minority of students lacked both the personal confidence and institutional support to put their fears aside and reconnect with the same bold exploratory spirit that led them to sign up in the first place.

Too often my teaching (or facilitation as it's called in the distance learning segment) consisted of talking time-starved students down from their isolated towers of despair. It's trying hard enough that they juggle family and work schedules with their online education. But when the curriculum's too hard to grasp? That's when the sinking ship comes to anchor on the feeling that everyone else "gets it." The rest of one's virtual classmates are all on the same page.

The inconsolable student is in need of an immediate emotional rescue. It's 2 am. There's no life line. They are catastrophizing, big time. All sympathy aside, this routine sapped me dry. It consumed the energy I had been able to invest through the luxury of eye contact and 1:1 consults with my classroom students.

In addition to the lack of real-time human interaction, the course materials for the Internet Research section were treated the same as the other program components. This is not a minor omission. The world of surveillance, fingerprinting and case management doesn't require new readings, war stories or legal updates just because the program is cycling through a new class of students. I might not know my way around a crime scene barricade but I do know I could do a whole class on FaceBook -- a phenomenon that wasn't even a glimmer on horizon when our course materials went to press.

Internet Research not only warrants but demands a blanket refresh to stay in step with changing capabilities, rewritten interfaces, and expired resources. The course text predates social media. Even the online materials were produced three years ago, further alienating the virtual classes that call online their home, not just their subject matter.

I believe with a little more attentiveness the program can provide the stewardship that comes with a commitment to continuous improvement. Either way it's been an affirming, valuable experience and I thank CPE Director Ruth Ann Murray, Program Director Tom Shamshak, and curriculum manager Nancy Ahern for the opportunity to have helped pour the original foundation. That grounding will continue to establish BU's Certificate in Professional Investigations as a nesting bed for what Brendon Perrone calls the truth seekers among us -- the "modern day dragon slayers" with the courage to carry a questioning nature into the lines of battle.

To my former students thanks ... so much for inspiring me in your PI quest and your determination to engage a distracted, confusing, and often uncooperative set of circumstances that will ultimately answer to the justice you seek.

Investigation Entry

The cognitive psyches have weighed in and it's nearly unanimous -- a brain on wireless is one that's rewired. Our circuits are abuzz with new spongy cells burning neural pulses into the trendy new places brains like yours and mine are looking for action. We're as easy to find as the answers to our searches. That's because we're conversing freely and openly, punching our surfing sessions into Google-enabled keypads -- the MRI scoring each mental discharge.

Critics like Nicholas Carr argue that more neurons firing (or even faster processing) doesn't necessarily mean a brain capable of lucid thinking for sense-making or problem-solving in support of sound, evidence-based decisions:

"Dozens of studies by psychologists, neurobiologists, and educators point to the same conclusion: When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking, and superficial learning. Even as the Internet grants us easy access to vast amounts of information, it is turning us into shallower thinkers, literally changing the structure of our brain."

The more interesting question to me is not about brain shape or mental depth but the enfeebled analytical muscles of an unquestioning generation of digital natives. That's not to say Carr's cautionary polemic is an indictment of GenY. I'm sure for every would-be hedge fund trader there's a budding journalist willing to hold a day job too. But we've barely begun to assess the damage of coming of age in a world where:

* Capital (not English) is the universal language of the species

* First Amendment rights are surrendered with the wave of a coupon, and

* The healthy skepticism of an informed electorate is confused for the faltering missteps of a business model (that being the demise of newspapers and the cleansing power of public investigations)

Rather than lamenting the golden age of impeachable offenses it might be more productive to consider some of these recoverable assets if we taught investigation skills to home bound couch-surfers sniffing for cheese in their own white Google lab coats. Here are a few initial thoughts:

1) Paying for information doesn't necessarily mean a vendor or an identity thief owns your credit card. Another form of payment is attention. Short of subpoenaing a suspect's surfing sessions how does one capture that?

2) The web 2.0 world is a giant echo chamber when you're trying to be heard. But if you can tune your research ear you can better understand the motivations of your search targets and the social circles that they travel in.

3) With the advent of suggested search Google is now in the business of completing your thoughts for you -- or at least sketch them out early enough to reward their Ad Word buyers for their advertising dollars. Other than to follow the herd there is no useful purpose to keywording one's way through a Google-based investigation.

4) A stealth researcher doesn't file FOIA requests or hack into the hard drive of a person of interest. They can use frameworks like Oceans, Lakes, and Ponds to determine where to search and source conjugation in order to determine what to believe.

5) It's not just about the right approach. The right tool-set is essential for knowing what evidence passes the smell test and comes with the pattern-matching potential the researcher needs to press their case. Here's what Carr has to say about the random and undisciplined way that critical mental thought rolls out to sea in most search sessions:

The depth of our intelligence hinges on our ability to transfer information from working memory, the scratch pad of consciousness, to long-term memory, the mind’s filing system. When facts and experiences enter our long-term memory, we are able to weave them into the complex ideas that give richness to our thought. But the passage from working memory to long-term memory also forms a bottleneck in our brain. Whereas long-term memory has an almost unlimited capacity, working memory can hold only a relatively small amount of information at a time. And that short-term storage is fragile: A break in our attention can sweep its contents from our mind.

That buffer that Carr finds lacking in working memory is a reservoir of resilient research exhibits called an RSS reader. Consider the sound operation of one to be the price of investigation entry.

So that's the start of teaching Gen-Yers how to teach themselves at the Academy of Higher Skepticism. When those questions become the properties of digital natives, the immigrants will feel a whole lot better about turning over the messes of our creation. We'll also stop waxing nostalgically for the big three networks, the Sunday papers, and paid subscription media.

Investigation Entry

The cognitive psyches have weighed in and it's nearly unanimous -- a brain on wireless is one that's rewired. Our circuits are abuzz with new spongy cells burning neural pulses into the trendy new places brains like yours and mine are looking for action. We're as easy to find as the answers to our searches. That's because we're conversing freely and openly, punching our surfing sessions into Google-enabled keypads -- the MRI scoring each mental discharge.

Critics like Nicholas Carr argue that more neurons firing (or even faster processing) doesn't necessarily mean a brain capable of lucid thinking for sense-making or problem-solving in support of sound, evidence-based decisions:

"Dozens of studies by psychologists, neurobiologists, and educators point to the same conclusion: When we go online, we enter an environment that promotes cursory reading, hurried and distracted thinking, and superficial learning. Even as the Internet grants us easy access to vast amounts of information, it is turning us into shallower thinkers, literally changing the structure of our brain."

The more interesting question to me is not about brain shape or mental depth but the enfeebled analytical muscles of an unquestioning generation of digital natives. That's not to say Carr's cautionary polemic is an indictment of GenY. I'm sure for every would-be hedge fund trader there's a budding journalist willing to hold a day job too. But we've barely begun to assess the damage of coming of age in a world where:

* Capital (not English) is the universal language of the species

* First Amendment rights are surrendered with the wave of a coupon, and

* The healthy skepticism of an informed electorate is confused for the faltering missteps of a business model (that being the demise of newspapers and the cleansing power of public investigations)

Rather than lamenting the golden age of impeachable offenses it might be more productive to consider some of these recoverable assets if we taught investigation skills to home bound couch-surfers sniffing for cheese in their own white Google lab coats. Here are a few initial thoughts:

1) Paying for information doesn't necessarily mean a vendor or an identity thief owns your credit card. Another form of payment is attention. Short of subpoenaing a suspect's surfing sessions how does one capture that?

2) The web 2.0 world is a giant echo chamber when you're trying to be heard. But if you can tune your research ear you can better understand the motivations of your search targets and the social circles that they travel in.

3) With the advent of suggested search Google is now in the business of completing your thoughts for you -- or at least sketch them out early enough to reward their Ad Word buyers for their advertising dollars. Other than to follow the herd there is no useful purpose to keywording one's way through a Google-based investigation.

4) A stealth researcher doesn't file FOIA requests or hack into the hard drive of a person of interest. They can use frameworks like Oceans, Lakes, and Ponds to determine where to search and source conjugation in order to determine what to believe.

5) It's not just about the right approach. The right tool-set is essential for knowing what evidence passes the smell test and comes with the pattern-matching potential the researcher needs to press their case. Here's what Carr has to say about the random and undisciplined way that critical mental thought rolls out to sea in most search sessions:

The depth of our intelligence hinges on our ability to transfer information from working memory, the scratch pad of consciousness, to long-term memory, the mind’s filing system. When facts and experiences enter our long-term memory, we are able to weave them into the complex ideas that give richness to our thought. But the passage from working memory to long-term memory also forms a bottleneck in our brain. Whereas long-term memory has an almost unlimited capacity, working memory can hold only a relatively small amount of information at a time. And that short-term storage is fragile: A break in our attention can sweep its contents from our mind.

