How to Start Your Online Business or Grow an Existing One

Hundreds of step-by-step video tutorials and tools show you how to find profitable markets, get product ideas, source the best products to sell, build profitable websites easily, and drive qualified traffic. Plus, discover how to outsource it all.

Everything you need to start or grow your own highly profitable web business — regardless of size or model.

  • 1,000s of ready-to-sell products
  • Ideal for any skill level or business
  • Learn anywhere, anytime, 24/7
  • Use it risk-free for a full 30 days

Want More? Click Here For Details »


Posts Tagged ‘sidewiki controversy’

October 12th, 2009

The Google Sidewiki Controversy

The Google Sidewiki Controversy

muralesSyl­vie For­tin here, and I have a bone to pick with Google.

On Sep­tem­ber 23, 2009, Goo­gle launched a new, free ser­vice that pur­ports to be the next big thing in social com­mu­ni­ties. It gives every­day peo­ple the abi­lity to pro­vide their own com­ments on ANY web page they visit, in a frame that resi­des right next to the page they are viewing.

(This is exactly as if Goo­gle ins­ta­lled a gigan­tic graf­fiti wall in front of your sto­re­front, han­ded out paint cans, and invi­ted passers-​​by to write all over the wall, without giving YOU the abi­lity to erase anything. Ummm. Are they serious? Do they actually believe that only honest peo­ple would ever use the wall?)

At first glance, one might think this is a great idea, after all, it isn’t like Goo­gle has done anything par­ti­cu­larly inno­va­tive. Diigo, Stic­kis and Fleck are all ser­vi­ces that allow the gene­ral public to anno­tate the web and share their com­ments about web­si­tes they hap­pen to be visiting.

But there are a few things that make Side­wiki dra­ma­ti­cally dif­fe­rent from all the rest of the web anno­ta­tion appli­ca­tions, things that all web­site owners should pay close atten­tion to. Because with the intro­duc­tion of Sidewiki…

… Your work­day is about to change in ways you may not realize.

Let’s start by recog­ni­zing that Goo­gle has become the undis­pu­ted cham­pion in the ongoing battle for eye­balls. Accor­ding to a recent B to B Magazine article, Goo­gle currently con­trols a solid 90.54% of the glo­bal search mar­ket share over its competition.

There was some spe­cu­la­tion that Bing was going to beat Goo­gle, and for a brief shi­ning moment, it see­med to be on the rise, but after the ini­tial curio­sity clicks pas­sed, Goo­gle once again took back its mar­ket share to stomp Bing and every other search engine.

Kno­wing this, it is cri­ti­cal to avoid the mis­take of dis­mis­sing anything new that Goo­gle does. Because unlike all other tools and soft­ware appli­ca­tions that get relea­sed and must spend a great deal of money to reach out to all those eye­balls, Goo­gle launches its new appli­ca­tions already owning over 90% of the world’s eyeballs.

And it doesn’t cost them a dime to reach them.

Think about the sheer power of that mar­ket share, and now think about how impor­tant it is that you don’t ignore the latest Goo­gle appli­ca­tion… the Side­wiki.

In effect, this tiny little appli­ca­tion has the poten­tial to com­ple­tely alter your busi­ness model, adding new costs and frus­tra­tions to your work­day. How?

By allo­wing abso­lu­tely ever­yone to com­ment on any page of your web­site, and allo­wing clic­ka­ble links within those com­ments, it has flung open the doors to brand new ways to mess with your life.

This means that anyone who has the Goo­gle Tool­bar ins­ta­lled, inc­lu­ding your com­pe­ti­tion, now has the abi­lity to say anything they like about you or your pro­ducts, and there is abso­lu­tely nothing you can do about it.

Nothing. Zip. Nada.

Yes, you do have the abi­lity to click a tiny link next to their com­ments and “report abuse”. Whoopty-​​doo. Based on early tests, it takes Goo­gle mode­ra­tors at least 48 hours to get around to remo­ving abu­sive comments.

