• Thomas

    so in other words, if you run a Q&A site your screwed :/

  • Durant Imboden

    That depends on the complexity of the questions or answers.

    “What’s tomorrow’s weather forecast for St. Louis?” is easy to answer with a Knowledge Graph box.

    “Will the megastorm that’s brewing in the west hit St. Louis?” is likely to require clicking through to a weather site.

  • Smash Flare

    Many sites rely on users clicking through for those initial answers and work to encourage visitors to read further, purchase products or subscribe to updates, and Google is taking that away by taking content from these sites.

  • Durant Imboden

    Maybe so. But Google’s mission statement has always been about “organizing the world’s information and making it universally accessible,” not just “providing 10 blue organic links.”

    Evolution happens. In the early days of PCs, you needed add-on utilities for all kinds of things (using RAM above 640K, for example, or to manage a hard drive). Later on, antivirus programs, Winsocks, firewalls, networking, etc. were add-ons. Today, we take it for granted that an operating system should have built-in disk management, security features, and networking. Some of those old utility makers have gone broke or moved into other businesses; others, such as Norton, are still around because they offer a “value add.”

    The Knowledge Graph is a fait accompli, and complaining won’t make it go away. If you’ve got a site that depends heavily on supplying quick answers to simple questions, you’re going to lose out. If, on the other hand, you have a site that complements the Knowledge Graph instead of merely competing with it, you may find that the quality of your traffic (though perhaps not the quantity of that traffic) will improve.

  • Chris Tucker

    Based on what i read above he didnt answer the question at all

  • Eric Rahim

    author should add that in the future Google will have all the data in a structured form. for example slinky.me ( https://www.slinky.me/Google ) is world largest kb on russian, korean and japan. probably in near future Google will buy this company. all facts and data is mine (c) Google

  • http://import.io/ Dan Cave

    This is happening, the only question is how are you going to react to it?

    It sucks that a lot of people will be losing a lot of income because of this having put a lot of time and effort into building revenue streams, but that wont stop them trying to meet there own goals.

    As access to, and ability to process BigData proliferates, you have to be ready to move with the times you will only see Google leveraging more and more data to meet its own goals, which increasingly don’t align with yours. Perhaps have a think about how you can do the same and fight fire with fire, how can you get and use data to make your offering better, deeper and more complete?

  • J_Boch

    I think most people are worried about Google nibbling at their lunch, but looking at it in a desktop world.

    But Google is looking ahead to a mobile dominated world were TL:DR is the order of the day and load times are a real concern. Google also happens to own a huge piece of the mobile market share thanks to Android.

    It won’t surprise me when Google bakes their answer tools heavily right into the android platform and bypasses the 10 blue links completely. Just ads and answers.

    There will still be a Search Engine, but it will be like our Yellow Pages today, something you may only dig out if you really do need professional help. And sitting under Google’s “Knowledge Engine”.

  • Brian

    Maybe we should just use Google Scraper Report to report Google?

  • daveintheuk

    Subtle difference, but it isn’t “the world’s information” it is “other people’s content”.

    Bit like me saying I’d like to experience the world’s cars… when what I mean is I’d like to steal other people’s cars and drive them around.

  • Durant Imboden

    A lot of people have a misunderstanding of what copyright law is and what it covers (facts aren’t protected by copyright, for example), but that’s beyond the scope of this discussion. What we’re talking about here is “Google giving a direct answer” vs. “Google linking to a third-party site.”

    Again, the Knowledge Graph isn’t likely to go away, so you have choices: (1) Try to compete with Google in the “quick, simple answer” space [and good luck with that], (2) Be a resource for people who want more than quick, simple answers, or (3) Follow the example of telegraphers, Linotype operators, and keyliners who retired or found new occupations when change put them out of work.

  • daveintheuk

    Oh, I’m under no illusion that Google will change their current approach. Quite the reverse.

    I don’t think anybody has a problem with Google showing facts like “what day is it” or “how many centimeters in a meter” – this is public domain information. The trouble is when they take content people have worked hard to produce and serving it up without the creator getting any direct benefit (ie: a page view – an chance perhaps to earn some money or at least raise awareness of their site). Copyright law allows or fair use, I’m not sure how this sits there – but morally it is clearly wrong.

    Regarding point 2, that is fine – but quite often the way people find great resources of expert content is by having a simple question answered… and Google is taking that away from content owners. Secondly, who is to say Google will stop with the quick answers. The continually take more and more – and as a corporation are obliged to grow and increase their shareholder’s investment perpetually… so ultimately, now they’ve started on this route they are compelled to take more and more.