…but what are they? On 23rd July, the long awaited Google Knol was made available to everyone, but as Landingnet has discovered, there’s been a mixed reception.

Google Knol is yet another addition to the Internet’s vast array of content depositories, such as About.com, Squidoo, Yahoo Answers and the infamous Wikipedia, but many web commentators are concerned that Google Knol will conflict with the search engine giant’s other interests.

Google Knol’s affect on SEO

One concern is whether the SERPS (Search Engine Results Pages) will favour Google hosted content through Knols, giving priority over non-Google web content. Google have categorically stated that this will not be the case, and that it already hosts content through tools such as YouTube and Blogger, which remain equally competitive amongst the millions of web-pages available on the Internet. But, if there are SEO advantages to be had by authoring content on Google Knol, it could send shockwaves through the search engine marketing world.

Google Knol and duplicated content

However, Aaron Wall from SEO book has found that by virtually duplicating one of his SEO guides into a Google Knol, the Knol now ranks higher in Google’s SERPS than the original guide elsewhere. Quite what the Internet marketing community should make of all this at this early stage is unclear, but it is certainly something that we’ll be watching closely over the coming months.

Google state that the purpose of Knol and the Knols (a unit of information) it contains are to generate content by providing a place for ‘authors’ to publish their knowledge. Unlike other online content tools, Knols can be published and remain ‘owned’ by the author. The author in turn can allow the level of editing that others can make to their Knol.

This way, Google believes that Knols will provide authority to every article and subject site.

Is Wikipedia left with Knol-where to go?

Others however, especially Wikipedia supporters, believe that the whole Knol exercise is a cynical move by Google to compete with its online user content generated encyclopedia.

Google again deny that this is the case, and have stated that Google Knol will compliment Wikipedia, which it recognises as a good resource. With Wikipedia having received some bad press in recent months due to the sometimes spurious accuracy of its content, the last thing the giant online encyclopedia needs is an aggressive competitor.

Knol-velty?

The most probable outcome however, is that Google Knol will become an accepted addition to the online community and will be used to its full advantage by businesses and aspiring professors alike, to showcase their services and knowledge. However, like everything that has user content generation as its founding principle, everyone should take special care before taking anything that’s written as gospel!

A recent survey in NMA showed that 23% of businesses fail to update their website content on a regular basis. Guess who’s also guilty….? Yeah - it’s us! It’s a fair cop!

But all our wrong-doings will soon be rectified with the launch of our new brand and (brand-new) website!

It’s taking longer than planned, due to how hard we are working for our clients and because it’s always impossible to put our projects first.

However, we should have some sneaky peeks available very soon!

Surely, it’s only a matter of time until the first high-profile case hits the media?

At present, websites offering full interactivity for those with disabilites are rare.

The UK Disability Discrimation Act (DDA) 2005 offers only a vague statement regarding the obligations of website owners, but it’s general stance, that anyone with a disability should never be excluded, still stands strong.

It’s by no means an easy job, catering for many possibilities, such as:

• Complete Blindness
• Colour Blindness
• General Poor Vision
• Tremors/Shakes in the hands or arms
• Hearing Impairments
• Seizures caused by strobing/flash effects
• Learning Difficulties e.g. dyslexia

Each of the above represents a unqiue set of challenges for web designers, web developers and online marketers.

There are several organisations that have issued detailed guidelines on web accessibility, but as yet, none have been inforced. W3C guidelines and specifications (in particular WCAG) are highly regarded as are the PAS 78 guidelines issued in 2006 by the Disablity Rights Commission.

It’s a hard expense for a business owner to justify if their industry has an extremely low percentage of disabled customers. But once the first high-profile legal case against a website is actioned, the flood gates will no doubt open?