As Google Blogoscoped points out, there are at least two examples of Google News commenting, and I have to say its pretty darn cool.  One of them involves how branding influences children’s choices, with the example being that the McDonald’s brand caused children to choose healthier choices just by bring wrapped up in a McDonald’s package.

The AP (Associated Press) report quotes a Dr. Strasburger , who is an “an author of an American Academy of Pediatrics policy”, and the Google Comments has Dr. Strasburger making his own comment over here.  What’s interesting is that the AP report distills Dr. Strasburger’s opinion into a two or three sentence sound bite.  Google News’ Comments allows Dr. Strasburger to have a fully developed opinion (and boy, is it an opinion) about the issue.  I think this is a great example of comments adding a good layer of complexity to the topic, because it really allows people to get a bigger, fuller, picture around the story.

And by that, I know that Phillip Lennsen queries as to whether having Google Comments will dilute the power of the story — but that will only happen if its a one -sided comment, or that there is only one comment.  To get a good appreciation of any story is to understand both sides, and what better way is there to do that than actually hear (or, in this case read) what both sides are saying, quite literally, without the hindrance of a filter, or the artificial limitations of what a story is?  And this is even without the regular audience stepping in (which will no doubt come at a later point).

Which leads me to the other interesting issue.

Of course I fully expect someone from McDonald’s to post something — and as the PR part of the blogosphere gears up for this new change in Google News, I expect that its probably filtering through layers of bureaucracy if its reached anyone’s ears at all.  But, getting corporations to think about this issue is another Good Thing.

In order for this to work, Google Comments must (and there’s no reason not to) allow all sides to have their say, including corporations, and other large seemingly faceless entities.  In this case, I fully expect McDonald’s to trot out some kind of PR-flackery.  But maybe they won’t.  Maybe they’ll suprise us with a refreshingly honest answer, and use the Google News Comment system in the same vein and in the same ethos as blogging.

I wonder if this — and not, say, Second Life — is PR’s next greatest frontier?

When corporations are forced to respond on Google News, perhaps we’ll hear disarmingly real and honest answers about the issue — and perhaps that will be the greatest PR lesson that could come from blogging.  Hey, I love blogging as much as the next bloke (or gal), but Google News has the kind of reach that blogging just doesn’t have. 

Lots of unexplored issues here, and the story’s just hours old.  As I said previously, this is something I say with only a dash of hyperbole:  This ‘addition’ to Google News has the potential to be something big, whether its affecting how stories are written, how they are perceived, allowing the development of a lively debate that encourages people to understand the complexities behind the stories … and perhaps even more exciting, how large corporations — and governments? — are held accountable to stories that move across its “desk”, and what they might be encouraged to say when their proverbial feet are held to the metaphorical fire.