marketing you can measure
Talk to us today020 7061 6426
You are here: Home > Blog > Google Sidewiki: great idea, but what about the spammers?

Blog

24
Sep 09

Google Sidewiki: great idea, but what about the spammers?

Ben Locker Photograph

Yesterday Google launched a service called Sidewiki.

I'm a sucker for anything new, so before I'd read more than a couple of sentences on the topic, I was downloading the Google browser toolbar with Sidewiki integrated into it. The add-on toolbar is available for Firefox 2+ or Internet Explorer 6+ and it will soon become a feature of Google's own browser, Chrome (and, I hope, the nascent Chromium for Mac).

So what's the concept?

Google Sidewiki - an introduction

Essentially, Sidewiki is a system that allows you to comment on any web page. The idea, according to Google, is for readers to contribute "insights" and "helpful information" to any page. All you do is press the Sidewiki icon in your browser toolbar, and then you can leave your thoughts on any page. For example, one of my first actions was to give the team here at Coast some well-deserved praise. Visiting www.coastdigital.co.uk I typed in the following:

Sidewiki on Coast Digital's site

In an ideal world, the Sidewiki would be used for relevant, intelligent discussion of the page in question. But I have doubts that this will even be the norm. Visiting the Google UK home page, I found that the discussion so far didn't add anything to my experience.

Google Sidewiki comments

Similarly, a spammer had got in on the act early over at econsultancy.

Econsultancy sidewiki comments

Will people warm to Sidewiki?

This is the question that is all important, and - I think - too early to answer. There are, as I write, no Sidewikis on the home pages of technology sites such as The Register or the Guardian's technology pages - and a paltry two Sidewiki comments on the blog of Google's Matt Cutts. Most of the stories I've so far read about Sidewikis don't have Sidewikis themselves (apart from the one I added to The Telegraph).

So, a day in, things are looking slow. Only if Sidewiki gets popular will its joys and flaws become properly apparent.

Sidewiki pros and cons

That said, there are pros and cons that you can already detect. The best thing I've seen so far is the facility for site owners to add a sticky post at the top of the Sidewiki. As long as your site is registered with Google Webmaster Tools, and you are logged into your Google account, you are recognised as the site owner - and your comment goes to the top. Great for adding another welcome or plug for your services.

I can also see that backlinks in Sidewiki have SEO potential, though I plan talk to some of the team here to see what they think. Will these links actually have much value? I just don't know.

On the other hand, my worries are these:

  1. Taking conversation off-page. I like to decide whether there is conversation on one of my web pages. And I don't like the idea of people commenting on, say, my blog posts in Sidewiki instead of the comments thread on my own page. It takes value from my sites.
  2. Privacy. I quite like the ability to see Sidewikis on pages I'm browsing, but to do so I have to use Google's toolbar. I am not comfortable with it recording details of the sites I visit. In my own Google account, I always switch on private browsing, and I'm suspicious of the information gathered by the toolbar.
  3. Spamming. Enough said.
  4. Reputation management nightmare. Some industries are incredibly competitive and cut-throat, and I can see huge reputation management issues coming to light. For example, restaurants already have to contend with good and bad reviews on external sites, but to have poor reviews (potentially posted by competitors) in a browser sidebar alongside their own sites will be difficult to contend with. Personally, I'd rather eat in a restaurant where the owner manages the kitchen, rather than one in which they spend their time trying to bump Sidewiki comments down the page.

Of course, Sidewiki may well fizzle out in a week. Comments please, and preferably at the foot of this page...

About the author

Ben Locker is a freelance writer who has contributed to a wide range of publications, from The Times to local newspapers and magazines. He has been blogging in various corners of the Internet since 2003, and is as interested in the mechanics of the web as he is its content.

A magazine journalist and qualified teacher, he has spent much of his career working for education charities and other voluntary sector organisations. He became a freelance writer in early 2006 and now runs a popular copywriting agency.

Ben is particularly interested in the craftmanship of writing, and most enjoys helping others crystallise their ideas in the right words. His first book, a satire of which he was co-author, was published by Atlantic in 2007.

Comments

Posted By art | 04 Oct 2009 06:23:36
Hey Ben, I went to econsultancy to check out that "spam". It's not spam, is it? If anything it looks like satire. Prior to my visiting, not only had no one voted it down, but apparently nobody reported it as spam since its still up. My question is why didn't you vote it down if it wasn't useful?

Either way, a bunch of folks seem to have posted to the front page of the sidewiki page, so problem solved for the day at least.
Posted By Ben Locker | 29 Sep 2009 10:42:28
@ James H - I think a simpler solution would be to allow webmasters to opt out of the service entirely.

@ Justin Goldbeg - I think the problem with that would be to sanitise the service, where it was used.

@ Roz S - There are unexpected highlights to the story. Never any harm in seeing a newspaper with egg on its face!
Posted By Roz S | 26 Sep 2009 11:58:31
It's like someone showing my content in frames - except even worse, it's on my url. I wonder how the Daily Mail feels about this comment.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
"Why??
..would you read this sad toss? Don't you have more important things to do? Seriously.. you'll find better/proper news here: http://www.guardian.co.uk"

Webmasters should be allowed to opt out.
Posted By Justin Goldbeg | 24 Sep 2009 08:35:09
It would be nice if the webmaster could moderate things, as James H stated above.
Posted By James H | 24 Sep 2009 03:11:32
I would like to see Google allow those that are signed up to Web Master Tools, and have authenticated that they own the site, be allowed to remove posts that are spammed or derogatory flames from competitors. That would only be considerate on the part of Google who has forced this new "blogging app" onto every website on the Internet.
Post a Comment
Post a comment

  

Please solve the simple maths question ( 2+9 )