The following was written by Steve Rubel

Fear. You can just feel it in the air, can't you? There is fear everywhere that Google has become too powerful. As John Battelle notes, the tide of public opinion is starting to turn from loving Google to fearing them.

Perhaps. But I have news for you. Google's not the only monarch to watch - or fear - anymore. Despite the media's fascination with all things search, Wikipedia is waiting in the wings as the next Google. They (or maybe that's "we") are the emerging king disruptor; the one entity that we will soon fear most, if not already.

Let's take a walk through history. King Disruptor I was Microsoft. For years this king attracted legions of fans for providing access to information; for making getting on the Internet easy. However, soon the once-loved king saw its popularity erode once Microsoft invaded one too many industries.

At its peak, Microsoft ruled the technology kingdom like a tyrant, leaving fear everywhere in its wake. This reached a climax when it slayed the emerging prince with so much promise, Netscape. Later, as Microsoft invaded the nations of telecommunications, cable, gaming and media, it began to attract more ire. Eventually, the fear rose to a fever pitch and it was determined that Microsoft crossed the line. It went too far.The people - the people's government that is - rose up to dethrone the king, or at least slow it.

In Microsoft's wake a new ruler emerged - King Disruptor II, commonly known as Google. With its lightning quick search technology, friendly face and "do no evil" motto, Google won fans around the world. But eventually they too, like Microsoft, began to face enemies when they went too far. Now, for all of Google's contributions to society, King Disruptor II is viewed as a scary king. This will surely continue as Google grows, moving its tentacles in to areas like books, classifieds, email, news, shopping, advertising, entertainment and more. It will only become a bigger target.

History is about to repeat itself. A successor to Google's throne is waiting in the wings - it's Wikipedia, King Disruptor III. Like its predecessors, Wikipedia is powerful because it provides access to largely accurate information that can be hard to find. This king, however, is unlike any other because it operates in a completely democratic way. It's run by the people, without any grand financial ambitions. This doesn't mean its rule will be perceived solely as a benevolent one, however.

Already, Wikipedia instills a deeper fear than either Google or Microsoft did when they were at such a young age. It's the emerging king. Will it face the same scrutiny and fate as its predecessors as it expands? Certainly. But this time it will be far more difficult to slow. Yes, King Disruptor III - Wikipedia - might rule for years. And perhaps this may just be the way it was meant to be.

Reader Comments ...

__________________
Former WebProWorld Admin
IntentionalFoul.com

May have skipped a few lines . Except that I cannot see how Wiki can pay those who contibute.
Whenever I have visited Wikipedia I have come back with the feeling - what a waste of time Google Yahoo and all the others are. Sure there maybe a lot of junk there - I just have not found it . I am greatful for whatever I find since I rarely search for "reference quality material". Even some of the links never appear in Google or Yahoo.

Well, let's see, Google has billions and indexes the world. Wiki (though I love it) has no money and indexes... um, just Wiki!

Oh well. Nice thoughtful article, though hanging there in the probability category slightly above alien abductions and slightly below me winning Wimbledon next year.

I think that as without msn there would be no windows and google wouldnt exist, in the same way, without google (SEs), wikipedia wouldnt exist, so its like one is spawning the other and without each other none would be as much as they are.

I am a little afraid of the internet going the same way as the High Street though. Losing all the little interesting places in favour of the big chain stores. Recently an editor at Wikipedia said the following to me ,
"Wikipedia actually aims to replace sites like yours. You must have put an awful lot of work into it, but the good thing about Wikipedia is that it is being edited by literally 100s of people, gradually and steadily improving the quality of the articles."

Does that remind anyone else of the Borg?..."we will assimilate you all...rrrrr.....resistance is futile"

__________________
2009 Hairstyles - Pictures of 2009 hairstyles and a virtual hairstyler demo.
Price Comparison Site - Compare prices of well known brands and products.

I don't really buy into that... it would be nice, but like someone mentioned above, Google has all the money and all the indexes and databases...

Wikipedia is a baby. What makes you so convinced it won't be slayed 'as a prince full of promise' like Netscape was by Micro$oft?

__________________
Freelance IT consultant & SEO marketing
Private message for contact information

I dont get this, am I missing something, Wikipedia has been around for ages hasnt it? I think it adds something extra rather than replacing anything.

__________________
Pet Care - Pet Cat Care

I hope spammers will not ruin wikipedia as they did it with google and the other searchengines.

The man who invented the wiki thing is a genious, that's for sure

__________________
http://www.wikifetcher.com
Add dynamic content to your website!

Possible, but in next few years, untill that google will be bigger.

The one creates content the other does not. I dont see Wiki replacing Google or Yahoo but I see it as becomming an encyclopedia search engine in due course. Google is filled with spam and wiki has limited that to a greater extent because people can "vote" the topic as spam. Google does not have feed back systems. If people could vote to remove sites as spam, Google would be able to clean up the mess quickly and with little cost.

I love wikipaedia, It's awesome. It's the first point of call for anyone wanting reliable info, without ads/spam/untruths.
excellent site, i've spent hundreds of hours just reading interesting stuff from particle physics to manufacturing to economic ideas etc...anything. The thing with Wikki is, that you get the feeling they know what the're talking about. I still haven't found many incorrect 'facts' or untruths on the site. It's all about the content.

