Comments on: Google’s Knol product is now open

By: Not liking knol « A Man With A Ph.D.

Not liking knol « A Man With A Ph.D. — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:59:57 +0000

[...] liking knol July 25, 2008 — Richard by eye of einstein Google’s Knol product is now open: [Via Bench Marks] Google has officially announced that their Knol product is now open to the [...]

By: Not liking knol

Not liking knol — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:58:58 +0000

[...] eye of einstein Google’s Knol product is now open: [Via Bench Marks] Google has officially announced that their Knol product is now open to the [...]

By: David Crotty

David Crotty — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:45:55 +0000

Good points Richard, although I’m hesitant to judge the nature of the content before the masses have had a chance to populate the site.

There’s a really nice article here, which compares the two, concluding that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia while Knol is something very different, a library:
http://blog.radioactiveyak.com/2008/07/google-knol-released-its-not-wikipedia.html

—An article that is owned, that provides no real way for others to have a voice, that has no links to outside sources and retains copyright only for the author goes against much of what defines the web.—

I don’t know, that sounds like quite a lot of the web to me. I’d say that in many ways it’s not very Web 2.0, although those things you mention–non-author input, links and copyright status are all completely up to the original author of the given article and can be as open as that person would like. We’ll see if those are things that people really care about, and whether Knol takes off or gets left on the scrapheap. I like the flexibility though, and I like the idea of being able to have one’s say without suffering the wrath of Wikipedia’s “high priests”.

By: Richard Gayle

Richard Gayle — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:34:32 +0000

Well, one thing it is not so far is Wikipedia, which for all its faults, is about connecting information. That is (and this is something all good wikis have and most blogs do also), it links to lots of other information on the web. It connects with others.

A knol seems to be something entirely different. Every single knol may have an author but of the 5 or so I looked at from its front page, none had a lot of links to outside web pages, even other knol pages.

Since each page ‘belongs’ to someone, they do not seem to want anyone to leave. Like Roach Motel, visitors check in but they don’t check-out.

An article that is owned, that provides no real way for others to have a voice, that has no links to outside sources and retains copyright only for the author goes against much of what defines the web.

Wikipedia may not be perfect but it does provide usually valid entry points for rapidly finding information. That is one of the Web’s biggest attributes, finding information quickly. Wikipedia helps here. I fail to see how Knol, in its current form, comes close to helping.

And don’t even get me started on what will happen when someone’s ad revenue drops because someone else has written another more entertaining article. Or when authors write for the ad revenue, just like the modern mass media.

By: Using Google Knol as a B2B Marketing Tool | Blogging

Using Google Knol as a B2B Marketing Tool | Blogging — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 19:13:19 +0000

[...] Google Introduces Knol as Wikipedia Alternative from Clint Boulton’s Google Watch, Google’s Knol product is now open from David Crotty at Bench Marks, and Google Knol Released. It’s Not Wikipedia. from The [...]

By: AJ Cann

AJ Cann — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:09:32 +0000

I’ve written 3 knols now, just to test the system. It’s clearly early days for Knol, and much is still missing (RSS anywhere, comment notifications, etc), but like you, I’m keeping an eye on it.