That buffer that Carr finds lacking in working memory is a reservoir of resilient research exhibits called an RSS reader. Consider the sound operation of one to be the price of investigation entry.

So that's the start of teaching Gen-Yers how to teach themselves at the Academy of Higher Skepticism. When those questions become the properties of digital natives, the immigrants will feel a whole lot better about turning over the messes of our creation. We'll also stop waxing nostalgically for the big three networks, the Sunday papers, and paid subscription media.

The Blogging Bridge and Tunnel Authority

Since I started the online version of Internet Research I've been assigning blog creation as the final class project. It's meant to demonstrate back to as large a world as possible these three learnings:

1) The query formation techniques we develop while talking to search engines in the mechanical ways that search engines understand

2) The ability to integrate supporting design elements that reinforce a core topic or innate passion that will not extinguish after the grading period

3) That aspirational voice which withstood every doubting impulse that the student was too overextended, broke, or scared of technology to toss their hat in the reinvention ring.

As you can probably guess I'm partial to demo #3 when it comes to favorite blogs. It's always flattering when a student is able to create a parallel blogging universe that includes a custom search engine, RSS feeds tailored to topic, tag clouds, and blog rolls. I get a little emotional when I see a post explaining the finer points of using a tilde to expand a nested set of word algebraics. But I really choke up when I hear a professional transitioning from the boundaries that trapped them into a bad career move or an unpromotable position -- aren't they all these days?

The best blogs are where the student can clarify those aspects of their experience that they want to plant as a foundation for bridging what they do well into what they strive to be recognized for. That's the bridge they're building and watching them cross over is a beautiful view to be riding. The tunnelling chute refers to the immersive delight of mucking about in sandboxes of our own design. That quality of focus cannot happen in a more self-conscious social medium: you can tell a Face book page by its cover.

Blogs instead are a staging area for the thought that lies behind our work. Sure there's always wiggle room for the surface details and the name-dropping. But the underlying factors that motivate our best efforts will find a nurturing harbor in the introspective virtues of blogging.

Here then are links to the newest cadre of bloggers for your horizon-gazing and tunnel-drilling pleasure:

Teen Case Manager (Robyn Allen)
PI Student (Barbara Pulse)
Professional Investigation (Luis Carrasco)
TFX Consulting (Deirdre Lin)
Getaway Car (Joel Armstrong)
Law and Psychology (Jiyoung Koh -- pictured above)
Little Voices (Sharon Floyd)
One for the Dads (Tracy Jenkins)
PABIGGE (Chris Mordi)

The Blogging Bridge and Tunnel Authority

Since I started the online version of Internet Research I've been assigning blog creation as the final class project. It's meant to demonstrate back to as large a world as possible these three learnings:

1) The query formation techniques we develop while talking to search engines in the mechanical ways that search engines understand

2) The ability to integrate supporting design elements that reinforce a core topic or innate passion that will not extinguish after the grading period

3) That aspirational voice which withstood every doubting impulse that the student was too overextended, broke, or scared of technology to toss their hat in the reinvention ring.

As you can probably guess I'm partial to demo #3 when it comes to favorite blogs. It's always flattering when a student is able to create a parallel blogging universe that includes a custom search engine, RSS feeds tailored to topic, tag clouds, and blog rolls. I get a little emotional when I see a post explaining the finer points of using a tilde to expand a nested set of word algebraics. But I really choke up when I hear a professional transitioning from the boundaries that trapped them into a bad career move or an unpromotable position -- aren't they all these days?

The best blogs are where the student can clarify those aspects of their experience that they want to plant as a foundation for bridging what they do well into what they strive to be recognized for. That's the bridge they're building and watching them cross over is a beautiful view to be riding. The tunnelling chute refers to the immersive delight of mucking about in sandboxes of our own design. That quality of focus cannot happen in a more self-conscious social medium: you can tell a Face book page by its cover.

Blogs instead are a staging area for the thought that lies behind our work. Sure there's always wiggle room for the surface details and the name-dropping. But the underlying factors that motivate our best efforts will find a nurturing harbor in the introspective virtues of blogging.

