Here's a quick update on ACAP -- the Automated Content Access Protocol project in which many newspapers and other online publishers are involved. Basically, ACAP is a new way for content creators (online publishers, etc.) to tell search engines exactly how to crawl the site -- what's searchable, what isn't, for how long, etc. (In full disclosure, NAA is a member/supporter of the project.)

For a primer and more background information on ACAP, click here.

There's been a lot of criticism of ACAP -- mostly that it's a business move on the part of publishers who want to keep their content out of the hands of search engines, that ACAP doesn't work, etc. The group has now posted a document answering some of the most common criticisms. From the Web site:

"Since the launch of ACAP in November in New York, ACAP has faced an inevitable flurry of criticism in the blogosphere (although we have also had a great deal of positive and supportive commentary as well). Some of the critical commentary has been thoughtful and well informed and, where we have been able to, we have tried to answer comments directly. However, it has proved impossible to answer all criticism in this way because of time constraints. Because so many of our critics follow essentially the same lines of argument, we have tried to answer the most common criticisms in a single document...."

I'll let the ACAP people speak for themselves.  Read more at the-acap.org.