Really interesting development over at Google News: apparently they are making a move to introduce a comments type system to its news. Currently, its only available with a subset of readers, and they are only allowing certain individuals to post comment — namely people who were directly involved with the news. While there are lot of questions (namely, the manpower required in moderating a free-for-all Google comment system) that roiled around in my mind with this new venture, I think its potentially game changing for online news, and this seemingly odd choice to only get people who are part of the news to comment is actually pivotal.
Here’s why.
Google being Google, it will have the brand power to attract principals who are actually part of the news to participate. Who wouldn’t want to be part of the reach that Google has?
Furthermore, this offers individuals who are part of the story to actually *tell* their side of the story, in their own words, providing context, opinion, and their own personalized version of the events. In many ways, this is almost like bringing a blogging-like aspect to the news, without actually having the trouble to set up a blog, or, having a place to host it to have your opinion noticed.
Being the one place to actually host all of these opinions? That’s big. Furthermore, that’s News. Google News is going to be a place not only where it aggregates headlines, but it actually provides a place where people who were involved *with* the news can tell it their way. It will actually be getting principals involved with the story to create The News.
Furthermore, can you imagine what kind of effect this will have on news reporting organizations and journalists? Having the people in the story, or people who are related to the story actually giving their own version of the story — or, actually fact checking the reporter’s stories? Or, giving their opinion about how stories from one organization are versus others?
Furthermore, can you imagine, as a reader, where *you* will go for news? Before Google News was just an aggregator of news headlines from a variety of sources. *NOW*, Google News is also the aggregator of some very important opinion, and in a very real way, creates “News2.0″. It allows people *in* the story to relate *their* story, and then distribute it for public consumption and conversation.
Getting the people *in* the story first is an important first step, because it automatically validates the whole idea *of* comments for many people who aren’t familiar to it, or who are new to it (despite efforts by many online newspapers). And I think this will naturally create even more buzz and more pop to this feature — eventually, as if Google needed any more help with it — creating a tidal wave of comments when the doors blast open when it goes out of “beta”.
And once that does happen, it will create an even bigger reason for people to return to Google News and *not* the actual news site, and its a reason that most of us already know about and recognize as the raison d’etre for blogs, forums, and for many social applications. Its the conversation, man.
I think if done right, (and I’m only saying this with a dash of hyperbole) this could be something that actually changes the way people read, consume, and *engage* with the news. Literally. One day soon, you will be able to engage with and interact with people who made (or who keep on making) The News.
Imagine that.
Keep your eyes tuned folks, because if it does happen in the way that I think it might? Newspapers might have something else to worry about entirely, as Google is bringing a revolution to news in a way that I don’t think anyone expected, or really, any one else is in a position to duplicate.
August 8th, 2007 at 12:15 pm | Permalink
or is this just Google’s way of getting free content to pad its news stories? and will many of the people involved in the news actually have the time to correct or append it? will this just result in more jobs for p.r.? Lots and lots of questions!
August 8th, 2007 at 12:32 pm | Permalink
[...] Tony Hung believes that Google’s enormous power will naturally draw in participating commenters, writing that, “Google being Google, it will have the brand power to attract principals who are actually part of the news to participate. Who wouldn’t want to be part of the reach that Google has?” [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 1:37 pm | Permalink
Tish — true as well. But I think that the free content that “pads” its news stories has potential to be bigger, better, and more important than what’s reported. Its an opportunity for those involved with the news to actually render it in their own words. Newspapers, news sites, and journalists have their own fans for good reasons; on the other hand, this creates a real alternative for all of this. Imagine of Google News existed aroudn the time of the OJ trial. Would you be interested in hearing what OJ had to say — directly — at the time? How about his lawyers? How about the Goldman family?
True, there are many logistical issues to work out, including issues around moderation, and public relations as Steve Rubel points out, but I think this has the potential to be really big.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:43 pm | Permalink
Tony…I think folks involved with the news have often had their say (weren’t the Goldman’s often interviewed for CNN and such?) In the case of trials, comments off the official record may cause some problems (don’t know the actual legal language, but maybe something about compromising the case?) I wonder, too, about the degree to which journalists will be able to defend themselves. Newspapers have routinely dissuaded journalists from answering back on their message boards and forums, so they may have to set some sort of policy re how they will handle something refuted on Google News.
Lots of unexplored ethical territory here for sure.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:51 pm | Permalink
Good points all around — as you’ve pointed out, it opens up a giant can of worms, questions and debate … some of which, I’m sure, we’ve yet to discuss about. But the story’s really only a few hours old, so I’m interested in hearing what the newspapers and big media have to say about this in the days / weeks ahead.
August 8th, 2007 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Are you saying that you’d rather have a subject of your story comment on your story on Google news rather than on your blog?
This is in Google’s interest, first and foremost.
August 8th, 2007 at 2:24 pm | Permalink
Hi Eric,
I would rather have the people in the story having the opportunity to comment in their own words — period. I am not so naive as to think that people would comment on my blog — or most people’s blogs, or even most newspapers. But they might on Google. And adding their actual voice and opinion to the discussion, I think, is a good thing.
Is this in Google’s interest? Of course. But I also think that they are also the only ones who are positioned to do it as well (and well enough).
August 8th, 2007 at 3:21 pm | Permalink
[...] Hung, who writes about Web 2.0 issues, blogged that the new feature is almost like bringing a blog-like aspect to news “without having the [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 6:06 pm | Permalink
Most “newsmakers” already have the opportunity to shape the news. They put out press releases, talk with reporters, and try to influence the story.
In my job as a media spokesman for a local public figure, I can tell you that the newsmaker I work for would never bother to put his comments on Google’s website unless the story was HUGE and the media lacked some basic understanding.
This is an interesting idea, but clearly needs to be developed further. I am having trouble imagining why it would be valuable to real “newsmakers” to the point where they would invest valuable time “blogging” about the news when they already had a chance to get their side of the story out via press release, press conference, interview, etc.
I will also be interested to learn how Google News is able to verify identities and create accounts for “newsmakers.”
Google is no doubt one of the collectively smartest organizations on the planet, and if anyone can figure it out, they can… but as someone in the business, I don’t get it - at least not yet.
August 8th, 2007 at 6:16 pm | Permalink
[...] all about conversation, seems to think the second coming is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 6:57 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 6:58 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 7:06 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 7:17 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 9:01 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 9:18 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 10:14 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 8th, 2007 at 11:16 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will ‘change online news as we know it.’” [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 12:16 am | Permalink
[...] plans to verify that remains to be seen). I think — as Tony Hung at Deep Jive Interests does — that this has the potential to expand the journalistic [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 12:19 am | Permalink
[...] plans to verify that remains to be seen). I think — as Tony Hung at Deep Jive Interests does — that this has the potential to expand the journalistic [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 1:07 am | Permalink
Spokesman,
Honest question, here. In spite of all the ways you’ve listed to get an ‘official’ message out, how many do you think are honestly and truly received in the spirit they were sent? Furthermore, they are further filtered by the journalists and reporters (or, bloggers, for example) after that.
Are you saying that you cannot see the power of getting a principal’s word and opinion, unfiltered and unedited *verbatim* on Google?
Of course you’re right in that you just having trouble ‘imagining why it would be valuable to real “newsmakers” to the point where they would invest valuable time “blogging” about the news when they already had a chance to get their side of the story out via press release, press conference, interview, etc.’ … because, quite rightly, we need a really good example of it working.
We haven’t had one yet, but all we need is one example to get everyone talking about it — one example where someone involved with a real story [perhaps not even a big one], decided to chime up on Google News to give a completely different side of the story. Or, break some news not previously known.
And you know what? Call me optimistic, stupid, or naive, but I think its going to happen one day soon. Let me know what you think about it when it does.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:50 am | Permalink
[...] people like Tony Hung have received this new feature with open arms even calling it 'pivotal' saying, “Google News is going to be a place not only where it [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 9:42 am | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 10:10 am | Permalink
[...] people like Tony Hung have accepted it those like Frank Shaw feel that this feature will “never make it out of [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 10:22 am | Permalink
[...] tout en émoi et voit en cette annonce, l’arrivée du Messie. Même, le toujours réservé, Tony Hung parle d’un tournant qui changera le concept des infos en [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 11:01 am | Permalink
[...] this business about walled off gardens is probably *as* premature as the “biggest thing since Jesus” post yesterday, if not more so. Let’s all remember that this Google News Comments is [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 12:00 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 12:02 pm | Permalink
[...] Hung, who writes about Web 2.0 issues, blogged that the new feature is almost like bringing a blog-like aspect to news “without having the [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 2:19 pm | Permalink
[...] plans to verify that remains to be seen). I think — as Tony Hung at Deep Jive Interests does — that this has the potential to expand the journalistic [...]
August 9th, 2007 at 4:45 pm | Permalink
[...] Hung, who writes about Web 2.0 issues, blogged that the new feature is almost like bringing a bloglike aspect to news “without having the trouble [...]
August 10th, 2007 at 1:13 pm | Permalink
[...] Tony Hung thinks this is a game changer because it allows those involved in stories to tell their side of the story without it being filtered through a reporter. But I don’t really agree. [...]
August 10th, 2007 at 3:19 pm | Permalink
[...] live and breathe over what Google is doing, this announcement has drawn a considerable amount of controversy (although some are keeping cooler [...]
August 10th, 2007 at 4:37 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 11th, 2007 at 9:57 pm | Permalink
[...] with it Google is no longer just an aggregator of news. Now they’re participating in it. Over at Deep Jive Interests they seem to think that this is a good thing, that those mentioned in the news will be able to tell [...]
August 11th, 2007 at 10:23 pm | Permalink
[...] market is letting the subjects of the news have their say—and from a mighty platform indeed. (See here for a very enthusiastic response, one to which I’m deeply [...]
August 12th, 2007 at 7:05 am | Permalink
[...] with Danny: Google doesn’t know what it’s getting into. But perhaps they do, as Tony Hung explains: “Google News is going to be a place not only where it aggregates headlines, but it [...]
August 14th, 2007 at 3:01 pm | Permalink
[...] seems to think the second coming of Jesus Christ himself is here. An example: normally reserved Tony Hung calls it “pivotal” and that it will “change online news as we know [...]
August 16th, 2007 at 4:36 am | Permalink
getting people in the news is a great idea. big question now is how?
i’d just stay tuned
August 18th, 2007 at 10:28 am | Permalink
[...] Google News Comments were announced, and it seems like I’m not the only one who thinks its bigger than Jesus — although, as far as I can recall, I also didn’t liken it specifically to Osama Bin [...]
December 26th, 2007 at 9:44 am | Permalink
[...] December 26th, 2007 at 9:44 am So four months after I unbashedly proclaimed that Google News would change the world as we know it (or something like that), the New York Times has done a bit of a pseudo-update on how things have [...]
February 21st, 2008 at 8:01 pm | Permalink
[...] several months ago, I ranted and raved about this (not unlike, for example, how others ranted about the Jesus Phone, but I am a media geek, I [...]