Here then are links to the newest cadre of bloggers for your horizon-gazing and tunnel-drilling pleasure:

Teen Case Manager (Robyn Allen)
PI Student (Barbara Pulse)
Professional Investigation (Luis Carrasco)
TFX Consulting (Deirdre Lin)
Getaway Car (Joel Armstrong)
Law and Psychology (Jiyoung Koh -- pictured above)
Little Voices (Sharon Floyd)
One for the Dads (Tracy Jenkins)
PABIGGE (Chris Mordi)

Giving Voice to Learning

I just completed a first cycle of online instruction for a section of the Professional Investigations Program at Boston University. I've been teaching the classroom version for a few years now but it's always been a forced fit to teach an online class offline. The paradox was a real boon for my online PIoneers who were sandwiching their curriculum inbetween forced feedings of social networking, day jobs, working double shifts, financial acrobatics, and putting kids to bed.

But as much as the freedom from time and distance is a liberation I seriously needed to connect -- not passwords to logins or even names to faces but from experiences to voices. There is a reason there is no "text of experience" to replace that expressive voice for communicating the aspirations and endeavoring spirit. It's the voice of experience that each participant conveys in the faith that their investment in virtual learning will pay off in tangible, transformative ways.

I pushed the program administrators to consider adapting at least the option for an opt-in phone conference to clear the air about the voices -- even at the risk of having the stronger personalities dominate the discussion. There was also the concern that enthusiasm for the subject might push against the pressures carried by online adult learners. But given the tight deadlines everyone is under, I'm not sure that's a lasting concern of our students. They want to be heard -- especially in a forum of their peers.

Either way the voice is more than a phone call. It's also the willingness to parlay one's life experience into the program curriculum. That's not a theory of learning. That's an application of doing. The learning and the doing are one in the same. In my class that's called the PI blog. The basic blocking and tackling generates a container of news and commentary about the passions of our aspiring PIs. More importantly it's a chance for them to insert themselves into a conversation between those interests and the role they would play for shaping them.

• Looking for a primer on getting into the PI field? Look no further than Robyn Kervick's Aspiring Sleuthhound.


• Working the PI job leads? Brian Dodge factors in the exacting qualifications with PI or not to PI. Deb Burress addresses similar job-hunting turf with a more diary-like approach.


• Reporting on the latest scandals in corruption-prone institutions? Nick Jamieson keeps the stakeholders honest in his Government Investigations.


• Interested in the need for improved transparency and better forensics standards? Emmy Balon writes with eloquence and authority on Becoming Nancy Drew.


• Fishing your way out of foreclosure and the rights and responsibilities of homeowners when their debt loads are clamoring for higher ground? Tune into Ligia Tanney's Real Estate Solutions Radio.


• Looking to source anonymous and potentially malicious phishers and schemers? Check out Mark Williams Skip Tracing News.


• Finally Allan Bowlin crosses state lines to put his GPS expertise to work in Digital Forensics.

All these niches blossomed in the last compressed week of the course. I look forward to seeing how each one of these seedlings take root in the Internet Research soil tilled by these insatiable investigators (or "truth tellers" as Program Director Tom Shamshak likes to call our students). Long may they testify.

Giving Voice to Learning

I just completed a first cycle of online instruction for a section of the Professional Investigations Program at Boston University. I've been teaching the classroom version for a few years now but it's always been a forced fit to teach an online class offline. The paradox was a real boon for my online PIoneers who were sandwiching their curriculum inbetween forced feedings of social networking, day jobs, working double shifts, financial acrobatics, and putting kids to bed.

But as much as the freedom from time and distance is a liberation I seriously needed to connect -- not passwords to logins or even names to faces but from experiences to voices. There is a reason there is no "text of experience" to replace that expressive voice for communicating the aspirations and endeavoring spirit. It's the voice of experience that each participant conveys in the faith that their investment in virtual learning will pay off in tangible, transformative ways.

I pushed the program administrators to consider adapting at least the option for an opt-in phone conference to clear the air about the voices -- even at the risk of having the stronger personalities dominate the discussion. There was also the concern that enthusiasm for the subject might push against the pressures carried by online adult learners. But given the tight deadlines everyone is under, I'm not sure that's a lasting concern of our students. They want to be heard -- especially in a forum of their peers.