If you run an online busi­ness like I do, 48 hours is a life­time if you’re sta­ring at a nasty com­ment that is appea­ring on your own web­site, one that hun­dreds of visi­tors can see while they are deci­ding whether or not to buy your product.

Think about the many ways this tool can be abused.

  • Your com­pe­ti­tion could visit every page of your web­site and post a vicious lie about how you are a known sex offen­der and that if peo­ple want to buy pro­ducts from good peo­ple, they should visit his site instead.
  • Peo­ple could post direct down­load links to your pro­ducts on your order page, thus sabo­ta­ging your sales.
  • Your own cus­to­mers could con­fuse Side­wiki with your cus­to­mer sup­port, pos­ting pri­vate infor­ma­tion you are una­ble to res­pond to or correct in any way.
  • Have a pro­duct for sale? Others can post their “bet­ter price” for that pro­duct and com­ple­tely kill your sales.

And the pos­si­bi­li­ties are endless.

So in essence, by ope­ning up this type of “social com­men­tary” for the gene­ral public, and by not allo­wing web­site owners to have any kind of con­trol over what appears on their own web­si­tes, Goo­gle not only enjoys 90% mar­ket share of all search engine traf­fic but also they now con­trol over 90% of YOUR cus­to­mers, YOUR traf­fic, YOUR ad space, and YOUR money.

If you think for one minute that Goo­gle isn’t going to slap ads all over it, you are delu­ded. So, if you’re run­ning a site that has Adsense ads, you will most likely see your reve­nue dec­rease rather quickly when Side­wiki intro­du­ces ad sup­por­ted comments.

Ins­tead of Goo­gle being your source for traf­fic, it now beco­mes your traf­fic hijac­ker by piggy­bac­king your web­site and diver­ting peo­ple away from it ins­tead of towards it.

Peo­ple have argued that this is won­der­ful for the “end user”, because it allows you to make deci­sions about ven­dors in a more open and fair way. If you’re about to buy a pro­duct from a scam­mer, Side­wiki has the poten­tial to “pro­tect you” by allo­wing you to see what other cus­to­mers have to say about their expe­rience with you.

The argu­ment is that if you are a good ven­dor with great pro­ducts, then you have nothing to worry about, and that the only ones who should be worried are the scammers.

This, I would argue, is bla­tantly false, and the exact oppo­site of what will actually happen.

The fact is that ethi­cal busi­ness owners are usually not as crea­tive or inven­tive as scam­mers. We’re usually far too busy buil­ding qua­lity pro­ducts and web­si­tes to think about how to use tools like Side­wiki to abuse people.

But the scam­mers and spam­mers are VERY crea­tive and spend a great deal of time thin­king up new ways to abuse sys­tems, soft­ware, and appli­ca­tions. They are rub­bing their hands in glee thin­king up ways they can des­troy your busi­ness and your repu­ta­tion, and Side­wiki is going to be so easy to manipulate.

Ima­gine how much time and money you’ll waste trying to stomp all the poten­tial nega­tive com­ments that can appear on each and every page of your website?

At the time of this wri­ting, there is no sim­ple way to locate new Side­wiki com­ments that have appea­red while someone is vie­wing dif­fe­rent pages of your web­site, so the only way you can pro­tect your­self is to load each page of your site manually, while Side­wiki is open, and repor­ting com­ments as abu­sive… manually.

If you have only one web­site with only three pages, this is no big deal. But most of us have mul­ti­ple web­si­tes, with mul­ti­ple pages.

The pros­pect of having to load each page of each web­site every day, just to see what peo­ple are saying about us, is patently ridi­cu­lous. You would need to hire a full time repu­ta­tion mana­ge­ment team to keep track of it all.

