Google Knol: The First Real Challenge to Wikipedia?

In the search landscape, Wikipedia has been dominating first page search results on practically any subject for years, and continues to be one of the most authoritative “go to” sites for research and quick fact checking. However, the collective wisdom of Wikipedia stems from only a small group of editors in a very top-down bureaucratic way, and a growing number of users and ex-Wiki editors have expressed discontent for the open content encyclopedia’s sometimes less than fair opinions and editorial methods. Additionally, Wiki editors have faced several very public credibility issues in the recent past, especially since the development of Wikiscanner, a publicly searchable database that links Wikipedia edits to the IP addresses of the business entities that create them. Some of Wikiscanner’s past revelations have left many users questioning the integrity of Wikipedia’s information.

Enter Google Knol, the search giant’s “encyclopedia 2.0” answer to Wikipedia. Today marks the official launch of Knol, and the search market is abuzz with speculation over its competitive capabilities.

Although Knol is similar in concept to Wikipedia, it offers some very big (and potentially game changing) twists:

1. Knol operates on an open identity user model that invites anyone to create a “knol”—a unit of knowledge. But the difference here is significant: every knol will be tied to its creator’s Google account, which gives a name and identity to the information being put forward. “The key principle behind Knol is authorship. Every knol will have an author (or group of authors) who put their name behind their content,” Google said in its blog on Wednesday. It’s their knol, their voice, their opinion.” By giving an identity to the facts and opinions shared in Knol, Google aims to help users make better use of web 2.0 content.
2. Unlike wikis, knols cannot be edited by anyone except their creators. With this decision, Google is presenting an interesting solution to the credibility issues that plaque Wikipedia by encouraging integrity and establishment of good user reputations. Instead of multiple editors battling back and forth to edit conflicting articles to conform to their perspective, Knol permits each user’s article to stand on its own. “We expect that there will be multiple knols on the same subject, and we think that is good,” Google said.
3. Knol gives authors the opportunity to make money—through advertising. Each knol can feature ads, which Google is leaving to the discretion of each author. Should a knol author choose to display ads, Google says the author will receive a “substantial share” of the revenue. The opportunity for authors to make money through advertising in Knol is yet another smart way to reinforce the idea of authorship and an incentive for users to build up strong reputations—a decision Google is banking on (literally) to compete with the less than ideal editorial conditions at Wikipedia.
4. The ability to rank and comment on knol articles are additional features Google has added to help counter potential credibility issues. Knol uses a system similar to YouTube’s ranking and commenting. Here’s an example from an article on Type 1 Diabetes written by a doctor, with a 4 out 5 stars ranking and 30 comments:Presumably articles with high rankings and favorable comments will rise to the top of Knol’s search results, and be more helpful to searchers.

In beta since December 2007, Knol has already amassed a large wealth of user-created knols and today’s launch will no doubt open the floodgates to a massive influx of user-generated information. But the big question is whether or not Knol can improve upon the foundations Wikipedia has built and rise to the level of being a serious and more credible competitor, or fall short of its lofty ambitions to make Web 2.0 information more trustworthy. After all, when the invitation is open to anyone, who can say what kind of information will be submitted, and whose agenda it will serve? Will Knol become yet another spam-congested social media site utilized for self-promotion and marketer back-scratching?

It will be interesting to see how Knol will shift the Web 2.0 landscape, and whether or not the search masses will trust its information over Wikipedia’s. Until we start seeing knols infiltrating the top search results positions alongside (or instead of) wikis, we’ll just have to keep wondering.

 back to top