NNSquad - Network Neutrality Squad
[ NNSquad ] A Few Thoughts on Google's "Search, plus Your World"
A Few Thoughts on Google's "Search, plus Your World"
http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000928.html
Wow. I haven't seen such a flurry of consternation and complaints
since Coca-Cola replaced their original formula with "New Coke"
decades go.
The Net's abuzz with the sound of SPYW (Search, plus Your World -
perhaps an unfortunate acronym) -- Google's new effort to
significantly integrate Google+ (G+) with Google Search.
The sense of panic in geekdom over this change can only have been
amplified by word that the manufacturer of Twinkies is filing for
bankruptcy protection again.
Oh, the horrors! Agony. Agony.
[cue sound of needle scratching across vinyl record]
OK gang. Settle down. Even if real Twinkies vanish, there are plenty
of similarly delectable knockoffs, and no matter what you've heard
about SPYW, the sky isn't falling.
There are piles of places where you can read about the details of what
Search, plus Your World is and how it works.
I'm not going to review or rehash those here.
But a lot of people have been asking me to comment, and I've been
playing with SPYW for a couple of days to get a feel for its user
experience, so here are a few preliminary thoughts regarding how SPYW
works and the controversy surrounding it.
First some facts we can stipulate.
We all know that Google is dominant in search, and some observers seem
to feel that this means they should be regulated as if they were a
public utility.
Of course they're not a public utility, and there have never been
reputable arguments asserting that their current dominance in search
was achieved through subterfuge -- which immediately differentiates
them from the most commonly quoted comparison of Microsoft, who indeed
did use underhanded means to force Windows on the world.
And frankly, one of the aspects that makes legislation like SOPA (Stop
Online Piracy Act) so nightmarish is the thought of the U.S.
Congress -- perhaps the best example of dysfunctional government in the
western world -- essentially dictating search results.
Anyway, the public utility argument is used to try assert that certain
actions that would be OK for a non-dominant search engine (like
Microsoft's Bing, which is deploying a deep integration with
Facebook), are supposedly not OK for Google to do, even with its own
services like Google+.
On the other hand, there are critics of SPYW who suggest that if
Google had given equal preference to (for example) deep data from
Twitter, as they are doing now for G+, there wouldn't be such an
outcry. This despite the fact that Google no longer has access to
Twitter data at that level, after contract renewal negotiations that
would have continued real-time access to tweet streams failed.
So we're faced with a question. Does the fact that Google has far
better access to its own G+ postings data than to Twitter postings
data mean that Google should be prohibited from optionally featuring
G+ postings data to G+ users in Google Search results?
It seems to me that the answer to this question should primarily
revolve around user choice.
If you're not a G+ user, or you're not logged-in to Google, your
natural (organic) search results are not going to include G+ listings.
If you are logged-in and you are a G+ user, by default you'll see the
G+ related listings. These can be enabled or disabled on a search by
search basis by controls on the search page, or completely disabled
(along with other personalization features such as Web history, though
I'm told localization features will still be present) through search
settings.
Now, as a heavy G+ user (though with a fairly limited number of people
in my G+ circles, just to keep the stream readable for me given the
time available) I sometimes am definitely very interested in what my
G+ universe of folks has to say about various topics. Seeing these in
my Google Search results can be very useful -- sometimes.
I say "sometimes" because in the current implementation, I'm finding
that those personal results often aren't terribly useful, mainly
because I've already seen most of them over on G+ previously. So I
find myself frequently turning off SPYW on a results page to restore
the non-personalized listings.
And frankly, I'm experimenting with turning SPYW off entirely (though
I'm reluctant to do this long-term yet, since i know that as Google
iterates the feature it will certainly improve in relevance).
For other persons, who don't keep track of their G+ stream as closely
I do, having those G+ related listings in their search results may
routinely be a really big win.
