With this post I hope to address some of the misunderstanding and fear mongering which surrounds Google SideWiki and other annotation services. First of all, let me explain what Google SideWiki is exactly. Basically, it’s a plugin that you install (via the Google Toolbar) that enables a sidebar on the left side of your browser. In this sidebar, you can comment on any website you visit – whether that site has enabled comments on their own site or not. This means that the website author loses control over the comments placed on the website. The video below shows how it works.
This is not the only annotation service (I prefer AddATweet), but is catching most of the attention since Google’s name is attached to it.
The response to SideWiki has been very mixed. Especially small entrepreneurs seem to be worried, voicing concerns like “what if my competitors start leaving fake negative reviews”.
Here’s how I see it…
It was never your RIGHT to control comments in the first place.
The Internet enabled this and now it’s disabling the control again. In real life, you cannot control what people say about you or your business. Since the Internet makes sharing ones opinions and reviews so easy, you better make sure you adapt to it and do a great job for others and always stay ethical! If not, sooner or later you will be called on it. This is why I also think we shouldn’t worry about competitors that try to spam your site’s SideWiki with negative comments – because if that’s their business mentality, the Web will destroy their reputation.
Google SideWiki and other annotation services make a more transparent web.
For instance, go to any hotel’s website and usually you can see customer reviews. Of course the hotels moderate these reviews, but with the Internet becoming more central to our lives by its increasing mobility (laptops, netbooks, mobile devices), it will get harder and harder to rip people off by not delivering what you promise. You have to meet expectations and exceed them if you want to succeed in a transparent world.
It’s inevitable.
To be honest, I think the cries for a ‘ban’ of Google SideWiki are absolutely ridiculous and show a complete lack of understanding of the Internet. Within the next ten years, augmented reality will become common. This would let people aim the camera of their mobile device at a restaurant and instantly receive reviews in an overlay on the screen of their mobile device – but this will be possible for every and anything. For an example of this, check out Layar in the video below.
People are already leaving comments about your business in channels you don’t own or control.
For instance on Twitter. It was just a matter of time before someone brought the reviews and the subjects of the reviews together. AddATweet has doen that, which is why I prefer AddATweet over Google’s SideWiki; it combines existing social networks with annotation… plus it doesn’t require me to download some toolbar I really don’t need or want.
The problems will solve themselves.
Yes, anonymous commenters might be a nuisance, but how much weight do people really give to such comments compared to a non-anonymous comment? Also, your personality reflects in everything that you do, so if you’re a troll, people will have trouble trusting your business and they’ll leave non-anonymous comments about this through annotation services. Perhaps there are other concerns – let’s talk about them, leave a comment!
In the end, I think these annotation services will do many times more good than bad (if they’ll do any bad at all, besides create a little more clutter to sift through).
So in short, here’s how I think annotation services, like Google SideWiki, will make the world a better place:
– Increased transparency; you can no longer say A and do B. The web will catch up with you.
– Democratization; we get to say what we want, about who we want and make others listen.
– Creating conversation; this will force any business to converse with and listen to its (potential) consumers.
– Collaboration; you can leave helpful hints for others on any website. For instance, if a website is unclear, you can point others in the right direction.
So, suck it up people. You no longer control the conversation – and you never have. If you’re worried about this, adapt your business model to something more ethical and aim to exceed expectations. Be confident! 🙂
Comments? Let’s have a discussion. You can also reach me on Twitter.
UPDATE
Within minutes of posting this, somebody called “SidewikiSux” already tweeted that there’s a lot of “BS” here in his or her honest opinion. Not sure why. Figured I would share this to show the amount of animosity towards Google’s annotation service. Opinions don’t convince me, arguments do… Let’s DISCUSS like mature people.
Comments
11 responses to “Why Google SideWiki is not the source of all evil – and how it will make the web a better place”
Here are two good ones…
What if someone posts a link to porn on a children’s website in SideWiki.
Easy, if Google refuses to monitor, moderate and filter SideWiki, then DON’T LET YOUR KIDS USE IT. It’s as simple as that. Using Google SideWiki or other annotation services is a choice. You are responsible for your children.
People can post links to other sites within the SideWiki.
Yep. So? Better make sure your content is good enough to make people come back. Don’t force people onto your site – make them WANT to visit your site.