Either way the voice is more than a phone call. It's also the willingness to parlay one's life experience into the program curriculum. That's not a theory of learning. That's an application of doing. The learning and the doing are one in the same. In my class that's called the PI blog. The basic blocking and tackling generates a container of news and commentary about the passions of our aspiring PIs. More importantly it's a chance for them to insert themselves into a conversation between those interests and the role they would play for shaping them.

• Looking for a primer on getting into the PI field? Look no further than Robyn Kervick's Aspiring Sleuthhound.


• Working the PI job leads? Brian Dodge factors in the exacting qualifications with PI or not to PI. Deb Burress addresses similar job-hunting turf with a more diary-like approach.


• Reporting on the latest scandals in corruption-prone institutions? Nick Jamieson keeps the stakeholders honest in his Government Investigations.


• Interested in the need for improved transparency and better forensics standards? Emmy Balon writes with eloquence and authority on Becoming Nancy Drew.


• Fishing your way out of foreclosure and the rights and responsibilities of homeowners when their debt loads are clamoring for higher ground? Tune into Ligia Tanney's Real Estate Solutions Radio.


• Looking to source anonymous and potentially malicious phishers and schemers? Check out Mark Williams Skip Tracing News.


• Finally Allan Bowlin crosses state lines to put his GPS expertise to work in Digital Forensics.

All these niches blossomed in the last compressed week of the course. I look forward to seeing how each one of these seedlings take root in the Internet Research soil tilled by these insatiable investigators (or "truth tellers" as Program Director Tom Shamshak likes to call our students). Long may they testify.

Measuring the Impact of Thought Pieces

A new acquaintance recently published a provocative piece addressing the subject of social enterprise in an influential business media outlet. He was curious what kind of post-publication life his article was commanding in terms of press pickup, social bookmarking, reader feedback, and the resulting footprint of organizations and peer-experts linking to it on their own sites.

Most of the territory covered is aimed at the vain anxiety our names and effects will go public but escape our notice. There's more than a few utilities designed to consolidate our social media profiles: "our interfaces don't miss a single interaction, blah, blah, blah."

What I liked about this exercise was that it wasn't email or password-based. The only detail was the article itself. This is actually plenty if we're pursuing the power of an idea (as opposed to the browser used by our site visitors).

As far as recipes go the easiest and most literal way to trace an article on the web is to perform a link analysis. To do this you save the URL and then see who's linked to it.

A second more effective way is to allow for your keywords to appear in the "anchor." Anchor means the words that the linking party uses to describe the page it's linking to. As you'll see this gives a more thorough result -- including some cheeky tweets.

Capturing the social media piece is a little more fleeting than garnering page links. As we saw in the Yahoo example we're limited to the exact URL. URLs are becoming less static over time -- especially as they age and publishers pull them offline. This largely limits the amount of conjecture you'll get. It's not that Dashboard to end all buzz factors.

Again it helps to be less specific but there is no definitive source. Here's another example of a selective media universe where first and last name are the only terms in play.

When the promise of comprehensive profiling turns into the scattershot footprints of puny indexes I do what any rationale researcher does. I retreat back to Google. This is a Google query that focuses only on a news aggregation tool called Digg.

... and on Facebook.

Finally, here are two novel visuals for depicting links. The first from Google captures all links into ft.com that mention the author's name.

The second is not a search interface but a multi-dimensional view of recent media generation on the topic called Silo Breaker -- not specific to the original article but a big picture view to rival the most panoramic thought piece.

Happy fishing.

Measuring the Impact of Thought Pieces

A new acquaintance recently published a provocative piece addressing the subject of social enterprise in an influential business media outlet. He was curious what kind of post-publication life his article was commanding in terms of press pickup, social bookmarking, reader feedback, and the resulting footprint of organizations and peer-experts linking to it on their own sites.

Most of the territory covered is aimed at the vain anxiety our names and effects will go public but escape our notice. There's more than a few utilities designed to consolidate our social media profiles: "our interfaces don't miss a single interaction, blah, blah, blah."

What I liked about this exercise was that it wasn't email or password-based. The only detail was the article itself. This is actually plenty if we're pursuing the power of an idea (as opposed to the browser used by our site visitors).

As far as recipes go the easiest and most literal way to trace an article on the web is to perform a link analysis. To do this you save the URL and then see who's linked to it.

