Dr. Schoogle: or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Google

Google, schmoogle...shoogle. "Optimising Metadata to Make High-value Content More Accessible to Google Users" by Alan Dawson and Val Hamilton show how shaking up your metadata just a bit can lead to impressive results in your Google ranking. I know, there are those librarians who would quickly retort "But, Google page ranking isn't everything!" True. But, in our profession, access to information is.

Dawson and Hamilton could not have used a more apt metaphor than moving mountains. Libraries and other collections of cataloged information are sitting on mountains of gold that are currently buried in the invisible layer of the web. In reading about metadata, interoperability, digital libraries, and such, it seems that we are always thinking of new ways to carve tunnels through these mountains, or shave off sides to make a new highway...or even providing free helicopter rides to the mountains, if users will only just come visit.

Yet, we are wary of Google. We have a love/hate relationship with it. We seem to be on the defense whenever it is mentioned. "Oh, sure, it's super-fast and takes you right to what you need, but is it reliable? Is it scholarly? How relevant are the other 199,999 results that came up after number 1? Your librarian can do better than that...it just takes a little more time and effort."

Does it have to be this way? When I read "the alternative strategy is to get Google to come to this mountain and do justice to it by indexing it fully and effectively" (Dawson and Hamilton 2005, 311), I felt relieved. Let's make even better use of all that metadata and content we have, and add a few simple pieces that will make it Google (or any search engine) friendly.

Dawson and Hamilton offer some great tips on making becoming Google-friendly. But, there is still talk of the illusive Google algorithm used to rank search results. Librarians want to know. Google answers: http://www.google.com/librariancenter/articles/0512_01.html. Here, Google answers "How does Google decide what result goes at the top of the list?" And, let's admit it: We all want to be on top.

However, I think it is important to note here that getting Google to come to the door doesn't mean we can toss out the metadata. Dawson and Hamilton consistently refer to the metadata in the Glasgow Digital Library. In "Understanding Metadata and Metadata Schemes," Jane Greenberg provides an overview of metadata, metadata schemes, and the proposed MODAL framework. This rich, structured information is still valuable for collections. Greenberg explains that "Frameworks are useful for understanding complex topics: they help divide, categorize, and analyze concepts..." Metadata makes this possible. This is part of the value that we add to our content and collections, the reason we want Google to find us.