extreme webmaster evernerve

Google has just announced their intent to create a Wikipedia killer. Google’s Udi Manber stated the following:

There are millions of people who possess useful knowledge that they would love to share, and there are billions of people who can benefit from it. We believe that many do not share that knowledge today simply because it is not easy enough to do that. The challenge posed to us by Larry, Sergey and Eric was to find a way to help people share their knowledge. This is our main goal.

Larry, Sergey and Eric: Sorry dudes, I don’t want to rain on your parade, but Tim has already solved that problem some time ago and Jimmy has just added a few bells and whistles.

A real genius knows that freedom is the most valuable thing on this Earth

The invention of the World Wide Web was a revolutionary thing, not because of its inherent world-changing potential, but because Tim made it free. Anyone could use it, without having to pay Tim royalties. This is the mark of a true visionary: making a great discovery and sharing it freely with the rest of the world.

You will be assimilated, but you won’t get paid for it

The author of this blog does not endorse Knol.

While Wikipedia may have its flaws, and has been exploited by webmasters and intelligence agencies, it is still free. It is still ad-free.

Tell me, what is your opinion on Knol, that hasn’t even been launched yet, when you see ads slapped onto its preliminary version? You can see a portion of that screenshot on the right. There are two things that have caught my attention:

First, the disclaimer below the AdSense text ad which says that “The author of this Knol does not endorse these ads”. This is supposed to be ethical, right? It means that the author is not biased, because she or he wrote the article with a genuine desire to share knowledge (or knolwedge?) and didn’t do it for profit. If we’re talking about ethics, why is there an ad there in the first place? Wikipedia doesn’t have a statement like the one Google made, because there are no ads to be found on its website. It is supported through donations.

Do you really think that a cash-raking company like Google is going to be unbiased regarding the content of Knol, which is certainly poised to be enormous? Do you think that they will allow the content that might hurt their own credibility and business model? How will you be able to tell an honest author or editor from a crooked one, if Wikipedia has already been gamed for personal or special interests? If an open, free project like Wikipedia is being used for not-so-ethical purposes, you cannot possibly expect a project from Google to be clean and transparent.

And here I come to the second thing that caught my attention.

Where the real danger lies

The main problem is that people will buy into Knol. When Google rolls out something, it tends to spread like wildfire. They have quality products, like Gmail, for example. So, if Knol will be easy to use (it will be), it has a big chance of becoming popular.

Why do I think this? Because popular, global brands are associated with authority, quality and coolness. People don’t question them. People endorse them. Worse, kids endorse them. Because of this fact, Google can get away with almost anything. How can you convince an average Web user that the big G maybe hasn’t got his or her best interests in mind when it rolls out a thing like Knol? How can you explain to an average Joe that it’s all about media consolidation and money?

How can you turn away advertisers from the next Google thing? Once this Knol thing becomes popular, advertisers will flock to it. Everyone will want a piece of it. And it can be seen immediately, in real time: There is already a blog on Knol, and the guy has already made 7 posts in just 2 days and, yes, you’ve guessed it right, slapped AdSense on it. And he bought a Knol-related domain. A wise investment, some will say. Talk about information spreading at the speed of light.

Also, Knol can appeal to one’s ego: Who wouldn’t like to have their own picture featured on a Knol? Did you notice the lady that wrote the prototype Knol on insomnia? Rachel Manber, of the Stanford University School of Medicine. This conveys authority: a professor at Stanford? This must be good, right? Wrong. You can’t rely on academia as a trusted source of unbiased, balanced information anymore. University researchers are being sponsored to conduct research which will yield specific results. If you are of the paranoid type and like conspiracies, I will just mention that Google’s founders studied at Stanford (not medicine, but hey, it does sound good).

Zombification Knolification is imminent

I don’t wish to spread just negativity in this post, so let’s have a laugh.

Here’s what Udi also said:

Once testing is completed, participation in knols will be completely open, and we cannot expect that all of them will be of high quality. Our job in Search Quality will be to rank the knols appropriately when they appear in Google search results. We are quite experienced with ranking web pages, and we feel confident that we will be up to the challenge. We are very excited by the potential to substantially increase the dissemination of knowledge.

I would like to rephrase that:

Once testing is completed, participation in knols will be completely open (but highly scrutinized), and we can expect much rubbish and biased content to appear. Our job in Search Quality will be to rank the knols appropriately if they suit us, and to bury them when they appear to be hurting our business model and credibility, in Google search results. We are quite experienced at having a caustic grip on the Web, and we feel confident that you will bend over at our request. We are very excited by this, and also the potential to substantially increase our earnings.

Make sure that your website is Knol-ready! Here’s a couple of banners that may come in handy:

..I will post the CSS code snippet to include this nifty banner on your website soon. Here’s the small version of the same banner:

I am seriously concerned whether we should call the process of everything being linked to and referenced by Knol Knolification or Knollification? I won’t be able to sleep until some linguist works it out and makes an official statement about it.

If you enjoyed this post, consider subscribing to my RSS feed or leave a comment. Share and bookmark: