I’ve been hearing about Internet  “portals,”  particularly in regards to what I’ve always called Internet search  engines.  Is “portal” just the newest jargon for “search engine” or is there more to it than that? 
 

I can certainly understand your puzzlement.  Many of the  resources that have been used in the past as “search engines” are now bill-ing themselves as “portals,” but the word “portal” should not be misinterpreted as new jargon for “search engine.”  Although all portals will have search engines associated with them, they go far beyond the original purpose of Internet search engines.

The Oxford English Dictionary provides the following definition for portal: “a door, gate, doorway, or gateway of stately or elaborate construction.”  This definition seems to imply that one would pass through a portal into an equally impressive structure. 

To a certain extent, this analogy holds true for Internet portals.  What used to be a “plain vanilla” search engine has evolved into an elaborate gateway that provides access to one or more search engines, plus a multitude of other services such as:  chat rooms, children’s areas, content channels (formerly known as subject directories), e-mail and phone directories, free e-mail, free web page space, interactive games, personalized calendars, one-spot e-billing (soon to come), sports information, stock quotes, TV listings, up-to-date news and weather, and more. . . plus the ability to personalize the web page to meet an individual user’s specific interests.  America Online was, perhaps, the very first portal, and still is a portal; but AOL is both a portal and an Internet service provider.  Yahoo was the first search engine to evolve into a portal similar to AOL.

So, why have portals developed?”  It all boils down to one thing — economics.  Jim Hu provides an excellent definition of an Internet portal: “a site that aggregates an array of content and offers a range of services to be the home page for as many users as possible, thereby attracting more ad dollars.”  Banner ads were the first mechanism used to support the various search engines.  However, the owners and developers of these sites quickly realized that people used their search engines and moved on to other web sites. 

What if a company like Yahoo formed alliances and contractual agreements with other companies and provided connections to valued resources and services directly from the Yahoo web site, so the user never really has to leave Yahoo or whatever portal s/he happens to prefer?  This translates into economics because if you provide the “best” portal, more people will use your portal as their home page.  Therefore more companies will want to form financial partnerships with your portal so they can take advantage of your portal’s high traffic, which in turn will boost their business.

The partnerships are multiplying faster than rabbits. Former competitors are now cozy bedfellows: CNET and NBC are co-owners of SNAP.com; Netscape has formed alliances with AOL and Excite; Disney, Infoseek, and Starwave have partnered to create the Go Network; AOL and CBS are partners; Disney could use its alliances with ABC, ESPN, and Daily Blast to provide a portal that easily gives news, sports, and children’s content. The list goes on and grows daily.

S/he who has the “best” portal is striving for the financial edge; perhaps more significant, s/he who has the “best” portal may also have a power edge as well: editorial power over the information made available to  a huge audience.  Which news stories, polls, chat rooms, columnists, etc. will be featured at any particular portal?  Who will make the decision as to what information is available at any one particular portal and what will be his/her agenda?  Of course the same can be said for printed newspapers and magazines, but what newspaper or magazine can claim to reach, easily, an audience of 14 million or more, as can AOL, for example?

Of significance with these multiple partnerships and efforts to be the “best” portal is the ability to have a portal set as the default home page when someone signs up with an Internet service provider and uses the browser that comes bundled with the ISP’s software.  Most often Internet Explorer will have Microsoft’s Internet Start set as the default, and Netscape will use Netscape’s Netcenter.  However, there’s no reason that a portal company, say Yahoo, can’t make a financial deal with an ISP to have Yahoo set as the default home page for whatever browser the ISP distributes to its subscribers.  Many of these subscribers don’t realize they can change their home page to something else, or they just don’t take the time to make the change. 

Finally, one recent evolution regarding portals has been the development of “vertical portals”.  Where as the “original” portals have been trying to be everything to everyone (“megaportals”), a need for subject-oriented portals has been identified and is being addressed.  Vertical portals focus on a particular content area and provide portal services to those specifically interested in that content.  For example, since its inception, CNET has always focused on technology.  Therefore, they have developed a portal that offers services that also focus on technology:  technology in the news; technology-oriented chat rooms and message boards; technology-oriented shopping opportunities; and so forth.

Where are portals headed?  Many observers believe that for a while there will be a proliferation of megaportals vying for subscribers; but in the end, only a few megaportals will survive, complemented by a variety of vertical or specialty portals.  Those megaportals that do survive will look very similar, just as the evening news from ABC, CBS, and NBC all appear to be very similar.

Here are some of the currently active megaportals and vertical portals.  Those “megaportals” marked with an asterisk (*) appear to be the major contenders at this time. 
 

For more information:

Green, Heather.  “The Skinny on Niche Portals.”  Business Week (October 26, 1998): 66-67.

Hu, Jim.  “Racing to the Start Line.”  CNET news.com (May 14, 1998) <URL: http://www.news.com/SpecialFeatures/0,5,22073,00.html?st.cn.nws.rl.ne>

Li-Ron, Yael.  “Portals Into the Future: What’s Up Next?”  PC World (August 1998) <URL: http://www.pcworld.com/current_issue/article/0,1212,7202+12+0,00.html>

Lidsky, David.  “Your Door to the Web.”  PC Magazine (September 15, 1998): 46.

Kuchinskas, Susan.  “Content’s Comeback; Internet.” ADWEEK Eastern Edition (March 15, 1999): IQ/22.

O’Leary, Mick.  “Portal Wars.”  Online (January 1999): 77.

Peek, Robin.  “Wanting to be Everything to Everyone; Search Engines and Services.”  Information Today (September 1998): 37.

Portal Comparison Chart.  <URL: http://www.portalhub.com/guides/chart.html>

PortalHub: The Gateway to Computers  <URL: http://www.portalhub.com>

Scheer, Robert.  “Scheer Bytes: Portals are Power.”  Online//Journalism//Review (November 24, 1998) 
<URL: http://olj.usc.edu/sections/editorial/98_stories/scheer_112498.htm>

Stewart, Thomas A.  “Internet Portals:  No One-Stop Shop.”  Fortune (December 7, 1998): 235.

Tedesco, Richard.  “Can’t Play Without a Partner.”  Broadcasting & Cable (February 15, 1999): 73.

“Your Door to the Web: Rating the Web Portals.”  <URL: http://www.zdnet.com/pcmag/special/easycomputing/fall98/ yourdoor/rateportals.html>

As always, send questions and comments to:
 

Snail Mail:	Tech Talk Billie Peterson Moody Memorial Library P. O. Box 97148 Waco, TX  76798-7148
E-Mail:	petersonb@baylor.edu