• http://www.starbucks.com/careers Jeremy Langhans

    this like 100% totally sounds like *fun*
    i jus’ added a sidewiki to our careers page here 😉

    Jer

  • http://jessicacrb.blogspot.com Jessica Braun

    I agree that Sidewiki could create some significant problems for brands and I think that is largely because negative comments will frequently outweigh positive ones. When someone is malcontent about something they complain however, when things are working smoothly consumers seem less likely to comment on how great a product or service is. Therefore, if you have more consumers writing negative reviews because the positive ones are just not written as often it could be catastrophic for branding.

    Hopefully I’m just being pessimistic.

  • http://www.reputationmanagementfor.com/ Mark Scott

    Its another easy opportunity for a disgruntle employee or competitor to easily attack a website. Often these kind of tools are used by people have issues with a company and rarely by people who have had a fantastic service. You only have to look at sites like Trip Advisor

  • Michelle Rawicz

    I see having an opionion is valuable for book or movie reviews, but being to say anything you want, when you want to just created more clutter out there – more things to sift through to form a view about a company, product, etc. Thre purpose i see in this app is they noticed people like to complain and whining brings in ad dollars to a site. So many voices in the midst can be tiring with a contstant strain to listen…

  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/frodin Richard Frodin

    Re: Mark’s comment about Tripadvisor, surely that site proves the opposite is just as likely? Most comments on there are perfectly rational, justified with evidence, and constructive – and the reader is empowered with enough information (ie the context of a crowd) to identify wantonly destructive behaviour. That’s a visualisable outcome for sidewiki content too (over time).

  • Shirley Ray

    Glad to see this article. It’s something everyone who has a web site needs to be aware of. With no opt out for webmasters, Google is in essence highjacking their content.

    Here’s a link to a more comprehensivce discussion of the down side to sidewiki. http://talkbiz.com/blog/google-steals-the-web/

  • http://www.reputationmanagementfor.com/ Mark Scott

    Hi Richard yes agree in the normal world, but I guess I see how it’s abused rather than utilised correctly. Maybe my glasses are a bit more tainted than most…

  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/frodin Richard Frodin

    Mark, do agree this is generally a negative development though – it subverts a core principle of the web, which at its heart has until now been real estate – yes, networked, but definitely your site was land that you owned. It’s one thing for someone to comment on you at Tripadvisor or another piece of aggregator real estate that’s not your own, but a whole other thing for someone to be able to add a comment on to your own site (with you not being able to opt-out in any way). Good money will have been spent getting visitors to that land, and it seems a bit inequitable that squatters can then push negative or competitive messages to customers you’ve invested in attracting. “Don’t be evil” indeed…

  • http://www.lifesize.com/videoconferencingcareers/ Michelle Rawicz

    I agree with Richard’s comment above. As much as we all like having a say and voice about things, this does seem highly inequitable to a website owner, particularly if you are not able to shut it off or opt out. Its a bit self-serving on Google’s part. Instead, a website owner should allow a “smoking” section somewhere on their website for this, where naysayers can congregate.

  • Jim Stroud

    The new tool from Google is interesting, but this has been going on for years with another tool (that I adore) called Diigo. (www.diigo.com)

  • Kannan Kasi

    This is absolutely unethical. It is trespassing. There is a forum for everything. Expressing one’s feelings is fine but not on the corporate website. As explained above by Shirley Ray or Richard Frodin, rumour mongers or liars can cause so much harm to you. Really frightening. There is no way, a corporate can shut / satisfy the naysayers. How can we form a forum to raise an objection to this? Should we also use Sidewiki to raise our legitimized concerns against Sidewiki and make it appear on google’s corporate website ?

    When you post a comment to this article, there is a statement below “Post Comment” button that reads “Comments are lightly moderated for spam, inflammatory language,
    and other inappropriate messages.”

  • http://www.reputationmanagementfor.com/ Mark Scott

    Kannan to be honest the only effective way to do it is to boycott using Google, problem is of course they control 80% of the search market so would they notice.
    I had an issue with one of my sites where it disappeared from Google’s natural searches. I immediately stopped my adword spend for the site which was about $100,000 a year and contacted the Google adwords to complain, miraculously my site reappeared again in the search results. So although they are meant to be ethically driven I still think the big buck is worth more to them. If enough people boycott using adwords then just maybe they will listen. Hit them where it hurts!!!

  • Jackie Bozorgi

    I have mixed feeling about this. While it will absolutely encourage companies to be at their best regarding customer service, etc…it will give unethical competition an upper hand in bringing your site down to promote theirs.

    I wish it didn’t exist.
    I will be downloading it.

  • Pingback: The Future of Recruiting | Connecting Career and Life()

  • http://www.enticelabs.com/ Joshua Westover

    Great post Jimbo! Thanks.

  • Keith Halperin

    Interesting…..

    I just found this site:

    GLASSDOOR
    http://www.glassdoor.com/
    A free inside look at over 30,000 companies.
    Company Salaries, Reviews, and Interviews posted anonymously by employees.
    See what we have for your company or job title…
    Search Salaries Reviews Interviews

  • http://www.brickelm.com Lesa Caskey

    OK, I’ll be the one to look at the bright sides of this app for organizations in general. Too often, dissatisfied workers have a difficult time airing their grievances or communicating the issues they’re having because they are not sure who they can trust. With the Sidewiki, employers may get an opportunity to learn valuable information about their own company that they might otherwise not get to know. This could prove to be the canary in the coal mine of sorts for when there is trouble brewing.
    Another bright side for companies is along the same lines, but on the customer-facing side in that the Sidewiki comments may alert a company to a problem they didn’t know they had.
    For instance, there is a large media company here in LA that has written an app that collects Twitter data on a live feed. The information from Twitter lets this broadcaster know when local cable or satellites are down much faster than through their own current process because people start squawking on Twitter about their TVs going black. This company also tracks viewer squawks on the shows and ads which is essentially free market surveying.
    It is possible to graciously thank those who write posts for taking the trouble, therefore setting the tone for constructive dialogue.
    I don’t see this as a negative for employers at all. I only see the opportunity to embrace yet another channel through which a company can broadcast a positive message that further promotes their product and employer brands.

  • Pingback: Corporate Communications and Social Media: Genie Will Not Return to Bottle | Corporate Eye()

  • Pingback: Google’s Universal Customization Has SEO Implications : ERE.net()

  • Pingback: Social Media Only Makes Recruiting Fundamentals More Important « The Staffing Advisor()

  • Pingback: Emerging Talent Acquisition Trends For 2010: Are You Ready for a Roller Coaster? (Part III of III) : ERE.net()

  • Pingback: Social Media Only Makes Recruiting Fundamentals More Important « SocialMediaRecruitment.com()

  • Pingback: Social Media Only Makes Recruiting Fundamentals More Important()

  • Pingback: Google Wants to Manage Your Inbox - ERE.net()

  • Pingback: 5 Tips to Increase Quality Referrals from Third-Party Recruiters()

  • Pingback: Recruiting Roundup » Is Employment Branding Relevant in the Era of Web 2.0?()

  • http://www.bisnisrumahanpemula.com/ Muhammad Hafidz

    I agree that Sidewiki could create some significant problems for brands and I think that is largely because negative comments will frequently outweigh positive ones.

    pengertian etika bisnis