"the blog clog myth" makes some interesting points about the the blog clog problem and does a good job of pointing out the fallacy in the analogy between the blogosphere and usenet:

"The "precedent" quoted, when Google bought the Usenet archives of Deja.com and "removed the groups from the main index", is a red herring. Google has not removed newsgroups from the main Google index - you'll find web-based archives of newsgroups on there today. It simply built a far better, specialised search for the groups elsewhere after it acquired the Deja.com archive."

good point, but it doesn't address this issue that blogs are clogging the results of searches in a way that web-based archives of usenet postings never did. when i search for "galaxie 500 window crank" i don't want to find me as the number one hit. i don't think anyone else does either. and here's the main point - it's a disservice to the people who are doing the searching.

it might be fun for my ego, but most people - the vast preponderance of people - don't care about weblogs [ even if they might reap the benefits of finding what they are looking for through the wonders of pagerank ]. most people would consider google to be a better service if i, and a relatively small number of other people, didn't get in the way of the information they really want. i might soften my stance that blogs should be removed from the main index by default, but to maintain that google is a better service by biasing results towards information that most users aren't interested [ repeat after me, "most users aren't bloggers" ] in, isn't in keeping with google's historic stance as being obsessively focused on users. me dons abestos duds