Web Search–Google
Source: San Jose Mercury News
Comments on Google Article
I’ve tried not to make ResourceShelf a site where I comment and offer my opinion on each and every item posted. However, from time to time, I do like to toss in a few comments, and today is one of those days. Mike Bazeley of the San Jose Mercury News — one of the best covering the Internet beat — included a couple of comments of mine in an article today. I was flattered when he called me to solicit them. That said, I would like to enhace and maybe even clarify the two quotes.

Some seem to consider me a Google basher. However, if you read ResourceShelf on a regular basis, you’ve probably noticed that most of my comments are about pointing out the interesting, innovative, and often useful work that’s being done in the web search space by Google AND others. Sure, from time to time Google deserves a kick, but they can take it. I think what Google has built is THE benchmark and VERY impressive technology. They also treat their highly intelligent and rapidly growing workforce very well and yes, the food at the Googleplex is mighty tasty. Most of their success is more than well deserved.

What some might consider “bashing” on my part is simply an attempt to point out that other excellent web search/information retrieval work is being done by other companies and individuals. This goes for the MANY specialized search resources out there along with the work being done by the other big names like Yahoo, Teoma, a9, and MS. Perhaps what Google should be lauded for most is making everyone in the search space better. Yes, competition is a good thing for the web searcher.

OK, let’s get to my quotes in the MN.
“But Gary Price, a Washington, D.C., area librarian and information research consultant, questions how long Google can maintain its dominance. Price, who operates the Resource Shelf Web site, said other, smaller search sites such as Gigablast, Feedster and Topix.net use more innovative technology and do a better job than Google.”

I probably needed to be a bit clearer with Bazeley. The tools that I mentioned are by no means competition for Google in the general web search space. Yes, Matt at Gigablast is doing great work, but direct competition is a way off. My point is that these companies (and many others) offer innovation and search capabilities that Google does not or will not offer (at least at this time). Scoble is on target when he writes, “I think the innovators will be the small engines like Technorati and Feedster.” Danny S. writes, “Does that mean little players such as Gigablast, Feedster or Daypop won’t survive? Not at all. Now think cable TV. These services and other specialty search engines will attract their own unique audiences.” I agree with Danny 100% that web search and online information retrieval is not a winner-take-all situation. It’s good to have choices.

And what about content not in Google — or in any general web engine for that matter? Focused/speciality/niche search tools — both free and fee-based (often available for free via a university or public library) — offer content not directly accessible from these services and, in many cases, offer more utility with this data. While it’s true Yahoo and Google are making efforts to grow their databases, just adding content doesn’t mean people will find it.

“To me what Google has done better than anyone else is get the media believing that they can do it better than anyone else,” Price said. “When you write the history of Google, the most interesting chapter will be the one about its public relations. They’re the real geniuses.”

It’s one thing to create great technology (many companies have done it and failed), but it’s something else to build the brand and a demand for that brand that compares to what Google has done. Much of the credit for building the brand needs to go to the p.r./marketing team at Google. I don’t think many (if any) have done it better. Wow! The media I’m talking about in the quote is not the tech press — including those of us who watch the search industry closely like Battelle, Sullivan/Sherman, Beal, and Notess. The media I’m referring to in my quote are the mainsteam organizations who have give very little attention to everyone else — mainly, what the other major players are up to and how these tools offer options not found at Google. Yes, we’ve seen a few “out to beat Google articles” lately, but it’s still minimal. People regularly tell me that they had no idea what they have been missing by relying on one search tool. Tara (who often says things best) does it again in this quote from an AP story, “Google has a lot of smart people who have built a great search engine, but there are a lot of other smart people out there looking for ways to make search engines even better.” These smart people are all over the place — both at direct competitors (Gary Flake at Yahoo, Udi Mandber at a9, etc), as well as at speciality search and niche tools.

Final Thoughts
One of the things that attracted me to librarianship/info retrieval was that so many options and tools (both electronic and print) existed, each one with its own strengths and weaknesses. One of our many goals at ResourceShelf is to remind you that many options and tools continue to exist, and the best searcher will know about and use the right tool at the right time. This knowledge not only can make you a better searcher, but can also make you a better teacher. The info pro as educator is a role that continues to grow in importance.

Update
Michael Bazeley, the author of the Mecury News article, read my comments and shared his with me in an email. He has given me permission to repost. Thanks Mike!

From the email:
Gary,
I did not intend to imply that you viewed Gigablast, et al as Google competitors, though I can see now why some people might infer that from my story. I meant to suggest exactly what we talked about, that there is great innovation happening in many places other than Google, despite Google’s reputation as the top dog. I should have nuanced that better.
I think the phrase “questions how long Google can maintain its dominance” may have been unfortunate. We’ll do better next time.
Regards,
Michael

This entry was posted on Saturday, May 1st, 2004 and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.