"When they step up to a Google query box, Web users are expecting one thing from the search engine -- to be quickly directed to the one page that can solve some momentary, pressing mystery. Google provides such pages with remarkable consistency, and that accounts for its success"
But as millions embrace this simple and satisfying structure, they are participating in the grand bargain I talked about earlier. Eric Schmidt admits that in order to be as accurate as its users expect it to be, there needs to be some personal information gathering:
From a 2007 Financial Times article:
"Eric Schmidt, Google’s chief executive, said gathering more personal data was a key way for Google to expand and the company believes that is the logical extension of its stated mission to organise the world’s information."
The 2006 NPR piece is interesting because it presents a brief but nuanced view of Google. Google collects the longest lasting and probably most comprehensive information on its users, but it was the only company to not give in to the Justice Department's subpoena. Is this Google being good or evil? Hard to say.
----
The term 'personalized search' looms large. Is it helpful or intrusive when we search for something and Google, judging by the information its collected on you, provides a more specific answer. Collectively, would we rather type in 'dentist' and automatically get a list of dentists in Hartford County or would we rather take the extra step of typing in 'Hartford County Dentists' so long as Google doesn't know where we are? In this age of quick convenience, I believe many people will choose more disclosure for quicker results. But like I've said before, that is the risk Google takes in participating in its 'grand bargain'.
No comments:
Post a Comment