Alright, constructive criticism is coming in via Sidewiki: http://www.google.com/sidewiki/entry/sidewikisux/id/yTId0Kd3FpghXvlkfWMvqGo2IPQ
The original text is in italic, my replies are in bold.
Excellent Post About Sidewiki But..
Its very fine to hear more and more about what a good tool the Google Sidewiki is. Its probably true that companies should not worry so much about Sidewiki and just go with the flow. After all, there really is no controlling the Internet, so why fight it? Except.
“It was never your RIGHT to control comments in the first place.” Well, I pay to host a web site, I most certianly do expect to have complete control over what appears on it. Perhaps the author would not mind if I stand in the lobby of his establishment, handing out fliers for my competing company or view.
Yes, you do have the right to control what appears on your site… but Google Sidewiki is not your site. It’s a plugin and all of the information is stored on Google servers and then linked to your site. What do you think about AddATweet?
You cannot compare it to standing in someone’s establishment. It’s more like writing about the service you received in an establishment, after you were there. But to be honest, it’s hard to compare to the way things worked in the past.
“Google SideWiki and other annotation services make a more transparent web.” Not like there are plenty of places to leave discenting opions, and on someone elses dime. Meaning if you have a difference of opinion, you are welcome of course to express it, but you are also expected to pay for it in some way. What, do corporations have to buy the bus tickets for protestors now?
Pay to express an opinion?? Why? You’re not paying for others to express their opinion. Google is.
“It’s inevitable.” No its not. Picket outside my house if you like, but stay off my lawn. I might turn the sprinklers on.
Yes it is. Just look at the augmented reality video. These things will become mainstream VERY fast. Besides that, there are many other annotation services besides Sidewiki. And it’s getting easier to make them… We’ve already reached a point of no return.
Loss of Control
In the states, we are pretty uptight about naughty bits. We don’t like to expose children to what we consider innapropriate images. Sidewiki gives some not very nice people the opportunity to sidesaddle on web sites specifically made for children, circumventing existing parental controls.
Erm… No. Sidewiki is NOT your site. It’s Google’s and can only be accessed using the Google Toolbar. If parents don’t want their children running around on unmoderated websites, then they should not enable Sidewiki. It’s as simple as that. Also see the previous comment.
I feel this is one of the biggest misunderstandings. Sidewiki has nothing to do with your site, it’s an external platform.
Link-O-Rama
How many web sites out there? Must be, um dozens (I am kidding, of course). And how many web sites are under minimal maintenance? Many. those vacation pics you posted to Flickr years ago. Travel sites put up by retired people. School project webs. All of these are accessable now to Google Sidewiki. Marketing people (not going to use the ‘s’ word) can place links, these pages with the links will be indexed, and both Google and the “marketing” people make money.
So? It’s still your choice to click those links or not as a visitor. The links are very useful… for instance, you could link from this page to a page that shows good reasons why Google Sidewiki IS actually the source of all evil… 🙂
Anyway, I would really love it if you directly address some of the arguments in my post and my replies.
If you have a good site, Sidewiki will be good to you. Don’t worry. Be confident!
I don’t believe you fully understand the implications of Google’s indexing of static Sidewiki pages such as http://www.google.com/sidewiki/entry/sidewikisux/id/yTId0Kd3FpghXvlkfWMvqGo2IPQ
Also I am not sure you understand how links and affiliate marketing work together to make money for Google. And no I am not going to go over all that. Just know that links can make money for people, and Google makes money selling the links.
If the little Twitter tool can make static pages and without a lot of javascript, it could be a threat as well, even if few adopt it.
See once Google indexes the included content, it becomes a second web. With the spam links. No need to install toolbars or what have you. This content may well outrank the source pages. And as it is, its not moderated.
What is worry some is that Google seems to have enough money to not care about legal problems.
Google as a search engine is successful because it gives good results.
If it starts indexing and giving higher page rank to Sidewiki entries, it will lose market share to Bing and Yahoo.
Affiliate marketing and Google Ads are two different things.
Of course we should be critical of big corporations like Google and be wary of their intentions at all times… but annotation services are here to stay. There are dozens of them.
I honestly don’t see the problem. IF Sidewiki entries would start outranking the original content, then there might be a problem… But I doubt that will happen, unless the content offered in the Sidewiki is more valuable than the content on the original site.
