Google announced a new feature today for their Google News web site that allows people involved in news stories to post dissenting (or concurring) view points next to published news items. From the Google News Blog:
"We'll be trying out a mechanism for publishing comments from a special subset of readers: those people or organizations who were actual participants in the story in question. Our long-term vision is that any participant will be able to send in their comments, and we'll show them next to the articles about the story. Comments will be published in full, without any edits, but marked as "comments" so readers know it's the individual's perspective, rather than part of a journalist's report."
In order to send comments to Google, those "special" readers will need to email Google with a link to the story they're commenting on, and a way for Google to authenticate their identity. (More information on their help page.)
Tony Hung thinks this is a game changer because it allows those involved in stories to tell their side of the story without it being filtered through a reporter. But I don't really agree.
Comments appear directly below news links (highlight added).
While it is certainly important for news organizations to offer dissenting views, this feels like an odd choice for Google for a couple of reasons. First, this is a very "web 1.0" feature. Rather than encouraging an open discussion on news topics, Google is perpetuating a closed debate between newsmakers and journalists. And they're using a clunky, slow medium (email) to do it. With many mainstream news organizations adding mechanisms for instant feedback from readers, and offering ways for readers to submit news items themselves, I'm not sure if this feature is really all that compelling.
Further, many news organizations already offer methods for editorial response. And isn't the blogging revolution, at least in part, about telling your side of the story without having to go through the mainstream press? Google News offers another outlet for people to be heard, and for that they can be applauded, but I don't think they're "bringing a revolution to news," as Tony Hung argues, unless he's talking about the way Google News aggregates blog content alongside mainstream press reports (which is somewhat revolutionary, but something they've been doing for awhile).
Secondly, as Steve Rubel points out, Google is now venturing into the realm of original content. They will now be publishing content (if not expressly producing it), and opening themselves up to potential headaches they didn't have to deal with in the past. Editorial content has traditionally been Yahoo!'s domain, and with Yahoo!'s News site still the dominant force in online news, maybe it is not so surprising that Google is trying to follow suit.
I agree completely with Rubel's analysis:
"Google gets points for opening up their platform to comments from sources but I would had rather have seen them make it more democratic and have this open to everyone. In being selective, the move is more fraught with risk as Google begins to make editorial decisions that might not be popular. A better way to manage this might be to have a system that lets everyone comment, yet also delineates those from official sources that are mentioned in a particular story."
Further, Ars Technica makes a good point in their write up of today's announcement. Some publishers have already been wary of Google News for publishing their headlines and excerpts without compensation. The prospect of unfiltered and possibly negative reactions from outside sources alongside those links isn't going to make those skeptical publishers change their minds.
Check out a Google News comment here.
What do you think about Google News' new feature? Leave your thoughts in the comments below (or email them to Google News -- kidding...).
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1520
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
Feels 1.0? Everything about google's homepage and searching is "1.0". But that is how they want it. Anyway, I think this rather small feature is a nice addition.
Posted by: Brant Tedeschi | August 8, 2007 12:57 PM
You bring up some interesting points. The legal issues that go along with choosing which comments to post are very sticky.
It also seems to me like an administrative headache, trying to manage submissions manually.
Posted by: Tim McCormack | August 8, 2007 2:48 PM
Seems that I can't get trackbacks to work with this blog. My thoughts at:
Google News Solicits Views
http://www.messagingtimes.com/blog/?p=1080
All the best
Tom
Posted by: Tom O'Leary | August 8, 2007 4:39 PM
Josh,
If you read the post from Google closely it says that its long term vision is to see comments opened up to everyone and that restricting comments is part of its initial roll out.
Having a free-wheeling conversation that pulls in both experts and laypeople alike is a good thing. And what beter way to get the "experts", or just the people involved with the story, than to allow them to have an unfettered platform for their opinion? One that's unhindered by the potential (and potentially distracting or discouraging) noise?
Cheers
t @ dji
Posted by: Tony Hung | August 8, 2007 5:11 PM
"better", sorry ;)
Posted by: Tony Hung | August 8, 2007 5:12 PM
Tony, I certainly would hope that they do move in that direction (i.e., comments open to everyone). But they'd hardly be the first news site to offer comments (see AOL News, CNN, etc.) and not even the first news aggregator to do so (see Topix -- well, the old Topix at least ;)). So I still think "revolutionary" might be hyperbole. :)
Posted by: Josh Catone | August 8, 2007 6:00 PM
... to which I have already admitted the world "revolutionary" has some hyperbole in it. ;)
No question that the wouldn't be the first. What *WOULD* be "first" is getting people who are actually *part* of the story to participate in the conversation. I don't know if anyone has a trackrecord with this, but by kicking things off in this way (in a 'limited' way) is actually brilliant, and if any one has the cachet to do it, Google might (but so might Microsoft or Yahoo -- but Google just beat them to it).
Of course everyone's right: there's lots for Google to work out. On the other hand, if done right, this could be game changing. A little hyperbolic, but it something I'll still hang my hat on for now. ;)
Posted by: Tony Hung | August 8, 2007 9:38 PM
Google News has been able to operate solely because they have been allowed to crawl the websties of news providers and aggregate that content to provide a high quality news source.
I therefore find it puzzling and entirely frustrating that Google is moving to host original content, whilst prohibiting others from crawling it as stated in their Terms of Service and robots.txt file.
Posted by: Nick Cox | August 9, 2007 8:51 AM
Yahoo's news service used to have open commenting. And it devolved into a vile cesspool of hate speech. Perhaps Google is trying to find a way to keep it a little higher brow. I can't see how their system can be sustainable though, considering the volume of news stories and sources they handle, and the editorial overhead seems like it has the potential to become burdensome. Imagine if Paris Hilton decided to use this as her vehicle for responding to the gossip press...
Posted by: jenjen | August 9, 2007 9:52 PM
Why not open it up to everyone to comment, but give participants in the story a higher priority somehow so their comments don't get lost in the mix?
Then you could allow comments on the participants comments as well.
Posted by: Chris McElroy aka NameCritic | August 9, 2007 10:24 PM
Most comments, and most of the web in general is mindless drivel, hate, porn, gambling, and fantasy sports leagues. Anything that provides a strong filter is fantastic in my book. What do I care what someone random person (posting anonymously) thinks about a news story? (case in point, what do you care about what I am writing now?). I'd love to hear what people involved in the stories have to say. It would also be a great check on reporters, to keep them from misquoting or taking something out of context.
I hope Tony Hung is right. I hope this is a game changer
Posted by: joe six pack | August 10, 2007 12:26 AM