Google, You Open or Closed? Make Up Your Mind Then Call Us

You probably have read by now about Google SearchWIki, a new feature that lets registered users comment on search results and URLs for one's own use and more importantly to share them with the broader world. I am all for opening up the web to comments but this entire launch was botched not thought through. And now (as of this writing) it's gone. Already there are reports of vandalism and spam too. Did anyone not think this would be a PR nightmare?

Unlike Wikipedia, there's no way for users to edit each others comments. You can only vote them up or down. Google should take a page from the Wikipedia and Mahalo playbooks and build a community around the feature that would self police such an open wiki. Otherwise, of course people are going to run amok on the world's biggest online stage! That's like turning a kid with a massive sweet tooth loose in a giant candy store. It's going to be a haven for spam.

What's worse, Google once again is showing what a chaotic culture can engender. Rapid, massive innovation that delights users? For sure. But it also can create massive inconsistencies and PR nightmares. For example, why are Google News Comments vetted by humans at a snail's pace. Yet, SearchWiki is open to all with no mechanisms to prevent abuse. Or why does Google Knol encourage writers to verify their identity? Yet, with SearchWiki Google opens its marquis service to unfettered user editing. It makes no sense. Epic Fail.

Google, call me when you make up your mind.

LATER:: Marhsall Sponder points out that it's still available with sound in Google Labs.

EVEN LATER:: It's now back with no apparent changes. Too bad.

Comments

[Michelle MacPhearson]

From an SEO perspective, I wasn't happy with it. But even from a user perspective, it's a messy product. If I wanted to see what a bunch of eejits thought about a page/article, I'd go to Digg. When I search at Google, I just want the info I'm searching for - not others' (often immature) opinions. The launch-disappear thing is even more troubling - who OK'ed this? And who's in hot water come Monday?

[Marshall Sponder]

Hi Steve,

Actually, Google Search Wiki isn't gone - it just got turned into a Google Experiment that you can opt-in or opt-out of, which is what people were asking for.

I agree with all your points - there needs to be some moderation (besides us) and Google didn't set that up.

The idea of Google Search Wiki is a good one, though - let's just help Google figure out the right way to launch it.

marshall

[Steve Rubel]

Michelle, Marissa Mayer is quoted in the press on SearchWiki so I imagineshe and possibly the triumvirate that run Google all signed off on it. Igive them kudos for opening up but they really need someone who understandscommunity to advise them that a wiki without self-policing mechanisms wouldbe a disaster.

[Luca Hammer]

Even when Google SW gets open to everyone they got the problem of millions of Users, who use the internet for search. They won't understand what this is for. And when the begin to write, and even if its just as low percentage as in wikipedia there will be a mass of unusefull content. And no-one could make corrections.

Google Search is a bit too big for experiments with bad concepts.

[Michael C.]

I don't get it - why is everyone complaining about the spam possibilities with SearchWiki? From the view I saw explaining the whole thing, it was made clear that any changes you make as a signed-in Google Account user will have no effect outside your own account.

So, what's the problem - what am I missing?

[Michael C.]

2nd sentence - I meant "video", not "view". It's here, FYI: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/searchwiki-make-search-your-own.html

[David Erickson]

Michael C.:

The comments are also available to anyone who is logged in, not just the people who wrote the comments. There are two links at the bottom of each search results page, one for "See all my Search Wiki notes" and one for "See all notes for this Search Wiki." The latter link includes everyone's comments.

I absolutely agree with Steve that there needs to be some accountability mechanisms because it WILL be abused. Look at the comments for a search for "George W. Bush" and you'll see them.

Without some mechanisms in place, it's a nightmare as far as reputation management is concerned. As it stands, the feature offers open season for libel.

I'm not so concerned about its SEO implications; if you're optimizing good content, you've still got a good chance at ranking well. It's all about understanding queries and matching them with quality content.

That said, I can see a lot of benefit the features could offer. It just ain't ready for prime time. They should have thought this through.

[Jake McKee]

Yeah, I'm confused about this too....

[men's sleep]

jbarry@mmi-agency.com nice post, thanks for sharing.