Sidewikis are a topic of huge debate – I’ve never known a social media debate get so polarised. I have to say that your post and the comments follow-up is the best and most well balanced pro-sidewiki commentary that I have read. I agree with all your points but also appreciate the counter argument. The only thing that I worry about is if the sidewiki just becomes a graffiti wall. Good and proper engagement is what we want to see spring from this social media tool. I also hope that some better monitoring tools to help the engagement process – needing to check every page of a site is a bit of a nightmare at the moment.
Hm, good points.
As for the graffiti wall comment. That is a good point. When it comes to Google’s past though, you can see that whenever a project didn’t really go the way they wanted it to go… they pulled the plug.
I think the battle for market share in annotation services is just getting started… and the one that will win is going to be the one that is most trusted by users as well as webmasters, because they could implement and facilitate some more advanced annotation services… and in the end… It’s the webmasters that need to write about the annotation services, so that it gets adopted by users.
I think what some people are missing here are two very key points:
1.) It’s all fine and dandy to say that the Sidewiki comments are not part of your website, but as a usability consultant I can tell you that from a user’s perspective it’s the same thing. They don’t tend to distinguish levels of ownership for content. If I go to Microsoft.com everything I see while my browser is pointed to that URL is perceived as part of the Microsoft website experience. You may understand the difference. I may understand the difference, but to the majority of users it’s a single point of experience.
2.) Google controls this content. This is scary to me. I’ve noticed some scathing things about Microsoft’s products on their home page Sidewiki (like how much better Chrome is than IE). Whereas Google’s Sidewiki’s are overwhelmingly positive (“The Amazing Google” or “Google is much more than just search!”) and closely maintained. Of course, Google is the sole arbiter of what gets displayed here so in essence, we’ve forced companies to maintain a blog in order to defend themselves… a blog that is controlled by Google.
Your points on the power of the Internet to drive truth and quality through collective review is spot-on and I commend you for carrying that torch. However, in the marketplace of ideas, there needs to be open competition. Some of my clients pay a lot of money to drive traffic to their sites and invest in high value content in order to share their ideas and their positions. If an opposing or competitive idea can simply piggyback on the investment I made to reach the same audience, then I am funding my competitors. I would contend that if my competitors’ ideas have value and merit, their own sites would rise to the top and there would be no need to provide this type of shortcut.
Oh, and I am going to take you up on your offer to provide a link to my blog: “that shows good reasons why Google Sidewiki IS actually the source of all evil… :-)” http://bit.ly/Vf7Y2 “Evil is as Evil Does”.
Thanks for the thoughtful arguments on both sides.
We really like and love Google, thanks to Google for helping me 🙂
I had enough doubt on sidewiki,but its now cleared for me after studying your post and comments,Its really help me.
Are you serious ?
Lets burn them at the stake !!
All of them !
Every hard working, honest website owners who has integrity and a genuine desire help their customers.
Yeah why not…. let them burn
Why
Because Google, in their overbearing God like attitude, have given all the crazies in the world a match, a gallon of gas and cart blanch to destroy whomever they desire.
This is the inquisition all over again !!
If this smacks of being ridiculous to you then I beg you, try this.
Start a small business, work 12 – 15 hours a day, build a good reputation and try your damndest to please every one of your clients.
Guess what, I can categorically tell you that you can not please them all no matter how hard you try, how generous or apologetic you are.
Now live with this.
Go to bed every night in fear that the one vindictive sociopath that you tried so hard to appease dose not leave a sidewiki telling the world that you are a pedophile just released from jail so do not support this person and whats more you will be ripping off to the point that they will never see anything they pay for from your website. Signed Very concerned Single Mother of 3.
Oh, by the way, your business is now stuffed, the years of work wasted and you have to find a job, probably in IT.
But hey, look on the bright side, in your spare time you surf the net looking for other hard working website owners to torch using sidewiki. Thank you Google
Welcome to the real world. Do you really believe that people will use this for the good of humanity ? Has it ever happened before ? Not in my lifetime !!
Well, the internet has enabled you to market your business online, hasn’t it?
If people start trolling on SideWiki it will become like the doors of toilet cabins… Sure, maybe what’s on them is funny, but nobody takes the rumours written on their seriously.