Over at Rails Authority I use a great client-side syntax highlighter called SyntaxHighlighter to make code examples look nice, but it doesn’t support Valid XHTML , so I enhanced it to handle an XHTML-compatible style, e.g.:
<pre>
<code class="code xml:nogutter">
Your IP address is <%= @client_ip %>
</code>
</pre>
(Inspired by Ernest’s post, linked above.)
While getting fat on turkey and mashed potatoes in Minnesota over the holiday, I discovered a great little radio show called Radio Lab, which is also published as a podcast. I had originally heard a clip of their show on This American Life a couple months ago, but despite Ira Glass’s ringing endorsement, I hadn’t sought out a listen until the night before flying. Boy, am I glad I did.
What’s Radio Lab? Think Car Talk (but more production and no phone calls) meets Bill Nye the Science Guy. What I like about the show is that the topics are science-focused, and the hosts (Jad and Robert) banter and discuss things in a lively way. It’s not boring; rather, it’s engaging and the pace moves swiftly. The production seems almost built for the attention-deficit world we live in: some key phrases are repeated for emphasis, there is some narration on top of recorded stories to provide clarification, and there is discussion in a conversational tone. It all adds up to a really fun and enlightening experience.
I managed to listen to eleven podcasts on four flights and while drifting off to sleep each night over the last few days. If you’re looking for a place to start, my favorite episodes so far have been Morality, Musical Language, Memory and Forgetting, and Who Am I?. It’s a fairly deep-thinking, hour-long show, so I’m not sure how it would hold up under the demands of driving (I often find my mind wanders as I drive regardless of what I listen to). But if you can manage to concentrate fully and follow along, you’ll be rewarded with some truly mind-enhancing moments.
And, if nothing else, you’ll be able to spout off random, newly-learned fun-facts at parties. Did you know that some animals sleep half of their brain at a time?
At the risk of being called a keyword Nazi and having to endure accusations that I care just a little too much about this stuff: Microsoft just managed surpass my experience with Yahoo.
As I mentioned, I’ve been advertising my online community classifieds site, Dibs.net, on Google for almost a month. Last night I decided to try out Microsoft’s advertising network for my community classifieds site. I copied some of my better performing ads from my Classifieds Ad Group on Google into my Classifieds Ad Group on Microsoft.
Here’s representative ad from the bunch:
I was in business fairly quickly — or so I thought. Microsoft has a similar “editorial guidelines” process to Yahoo’s. But at Microsoft, the process must go something like this:
Microsoft rejected what I consider to the the most important keywords from my advertising, including “classifieds” and “community classifieds.”
I’ve given them a chance to respond before I start calling them names here 
(PS – Google’s success in advertising appears to be not without reason.)
Update: Microsoft took only a few hours to respond, and did so positively by reinstating the classifieds-related keywords. Good for them (and me). They blamed the problem on their automated editorial process, which raises the question: why would anyone automate such a thing? I think we can all agree computers are great at some things, but applying subjective and vaguely defined editorial guidelines isn’t one of them. Either way, I take back my paint fumes and Scooby-Doo comment above, since it appears they aren’t nuts after all.
I’ve been advertising Dibs.net on both the Google and Yahoo ad networks for three weeks. I’ll have more to say later on, but I did want to share some notes about Yahoo’s “editorial process” regarding what search terms they let you advertise against. This process is allegedly for quality purposes, so that more relevant advertising is displayed to searchers.
Google has taken a more free-market approach to their editorializing of search terms you can advertise against. I’m sure they have a quality-control staff to keep ads clean, but they tend to let you spend your money however you want. I’m no Google fan, but I think Google’s approach is far superior, mainly because the market actually does self-correct mispositioned advertising: as people find their advertising for certain keywords isn’t working, they pare back the selection of keywords to be more laser-focused. I did this very thing; it works.
Yahoo, on the other hand, voluntarily protects certain company names (though who knows which ones) and is awfully serious about the relevancy of keywords you choose. But it’s all so inconsistent and confusing that you never know what they will allow. For example, they apparently allow some misspellings of brand names, but not others. And today I got notice they decided a term wasn’t relevant enough to Dibs.net — which surprised me, since I often describe Dibs.net using the exact term they rejected.
So, I just fired off an email to Yahoo support to see if they can make this situation clearer than the Mississippi mud they’ve given me till now.
Can you give me more detail as to why you believe the keyword “flea markets” isn’t applicable to my company, which is itself an online flea market (dibs.net)?
Removing the keyword from my campaign strikes me as an overly aggressive editorial decision, especially after conducting this search on Yahoo and noting NOT A SINGLE AD relates even remotely to flea markets. In fact, mine is the MOST RELEVANT of any company there. Of the most absurd listings you apparently allow, BizRate, Shopping.com, PalmersUniforms.com and Restaurant.com are advertised on the “flea markets” keyword.
Yes, Restaurant.com advertises under “flea markets” but dibs.net cannot? Come on, Yahoo! I’m trying to like your ad service. I really am. But this sort of random, haphazard enforcement of “editorial rules” leaves me plain confounded.
I have paused my advertising until I receive a response explaining how Yahoo can possibly hope to apply such picky rules consistently.
Thanks,
Kevin Hunt
We’ll see what they have to say about Restaurant.com’s flea market. Mmmmm, makes you hungry just thinking about it, doesn’t it?
Update (8/23): Yahoo responded this morning. They explained that because Dibs.net’s content is not about flea markets, the keyword is not allowed. Ok, fair enough, if those are the actual rules — but they’re not. That would be stupid. I responded and asked if Amazon would be allowed to advertise with the keywork “book stores,” since they have no information about actual book stores. Also, Yahoo’s response did not address how a site about restaurants can use the keyword they are disallowing for me. I’m still confused.
Come on, Yahoo! I really want to like you. Granted, this isn’t such a big deal in the grand scheme of things; but if I’m to commit an ad budget to you, you’d better clarify your rules and apply them consistently.