There have been reports of individual and personal blogs figuring in search results of Google News (which gives links to media organisations). One view is that, this has brought down the quality of Google News search. And this has set off a debate. Should blogs be kept out?
I feel yes. Google News should not include blogs in search results. If at all they do, it should be weblogs of recognised media organisations. Is it an issue of credibility? Not so much: because the website of a particular organisation may not have credible info on it, and conversely an individual blogger could be very credible with the info that he or she posts.
The real issue is more of recognition. Remember, a good number of individual bloggers are on pseudonyms. Even if they reveal their real names, rarely there are addresses, phone numbers and other contact information. That is not the case with recognised media organisations. Being overboard with full contact details brings in, though not necessarily, some about of accountability. I say “not necessarily” because there are organisations which never respond to emails you send them or pick up a call made to a number listed on their site.
One solution is: Google News can have separate links for media organisations and individual blogs. I am sure Google has, or if not, can come up with a technology to do it.
This is about everything that is evolving around us with time .... The changing trends .... Their highs and lows .... The changes that are making an impact on our lives .... From technology to social, economic and political issues ... Some books, some sports, some personal anecdotes.
Wednesday, October 18, 2006
8 comments:
I appreciate your comments. Thank you.
If your email ID is enabled in the Blogger profile, I'll reply to your comments via email because you won't have to come back here or look through email notifications to read my reply.
I might copy-paste the replies here if I feel they might be of interest to others as well.
For everyone else, I'll reply here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One has to agree with you, Pradeep. Google is an official search engine and deemed the best so it is best if it sticks to official sources of information.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, with desipundit being disbanded, a blog rating agency is required and who better than google?
Weblogs can't replace traditional channels of news. Though they could supplement the traditional channels of information/news by providing first hand information and things like 'on-the-spot' accounts and pictures, often, it is found that weblogs are biased and prejudiced, based on the writer's view and/or perception, which may not be always trustworthy.
ReplyDeleteAgree fully. Freelancers are good reporters probably, but unless someone validates their reports before publishing it, the entire effort is a waste. Google News should focus on leading established channels. They can have a blog search like Technorati if they want to
ReplyDeleteAgree with you totally..I think it's time Google streamlined it's search engine...now it throws up anything and everything connected to the "search words".
ReplyDeleteHiren, Truman, Me:).....: Thanks for the comments.
ReplyDeleteI left a comment here in the morning...
ReplyDeleteAnyways I agree with you and I hope Google refines its search engines so we do not go on a wild goose chase.
Silverine......: I'm sure Google will take into account the feedback and improvise. Afterall, that's precisely what they have been doing. And, probably for that reason, they are laughing all the way to bank: today their Q3 results shows a huge margin of profit.
ReplyDeletePradeep,
ReplyDeleteI agree to disagree with you in this regard. Blogs are a place where any individual vents his feelings and trust me he is a customer in all regards. A person who can commend and at the same time rubbish with regards to a product or a service. And this is going to increase only. Any big firm that understands them customers, takes steps to redress their valid complaints (forget the moaners, they will always be there) will survive.