But it's a choice matter. I choose to use Google+, and I appreciate
the option of including those listings -- or not -- in my search
results. Search is after all just one part of the Google ecosystem
that I'm logged into. Keeping these various services completely
distinct just wouldn't make sense, either from a business or user
experience standpoint.
Critics of the new "circles suggestions" aspect of SPYW, which
apparently appears whether or not you're a G+ user, and even if you're
not logged in or have disabled personalized results, seem to be on
firmer ground with their criticisms.
These suggestions are now appearing in the prime top of page real
estate for key searches on the right-hand side above the paid ads (not
in the organic, natural search results, it's important to note).
I'm finding these fairly irritating right now, and there's no way I
know of to suppress them.
If I search for "music" (logged in or not), I'm presented with circle
invites for Britney Spears and Snoop Dog. Every time. Over and over.
I have no interest in adding either of these persons to my circles,
and I would prefer waterboarding to adding Britney. But they keep
popping up, and there's not even a way to dismiss them and say "I
don't want to see these people again!"
Down below those two display elements are the ads, which I've noticed
frequently include Bing. In fact, when I tested this just now, the
paid ad above the organic search results in fact was for Bing. So
Microsoft shouldn't have anything to complain about in that respect.
But I still want Britney and Snoop suggestions to leave my search
results pages, permanently.
Is that level of Google+ promotion in the right-hand results pane --
to non-logged in users in particular -- problematic from a competition
standpoint?
I'm not sure. I'm not an antitrust lawyer. Dedicated Google haters
will always find something to latch onto, but my gut feeling is that
this seems to be pushing the envelope significantly, and in effect
perhaps unnecessarily providing red meat to critics at a very
sensitive time.
So while I appreciate the desire to promote G+, it's quite possible
that this aspect of the services integration is at least ill-advised
now, in the current implementation.
A couple of other notes.
Turning off personalization in the search settings disables all
personalization except localization, so if you're a user of Web
History those signals are also disabled. Being able to more
selectively control this would be desirable.
We also need to face the old opt-in, opt-out dilemma. SPYW is enabled
by default for logged-in G+ users. Some observers are arguing that it
should have been opt-in, though since G+ users have already chosen to
use G+, an argument can really be made either way, and as always the
ramifications of opt-in vs. opt-out choices can be significantly more
complex than they may appear at first glance.
An alternative would have been to default in the G+ users, but to make
it even clearer how to turn off personalization through search
settings if they wish.
So here's where we end up for the present.
As a G+ user, I appreciate the ability to have G+ related listings
optionally in my search results. It's unclear how useful these really
are to me, but like the saying goes, "your mileage may vary." There
should be a way to turn off the G+ results without disabling Web
History personalization. I understand why these are linked, but I
don't think it provides the best user experience and control.
I believe the rather aggressive "circle suggestions" to non-logged in
users is potentially a real problem. I'm not saying Google shouldn't
be able to do this, but I'm not convinced that it's a good choice,
considering the overall environment in which Google finds itself right
now. There are times when discretion is indeed the better part of
valor.
Finally, I want Britney and Snoop suggestions to get off my results
pages, permanently, before I'm forced to throw a boot into a display.
As a G+ user, I like getting suggestions about other G+ users to
follow within the context of my G+ usage -- but those can be dismissed
at my option.
While I certainly do understand the desire to promote G+, those
right-hand pane circle suggestions accompanying key Google Search
results (again, especially for users who are not logged in) can be
annoying, can't be dismissed, and are probably providing antitrust
ammunition for Google's adversaries.
So overall, while I believe that most of the loud criticism of Search,
plus Your World has been overblown, and that there are most definitely
important benefits for users with the integration of Google services,
there are relevant aspects of this rollout that could have been
handled considerably better.
And Britney, best of luck to ya', but please ... go ... away.
--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com): http://www.vortex.com/lauren
Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org
Founder:
- Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org
- Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org
- PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com
Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com
_______________________________________________
nnsquad mailing list
http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad