  In this paper we compare the relevance of information obtained from
"discriminative" media and from "non-discriminative" media. Discriminative
media are the ones which accumulate and deliver information using a heuristic
selection of it. This can be made by humans, or by artificial intelligent
systems, exhibiting some form of "knowledge". Non-discriminative media just
collect and return information without any distinction. This can also be made
by humans or by artificial systems, but there is no "knowledge" involved in the
process. We ranked the words occurring in an edited electronic publication
specialized in complex systems research, and we found that they approximate a
modified Zipf distribution. We compared occurrences of representative words
from the distribution with the occurrences in non-discriminative media. We
found that a non-discriminative medium (Google) has a higher variance from of
our original distribution than a semi-discriminative one (NEC Research Index),
even when both appear to have their own modified Zipf distribution. We conclude
that discriminative media have a higher efficiency rating, at least in the area
in which they specialize, than non-discriminative media. Using the same search
method, the discriminative media should deliver more relevant information. This
relevancy also depends on the skills of the user, but non-discriminative media
are more sensitive to poor searching skills, as there is a higher probability
of delivering irrelevant information. This leads us to suggest the
incorporation of intelligent classifications in different media (such as the
ones suggested by the Semantic Web project), in order to increase the relevance
of the delivered information.
