Mediaboss Marketing

Earlier this week, I wrote about my disappointment that granular data (the number of URLs reported, the specifics of the errors) was removed from Google webmaster tools. However, as Ive been talking with Google, Ive discovered that much of this detail is still available via the GData API. That this detail was available through the API wasnt at all obvious to me from reading their blog post about the changes. The post included the following:

And led me to believe that the current API would only provide access to the same data available from the downloads from the UI. But in any case, up to 100,000 URLs for each error and the details of most of what has gone missing is in fact available through the API now, so rejoice!

The data is a little tricky to get to and the specifics of whats available varies based on how you retrieve it. Two different types of files are available that provide detail about crawl errors:

(Thanks toRyan JonesandRyan Smithfor help in tracking these details down.)

What this means is that different slices of data are available in four ways:

What youre able to see about each error is different based on how you access it.

Eight CSV files are available through the API (you can download them all for a single site or for all sites in your account at once as well as just a specific CSV and a specific date range), but this support is not built into most of the available client libraries. Youll need to build it in yourself or use the PHP client library(which seems to be the only one that has support built in). The CSV files are:

For the topic at hand, lets dive into the crawl errors CSV. It contains the following data:

This file does not include details on crawl error sources (but that is available through the crawl errors feed, described below).

It appears that thecrawl errors feedrequest code is built into theJava andObjective Cclient libraries, but youll have to write your own code to request this if youre using a different library. You can fetch 25 errors at a time and programmatically loop through them all. The information returned is in the following format:

Originally posted here:
Google Webmaster Tools Crawl Errors: How To Get Detailed Data From the API

15-03-2012 13:15 Are you in? my.barackobama.com Remember how far we've come. From Academy Award®-winning director Davis Guggenheim: "The Road We've Traveled". This film gives an inside look at some of the tough calls President Obama made to get our country back on track. Featuring interviews from President Bill Clinton, Mayor Rahm Emanuel, Elizabeth Warren, David Axelrod, Austan Goolsbee, and more. It's a film everyone should see.

Read the original:
The Road We've Traveled - Video

The bids are now in, but whoever wants a piece of what is almost certainly a juicy contract is keeping quiet--and for good reason.

It's the bid that dares not (publicly) speak its name.

Friday was the deadline for companies to file their applications to win a piece of a Pakistani project that has stoked controversy stretching from to South Asia to Silicon Valley.

In late February, Pakistan's National ICT R&D Fund, which represents the government, began inviting bids to help create a "national-level URL filtering and blocking system." The system was described as a way to protect the public from "undesirable content."

But critics dismiss that claim as a smokescreen for the government to tighten its control over the Internet and choke off dissent. What's really going on, they say, is a Pakistani attempt to duplicate China's sophisticated content-filtering Internet--often referred to as the "Great Firewall."

"This is essentially about government agencies wanting more and more control over public spheres," said Sana Saleem, a Pakistani journalist and blogger who also runs a Karachi-based Internet free speech organization called Bolo Bhi.

The construction of the envisioned system would empower the authorities with a switch they could use to "turn off anything and everything that they deem 'objectionable'--especially in the absence of a legislation or proper definition of the term 'objectionable' or even 'national security," according to Saleem. She said that the project's opponents have heard that Pakistan's National University of Science and Technology may be involved in building and maintaining the system. "Interesting to note that it is a military run institution & beyond ironic that it teaches science and technology," she said.

In the run-up to Friday's deadline, activists published the names of some of the companies believed to be competing for the bid. However, it's difficult to verify the list's accuracy. For instance, it was reported that Cisco had dropped out of the running. But the company maintains that wasn't true. "We don't have the products they're looking for so we didn't bid," a spokesman said. Another company, Blue Coat Systems, whose Internet blocking gear has turned up in Syria also denied its participation or interest in bidding. "Blue Coat did not bid on this opportunity," according to a representative.

So who is emailing in their bids?

"Good luck trying to find out," said an executive at a technology company which sells products to many developing nations including Pakistan. "Nobody here is going to talk about that--nobody. Forget even getting something on background. And don't you dare use our company name."

Read more from the original source:
Pakistan's Internet filter has the Valley buzzing over who's bidding

15-03-2012 10:15 (www.abndigital.com) Jeremy Mansfield and his expert guest take a closer look at cutting financial costs. Joining Jeremy in studio is Joe Cimino, Corporate Solutions Director at Financial Fitness Training, and Jim Millar, MD of Financial Fitness Training.

Go here to see the original:
Cutting Financial Costs - Part 2 - Video

By Kate Hessling Assistant News Editor

UPPER THUMB When it comes to determining how wind turbines should be taxed, the State Tax Commission showed its hand when it took action last fall that would significantly lower values. Now, local governments in a statewide coalition have shown their hand.

The coalition has obtained a legal opinion and information to support the position that the state commissions ruling does not accurately reflect the true cash value of wind turbines.

Which hand will sway the ultimate decision of how turbines will be valued? Thats up to the local board of reviews and assessors.

The board is governed by the state Constitution, which requires it to work by fact when evaluating the taxable value of a property.

This is something thats been in Michigan law for a very long time, he said. They have to weigh the facts that they have and make a determination of what the value is.

The State Tax Commission is responsible for providing a format to help assessors determine the true cash value to be placed on a property. But, assessors and boards of review can consider other facts when determining true cash values, Schlichting said.

In fact, both assessors and boards of review have the legal authority and obligation to deviate from the use of the State Tax Commissions wind turbine assessment information if it determines the commissions findings do not reflect true cash value for the turbines being assessed, according to the coalitions legal opinion.

In making its changes last fall, the State Tax Commission determined the value of a one- to two-year-old turbine is much lower than previously considered. In determining the value, the commission ignored the income approach to valuating turbines because they are classified as personal property, according to a response to a Freedom of Information Act request that State Tax Commission Chairman Douglas B. Roberts sent the Michigan Township Association. The Michigan Township Association is part of the statewide coalition of local government officials from Huron, Tuscola, Sanilac, Gratiot and Mason counties.

The coalition had been working on obtaining the data the State Tax Commission used last fall when it made the changes that would lower the taxable value of wind turbines. An initial response to a FOIA request seeking a copy of that research that led to the change stated that no documentation exists with the Michigan Department of Treasury. In the response to a subsequent FOIA request, Douglas writes, the basis for change was common sense, because the commission could not find any sales studies for used wind turbines. Therefore, it couldnt use the usual selling price to define the true cash value of used wind turbines.

Read the original post:
Wind turbines: What are theyworth at tax time?