So, how can you pro­tect your busi­ness from these types of sca­ven­gers? That’s a terri­fic ques­tion, and I wish I could easily ans­wer it. This is simply too new a pro­blem for an effec­tive and sim­ple solution.

There are some bright pro­gram­mers wri­ting code, as we speak, and a few scripts that are sup­po­sed to block Side­wiki from appea­ring on your site at all. But how effec­tive they are remains to be seen.

Michel and I will be follo­wing this story clo­sely in the coming months, and will be pro­vi­ding you with upda­tes on the most recent tools and solu­tions. For the most recent Side­wiki bloc­king tools, go to our Updated List of Sidewiki Blockers where we will keep track of the latest and most effec­tive solu­tions to pro­tect your site.

Stay tuned, because this is going to be a very bumpy ride.

Syl­vie Fortin

P.S. There are a num­ber of dis­cus­sions going on about this issue, and there are some inte­res­ting points for and against Goo­gle Side­wiki. For further research, here are some points others have made that I find par­ti­cu­larly inte­res­ting to note…

Update (You’ll Want to Read This!)

A cou­ple of peo­ple have implied that we’re fear­mon­ge­ring here, and should just “get used to” the idea of the Social Web. (Bah, humbug!)

So, because lin­ge­ring doubts may still exist, I deci­ded to do a bit of sleuthing to see what I could find, for your con­ve­nience. I deci­ded to take the plunge and go dive into the dis­gus­ting world of Side­wiki com­ment spam, willingly expo­sing myself to some of the vile stuff out there. (You’re welcome.)

I thought I would start my search by ins­ta­lling Side­wiki and chec­king out what peo­ple have cho­sen to post on it while vie­wing Goo​gle​.com itself. After all, if Goo­gle belie­ves in true “trans­pa­rency”, then they should have no pro­blem with let­ting the gene­ral public post wha­te­ver they want on their own web­site, right?

Follo­wing a few threads, I was intro­du­ced to a wri­ter I’ve never heard of before. His name is John Var­ley, and he is spit­ting MAD about Side­wiki. So angry, in fact, that he is on a per­so­nal mis­sion to spew as much vul­ga­rity on Side­wiki (while on Goo​gle​.com home page) as pos­si­ble, every sin­gle day, until Goo­gle dele­tes the com­ment gar­bage that currently is dis­pla­yed on his own website.

This is the mes­sage he wants Goo­gle to hear, and it is his hope that Goo­gle will lis­ten, espe­cially since they claim to be pro­perly mode­ra­ting Side­wiki in a prompt and effi­cient man­ner, what with their RELIABLE spam-​​sniffing algo­rithms and all.

Strong Lan­guage War­ning! John Varley's clear message to Google on THEIR website. UPDATE: John’s Side­wiki entries were dele­ted, some­time bet­ween 10/​17 and 10/​18. See Update #2 below.

Also, here’s John’s mes­sage on his own web­site (this one is clean and inte­lli­gently writ­ten), where he explains his thoughts on Side­wiki, and why he wants it to die: Varley.net (See the big yellow box at the top, entit­led “The Side­wiki Abomination!”)

(Or you can click here to visit “The Side­wiki Abo­mi­na­tion” directly.)

I don’t blame him one bit, to be honest.

Take a look at the screenshot I took, after seeing the kind of gar­bage the real John Var­ley is seeing on his Side­wiki (I’ve edi­ted the swea­ring out of it and added notations):

Sidewiki Abuse Example

Side­wiki Abuse Example

Also, another inte­res­ting Side­wiki com­ment pop­ped up when I visi­ted my Face­book page. Appa­rently, someone was smart enough to post a war­ning to Face­book users, since some peo­ple may think Side­wiki com­ments are from Face­book Friends, when they’re not. (Or that their Face­book accounts were hacked.)

Worst still, some peo­ple are pos­ting on their Facebook’s Side­wiki, thin­king it is pri­vate (like Facebook’s “Wall,” for exam­ple) since they are someone’s friend and their account’s per­mis­sion set­tings is set to “friends only.”

