Google Knol and Hubpages
54Opinons Always Have Weight
The rise of Google Knol presents a threat to Wikipedia, in the sense that a knol is written by an expert and appears as an article, almost like an encyclopedia entry. Since each knol is a webpage, a Google search could potentially list dozens of knols before listing a Wikipedia article. This has caused people to suggest that Google is creating a monopoly on information dissemination.
Google claims that the development of knols will better enable people to access information (or a unit of knowledge, which is what knol stands for). People will be able to access information with ease because redundant information will be eradicated. What Google fails to realize, is that in any community composed of information gathering and sharing information is often redundant, and redundant for a reason.
An example would be a local news network. All of the information on the local news is delivered on every single station in the community. Viewers choose their station based on many variables: time of airing, the quality of the meteorologist or the quality of the meteorologist's humor, the ability of the anchors to avoid snarky remarks directed toward one another. There is a great variety of reasons why people prefer one station to another. It is important to have redundant information, people often want to be entertained while being informed and people enjoy different forms of entertainment.
This brings me to hubpages. A fellow hubber recently expressed some concern that the knol will negatively affect hubpages. This will not happen, in my opinion. Note: I said my opinion. Opinions are important, opinions are casual and are rarely agreed upon. Opinions and perspectives are what make each hub and hubber unique. Our perspectives and opinions are why we are here.
A knol is meant to provide encyclopedic-like information. An encyclopedia is objective. No opinion. Limited perspective. A knol does not seem to embrace a social identity, nor an entertaining quality. A hub does.
Although Google states that eventually anyone can author a knol, but Google will review the knol for quality. Hubpages, overall, seems to be self-governing.
Should the knol project prove to be successful, competition may grow tighter but, the panic ensuing over Google dominance and destruction of sites like Wikipedia, Squidoo and Hubpages seem to be unfounded.
CommentsLoading...
I'm not sure. But to me, it seems cheaper to develope your own site than to buy out others. Interesting point, though. Thanks for the comment.
GREAT Hub Cathanne!! Thank you for sharing!!
I agree with your assessment; HubPages is not in any danger at all!! The HubPages niche is doing well and growing strong daily!!
It seems to me, Google is following in the Microsoft footsteps of "indexing" information!! Information/knowledge is power!!
Thanks again for sharing!! Earth Angel!!
P.S. It is not always cheaper to develope a site than to buy one!! The technology and set up is cheaper, the registered subscriber lists are not!!
Thanks Earth Angel! For the encouragement and also the information.
In fact just picked up the paper (The Austraian) and the mainstream press think's googles taking on Wikipedia with Knol - which I don't really think matchs at all -
Oh yeah! Google is definitely using knol to take on Wikipedia. That's what the news here says as well. In fact, a couple of sources I referenced in the hub (Namely, Motley Fool) states the same thing. Oh, wait I think I talk about that in another hub called Goggle Knol: Wikipedia Killer or Scholarly Research Assassin? At any rate, since a knol focuses on encyclopeadic content much like Wikipedia, those are the two that are battlling it out. Sites like this don't need to worry much. One of the articles I read, I think from Businessweek, said that a knol was also entering into about.com territory but I don't know much about that. Thanks for your interest!
Given Wikipedia's biases and underlying power-mod structure that actively manipulates the material of entries out of various conflicts of interest, I'm not so sure that Google procuring experts to write encyclopediac material is all that worse. Even given Google's massive proliferation, I'd trust their data more than Wikipedia's at this point.
THis should be neat. Just hope it doesn't turn into Nazi take-over like Wiki is where nothing gets approved except MAYBE for 10 secs.
Does google god have to own everything on the internet? aren't there anti-trust laws, and corporations that got "too big"? Google already has its hands in everything- they are trying to buy Twitter now, I hope Twitter does not sell out to them. I have had enough of google's control issues - they have terrible customer service, and are a monopoly -which has to stop. Don't tell me they are buying up politicians too, yeah...I see. GOOGLE sucks !
Cathanne, you are almost completely in error about Knol:
- Nowhere in its content policy or Terms does Google say that Knols will be reviewed for quality. >95% of new Knols are now spam or worse. Knol has always been self-policed, but that hasn't worked for >two years thanks to Google's abandonment of "Knol Help".
-- Knol used to provide a 5-star rating system and comment voting (up or down). These features were completely inoperative for over a year and now operate in spam mode. You now see flame wars in comments where mobs pile on to down-vote folks they don't like. Google permits this, as if Knol is an Internet sociology experiment.
-- I challenge you to find a Google manager or executive who ever claimed that Knol was designed to compete with Wikipedia. The idea was borne in the media and won't let go.
-- Knol today is a growing fetid swamp of black hat flotsam surrounding several thousand excellent articles. A team of curators composed of Knol's top-ranked writers is preserving these at Scoop.it: http://www.scoop.it/t/the-best-of-google-knol/
-- Virtually none of the best writers at Knol produce new work there. Google has utterly failed to service Knol for around two years now. No one understands why Google has failed to pull the plug or failed to enforce their own Content Policy and Terms of Service. It is now possible to create the most vile content at Knol -- including hate speech, porno etc. -- with no worries about consequences.
-- Black Hat seo has discovered the ability to festoon Knols with comments that are doorways to sell pages. Fake Rolex watches and handbags are among the favorites, as if anyone would click one of those thousands upon thousands of links. Everyday you can witness new backlink efforts unfolding like Locust swarms.
-- Your Hub proves absolutely what is wrong with many Hubs: failure to do research and think critically.
Lissie Level 1 Commenter 4 years ago
I wonder if its just a strategy - before they attempt to buy out about.com, squidoo or hubpages- Ithought they were more into buying technnology/site than developing their own thee days