Posted on September 11, 2008 - by Nate

Google knol is spam with “lipstick.”

Much like Barack Obama’s recent comment wherein he said, “put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig,” I feel the same way about Google Knol. You put lipstick on a linkfarm, it’s still a linkfarm. Google doesn’t need to compete with Wikipedia, although they will. Just like Microsoft doesn’t need to compete with Google, but they will. The struggle I have with Google knol is threefold:

1. It’s less censored. Yes others can edit your posts, but only if you let them. This is a stark contrast to Wikipedia where the world is the police. I love that about wikipedia. How many have been on Wikipedia, seen something incorrect and refreshed the page to find it was fixed before you could even get to it. Wikipedia also has groups of editors who make sure no spam type information flies under the radar. Google knol, I fear, is lacking these same characteristics.

2. Links. Wikipedia allows outbound linking, but it seems there’s much less control over the links which are placed outbound on Google knol. I’m not a fan. This relates perfectly with point one in that there is not enough censorship. 

3. It can be irrelevant. I can go on there right now and write an article about cats and how they love catnip. Who cares! But it’ll be in there and get indexed. There’s just too much room for a slew of irrelevant information. If experts are supposed to be on there to share, let ‘em do it on Wikipedia.

I just have one final question: what are blogs for now that we have almighty Google knol? I mean, if I wanted an opinion on something, I would go a Google Blogsearch. If I want relevant information I know is under pretty consistent review, I’ll visit Wikipedia.