The poten­tial for Face­book users to think Side­wiki is part of Face­book is enor­mous. In fact, the above alert goes on to say that Side­wiki entries are PUBLIC and not con­tro­lled by pro­file per­mis­sion set­tings, and warns users to be careful.

That’s pre­ci­sely the issue, here. Side­wiki crea­tes the per­cep­tion that the com­ments are from the web­site or are part of it, which can lead to some serious lia­bi­lity issues — repu­ta­tion aside, it only takes one hate­ful or libe­lous com­ment to seriously damage and even com­ple­tely des­troy one’s busi­ness and livelihood.

So, do you still think that Goo­gle Side­wiki is harmless?

Really?

If so, then there’s nothing more I can pos­sibly say to con­vince you.

Until it hap­pens to you, I suppose.

Update #2

Since I wrote the update #1, Goo­gle has pro­ven my point by cen­so­ring Side­wiki entries that they didn’t like. Not because they broke the Terms of Use, but I sup­pose because the com­ments were direc­ted AGAINST Google.

The real John Varley’s Side­wiki entries have been dele­ted com­ple­tely. Mys­te­riously vanished. Strange, if you ask me. In fact, here’s a screenshot:

johnvarleysidewikiupdate The Google Sidewiki Controversy

I guess Goo­gle doesn’t waste time dele­ting com­ments they don’t want appea­ring on THEIR site, huh? Could it be because they want to pro­tect THEIR OWN reputation?

But inte­res­tingly enough, the FAKE John Varley’s side­wiki smarmy entries remain intact at the moment, fully two weeks after they were pos­ted, even though mul­ti­ple com­plaints have been sub­mit­ted about them. Goo­gle has made a clear deci­sion that these types of com­ments are per­fectly accep­ta­ble, by lea­ving them there for all the world to see.

fakejohnvarley The Google Sidewiki Controversy

This is utterly ridi­cu­lous, in my opinion.

Want more exam­ples? Fine, here are a few more. (Yes, all are screenshots, so that I don’t have to keep pos­ting upda­tes when Goo­gle emplo­yees come here and try to close the barn door after the horse has left the barn.)

Exam­ple of how Goo­gle gives Side­wiki spam­mers the royal treatment

duong The Google Sidewiki Controversy

Another spammer’s exam­ple
rose The Google Sidewiki Controversy

A smar­ter breed of Traf­fic Hijac­ker
andrew The Google Sidewiki Controversy

A par­ti­cu­larly vile exam­ple of what you can do with Sidewiki…

Click ima­ges to view full sized version…

ishi1 300x183 The Google Sidewiki Controversy

ishi2 300x187 The Google Sidewiki Controversy

Oh yeah, I’m totally com­for­ted by Google’s crack team of mode­ra­tors who seem to be doing a bang up job of remo­ving Side­wiki com­ments that vio­late their rules.

Clearly, I have nothing to worry about. There’s no such thing as spam. All peo­ple will use Side­wiki to post mea­ning­ful and thought­ful com­men­ta­ries about sites they visit. And Goo­gle will block all com­ments that vio­late their terms.

Right.

(If you believe this, then I have a bridge to sell you.)

Bot­tom line, you can’t have it both ways, Goo­gle. Please lis­ten to what we’re saying here.

We love Goo­gle, and have always spo­ken highly of your tools and objec­ti­ves. We think you’re bri­lliant. And we use many of your tools in our own busi­ness. But this spe­ci­fic tool needs to be fixed. Please. Before more inno­cent peo­ple, web­si­tes, and legi­ti­mate busi­nes­ses get hurt.

Turn Words Into Cash

Turn Words Into Cash

New! Million-dollar influence and persuasion tactics so potent, if they were any more powerful the government would be forced to classify them as 'mind control'! Click for more »