I love wikipaedia, It's so awesome. It's the first point of call for anyone wanting reliable info, without ads/spam/untruths.
I've spent hundreds of hours just reading interesting stuff from particle physics to manufacturing to economic ideas etc...anything really. The thing with Wiki is, that you know the authour knows what they're talking about.

It's like the principle of science really. If the authour makes something up (ie untrue) he/she gets shouted down/removed and the idea isn't spread any further.

Thereby incrementally the articles get more and more detailed and accurate.

I still haven't found many incorrect 'facts' or untruths on the site. ITS ALL ABOUT THE CONTENT!!!

I see Wiki only as an extension of DMOZ!

I tried adding useful links and the 'page police' removed my links and quality content. Seems certain people feel they own specific pages and 'they' determine what commerical links will be permitted. This person does not even live in the area let alone country and this happens to be my job writing content for the same.


Just another DMOZ that is difficult to get listed on if 'they' do not think your content is worthy enough.

I have used Wikipedia for several of my research purposes and I found it extremely informative and it was free.

Great job!

Regards,

Why don't we all just copy content from Wikipedia and put adwords on the page? I've seen several sites that do this & don't seem to get penalised for it.

Why bother writing your own unique content when it doesn't really seem to make that much difference?

Perhaps Google turns a blind eye to these types of pages when thry're making money off them. Surely not.

Wikipedia is good, lot of information is there. But google is great.

__________________
Team Growth - Web Designing, Animation, Web Development and SEO
AIM : Tgrowth || MSN : sales@teamgrowth.net

Wikipedia will not replace Google... there are way to many loopholes and easy access to Wikipedia.

I've used this with success on linking my various domains with wikipedia, pointing back to my domains. ALL of them for valid reasons. It was SOOOO easy. When something is THAT easy, it won't stay around for so long.

The upsetting thing is that Google is placing so much emphasis on WikiPedia... some of my long time KW terms ... wiki is showing up number one, of course with a link to my site on it. But, it sucks Google trust something they've excluded for so long... trusting a site where anyone/anybody can update or pollute.

Enjoy!

__________________
Living the life in the Idaho Falls and playing Disc Golf
Idaho Falls SEO

The difference between Google and Wikipedia is editorial value. Sure Google has a billion facts in its it database but sometimes you dont want to sift through the wheat and the chaffe.

The web in general has a billion news stories but I do not choose to search them out. Instead I visit the Drudge Report and Yahoo News because I like their filtration service. They go out and separate the crap from the interesting so I can pop in, scan their offering, and read or leave. If I had a hint that interesting news was not being reported then I would find a new news service.

In fact, that is why I like Drudge, because so much interesting and relevent news was not being reported by the mainstream press.

Wikipedia is like that, it has less "facts" than Google but way higher value. For a lot of information needs it is the best choice. It is only when I am looking for commercial information or a unique proposition that I feel the need to do in depth research into the billion facts on Goolge.


Steve

__________________
www.BathGems.com
www.fireclaimlaw.com www.ecoesq.com

I Loooooooooove Wikki, Why? For the search term Right to Buy most of the SE's list Wikki on page one, and guess who wrote it for Wikki!!!

My link is there on Right to Buy News and it does pull in traffic.

Marketing is my game and this really does work.

__________________
http://www.newhistoricalfictionbooks...-michael-fane/
http://ctab1.wordpress.com/2009/05/1...ity-mortgages/

Wikipedia is AWESOME!!!!! Tons and Tons of information!

I never liked Wiki. Oh, yeah you can find some interesting stuff there, but a DMOZ like arrogant approach surrounds Wiki also. Ever tried to get some real expert articles info on Wiki?...It is rather just enough to barely touch the surface. -But good that it makes someone happy. I will rather buy a real good book in a bookstore and I am happy to pay for it!

__________________
Robert Greenbucks

All I know is that I find a Wiki listing on just about every Google search I make. I cant even imagine the amount of Google traffic they get in a day.

__________________
KBK Marketing | Search Marketing Blog | Cheap Web Hosting

Listen to (observe) young people.

I was at work with my son 5 years old. Suddenly he booted (CTRL + ALT + DEL) the Pc. A colleague stood near by and laughed? He asked, how did he do that? I do not know how he learned that key combination. I had definitely not learned him the keystrokes.

I used Yahoo as my SE. Suddenly he and other young people started to talk about something called Google. Today he uses Wikipedia more than me.

And my daughters, they simply love MSN Messenger. I am sure, if a web browser and SE had been integrated into MSN Messenger, it would have been the preferred browser and SE by women. Would EU allow it? :-)

Do you see the possibilities?

Wiki on one screen, MSN Messenger on another and a SE engine on the third. I have used two screens for years and are handicapped if I have to use a computer with a single monitor. The next will have a least three screens. I would have no problem using 5.

P.S. I do not like multiple windows on a single monitor.

__________________
Mini Network:: Financial information at your fingertips
Learn object oriented programming where it started