smithaa02 - 12:06 am on Nov 16, 2011 (gmt 0)
Maybe in the future we'll see something like google local for vital terms... A public registration where you fill in a form for a certain key phrase which you purport to be your own. In the same way google local businesses are checked, 'vital owners' could be checked. What would be nice would be if the community could see the applicants and voice counter-concerns if vital rankings were assigned errantly (which they are being now).
Google does have to be careful though... I love the idea of an artist ranking over an Amazon page...but what should all terms work like this? If you do a search for Jerry Sandusky should his (assume he has one) personal facebook page come up first? If you search for a dictator, do you really want their official home page?
Part of this problem can be solved by being very specific. If you do a search for China, the main Chinese government site shouldn't be considered vital (if the search term was Chinese government that is a different matter). Same with say Saudia Arabia...if amnesty international can compete on that term from the democratic 'link community' then I don't see it wise for google to override this with an official website just because it's official.
Vital should only really be for people and companies that can answer accurately, "who am I" and not "what do I want to represent" or "what do I want to be about". Other associations should be vital for their own sake and not for what they associate with.