I'm all for keeping a close and critical eye on search engines, but the Observer article "The readers editor on ... the downside of Google" does perhaps go too far. An Observer commissioning editor ran a search on Google for an MRSA expert and the 'expert' was approached to write an article. It turns out he wasn't really an expert at all. This doesn't seem to me to be a downside of Google (particularly since other results pointed out that the self proclaimed expert was anything but); but more a downside of journalists being too quick off the mark and not taking time to consult an information professional perhaps?
Scroll to top