A second more effective way is to allow for your keywords to appear in the "anchor." Anchor means the words that the linking party uses to describe the page it's linking to. As you'll see this gives a more thorough result -- including some cheeky tweets.

Capturing the social media piece is a little more fleeting than garnering page links. As we saw in the Yahoo example we're limited to the exact URL. URLs are becoming less static over time -- especially as they age and publishers pull them offline. This largely limits the amount of conjecture you'll get. It's not that Dashboard to end all buzz factors.

Again it helps to be less specific but there is no definitive source. Here's another example of a selective media universe where first and last name are the only terms in play.

When the promise of comprehensive profiling turns into the scattershot footprints of puny indexes I do what any rationale researcher does. I retreat back to Google. This is a Google query that focuses only on a news aggregation tool called Digg.

... and on Facebook.

Finally, here are two novel visuals for depicting links. The first from Google captures all links into ft.com that mention the author's name.

The second is not a search interface but a multi-dimensional view of recent media generation on the topic called Silo Breaker -- not specific to the original article but a big picture view to rival the most panoramic thought piece.

Happy fishing.

In Defense of Poor Searching

I recently did a trial run with an online distance learning university. The other auditioners were the other prospective teachers in the program -- each with their own expertise and curriculum for teaching it.

We all needed to post an introductory lecture and discussion question to the school's web server. The other instructors would then field the question and three days of required threadings would ensue.

I found the response to my own web investigations course materials instructive. The feedback was useful not so much for its originality as a confirmation that the same excuse for poor information management practices is a dead-ringer for the reluctance I face on a daily basis as a knowledge planner for a management consulting firm.

Here's the responding thread:

"The problem we have with that is out staff just between too many tasks to remember all the options. "

It's true that the multitude of search options can be a little intimidating to a tech-savvy workforce and absolutely petrifying to the average Googler with no support (both technical and managerial). The trick is to let each student seek out their natural fulfillment. They've already agreed to wonder outside their comfort zones in signing up for the course. It's my job to get them to drive the search car to where they want to be -- not to confuse them under the "search hood."

Each new tool and method needs to be about problem-solving with the problem being something they've experienced firsthand many times prior to taking the web investigations course. One way to keep their receptive heads open to so much new material is to get them tagging their important discoveries on del.icio.us. I find that by not expecting them to memorize particular sites it frees them up to retain more of the course material, and more importantly, problem-solve more effectively.

Just as important to what's retained is what's left out I stop short of assigning any books or texts in a course that cuts a very diverse technology profile: some are never offline -- some are challenged to send an email attachment. I teach to the problem and then introduce filtering approaches (syntax) and the word choices and ordering (semantics).

The search section concludes with each student creating their own CSE ("Custom Search Engine") using the Google Coop tools. It complements the framework of Ocean-Lake-Pond -- that the size of your data set is just as important as the query you formulate.

Talk about an overlooked search lesson.

In Defense of Poor Searching

I recently did a trial run with an online distance learning university. The other auditioners were the other prospective teachers in the program -- each with their own expertise and curriculum for teaching it.

We all needed to post an introductory lecture and discussion question to the school's web server. The other instructors would then field the question and three days of required threadings would ensue.

I found the response to my own web investigations course materials instructive. The feedback was useful not so much for its originality as a confirmation that the same excuse for poor information management practices is a dead-ringer for the reluctance I face on a daily basis as a knowledge planner for a management consulting firm.

Here's the responding thread:

"The problem we have with that is out staff just between too many tasks to remember all the options. "

It's true that the multitude of search options can be a little intimidating to a tech-savvy workforce and absolutely petrifying to the average Googler with no support (both technical and managerial). The trick is to let each student seek out their natural fulfillment. They've already agreed to wonder outside their comfort zones in signing up for the course. It's my job to get them to drive the search car to where they want to be -- not to confuse them under the "search hood."

Each new tool and method needs to be about problem-solving with the problem being something they've experienced firsthand many times prior to taking the web investigations course. One way to keep their receptive heads open to so much new material is to get them tagging their important discoveries on del.icio.us. I find that by not expecting them to memorize particular sites it frees them up to retain more of the course material, and more importantly, problem-solve more effectively.

Just as important to what's retained is what's left out I stop short of assigning any books or texts in a course that cuts a very diverse technology profile: some are never offline -- some are challenged to send an email attachment. I teach to the problem and then introduce filtering approaches (syntax) and the word choices and ordering (semantics).

The search section concludes with each student creating their own CSE ("Custom Search Engine") using the Google Coop tools. It complements the framework of Ocean-Lake-Pond -- that the size of your data set is just as important as the query you formulate.

Talk about an overlooked search lesson.

The Limits of Web Research

One of the hardest lessons to learn about the web as a research tool is the notion that you can track anyone down and find out anything you want to know about them. We are all moving targets and using a non-linnear medium for target practice means we're going to be shooting more research blanks than bulls-eyes.

In my teaching this often takes the form of a student who is trying to stretch a Googling expedition into a positive ID and ultimately a lot of sordid details about someone who is probably not all that well-known for their compromising behavior. There are many obstacles before the public vetting of the dirt-dishing can even begin:

1) People are journeys -- not destinations:
There are 34 Springfields in the U.S. Some people have that many alter egos connected to a diverisfied multiple personality portfolio.

2) The trails they leave -- they may bob but not weave:
The web is not definitive. Try circling back to sourcing one's virtual history or even a current web presence is not about closing loops or riffing on a central theme or obsession. There is no one trail or "go to" site for intimating where the next detour digresses or the former backroad resurfaces as an eighteen lane interstate.

3) The web is more effective as a communications medium -- not a research tool:
It's easier to talk up a potential ally than track down a potential social menace. Making a professional connection is more reasonable than trying to corner a criminal suspect.

So how do we get away from using the web to track a fixed target the way a P.I. stakes out a parked car? Part of that realization is the expectation that cases are not cracked by keyword searches or even traditional document retrieval but by reaching out to potential witnesses, experts, and stakeholders. But before those overtures are made? First lay the groundwork with sound research practices.

That said, more incriminating evidence can be found every day. What turns up expands our notion of an increasingly transparent public domain. We see this as the digital natives begin to outnumber digital immigrants and share personal details in a way that would startle their guarded elders.

But is it us immigrants who are exposing our naivete when we complain about privacy invasions and storm the switchboards of the institutions where an employee's laptop is in breach? Perhaps yesterday's healthy precautions are tomorrow's unfounded paranoias. This is the luxury of the self-important. Should a budding investigator be hot on the trail of some middle manager for their next homework assignment? They may not need to keep a low profile. Because the profile cut by the target in their sights may dip even lower.

The Limits of Web Research

One of the hardest lessons to learn about the web as a research tool is the notion that you can track anyone down and find out anything you want to know about them. We are all moving targets and using a non-linnear medium for target practice means we're going to be shooting more research blanks than bulls-eyes.

In my teaching this often takes the form of a student who is trying to stretch a Googling expedition into a positive ID and ultimately a lot of sordid details about someone who is probably not all that well-known for their compromising behavior. There are many obstacles before the public vetting of the dirt-dishing can even begin:

1) People are journeys -- not destinations:
There are 34 Springfields in the U.S. Some people have that many alter egos connected to a diverisfied multiple personality portfolio.

2) The trails they leave -- they may bob but not weave:
The web is not definitive. Try circling back to sourcing one's virtual history or even a current web presence is not about closing loops or riffing on a central theme or obsession. There is no one trail or "go to" site for intimating where the next detour digresses or the former backroad resurfaces as an eighteen lane interstate.

3) The web is more effective as a communications medium -- not a research tool:
It's easier to talk up a potential ally than track down a potential social menace. Making a professional connection is more reasonable than trying to corner a criminal suspect.

So how do we get away from using the web to track a fixed target the way a P.I. stakes out a parked car? Part of that realization is the expectation that cases are not cracked by keyword searches or even traditional document retrieval but by reaching out to potential witnesses, experts, and stakeholders. But before those overtures are made? First lay the groundwork with sound research practices.

That said, more incriminating evidence can be found every day. What turns up expands our notion of an increasingly transparent public domain. We see this as the digital natives begin to outnumber digital immigrants and share personal details in a way that would startle their guarded elders.

But is it us immigrants who are exposing our naivete when we complain about privacy invasions and storm the switchboards of the institutions where an employee's laptop is in breach? Perhaps yesterday's healthy precautions are tomorrow's unfounded paranoias. This is the luxury of the self-important. Should a budding investigator be hot on the trail of some middle manager for their next homework assignment? They may not need to keep a low profile. Because the profile cut by the target in their sights may dip even lower.