Comparing Kirking on Ask, Google, and Live

Comparing Kirking on Ask, Google, and Live

Brittney over at Nashville is Talking gave a good timeline of how the JL Kirk & Associates scandal started:

1. Katherine Coble writes opinionated blog entry about her bad service at an employment agency, JL Kirk & Associates.

2. Subject of initial blog entry leaves long comment on said post defending herself and her company.

3. Coble reposts the comment as a post of its own, with a refutation responding.

4. Coble receives certified letter from King & Ballow on behalf of JL Kirk & Associates insisting that she remove any blog entries about the employment agency. She has two days to comply or they say they will sue for “tortuous interference and other damages.”

Early on, I noted how most of the first three pages of Google Results for J. L. Kirk were by bloggers critical of the company’s practice of threatening lawsuits against critics. I wanted to see how the past few days had treated JL Kirk Associates on google, and how the company is standing on Google and Ask as well. So I searched, and this is what I found:

Category / Engine Ask Google Live
JL Kirk Associates 15 3 28
Critical of Kirk 3 27 1
Other Kirks 12 0 1

The first 2 criticisms on appeared to be from two years ago. Only was was relevant to the recent bruhaha. The last is to a TV station (WKRN 2 Nashville) report on the issue. Ask also had 12 irrelevant search results, that had nothing to do with JL Kirk and Associates. was even worse, with 28 of the first 30 results being for JL Kirk Associates (generally The only result critical of the company in the first three pages was this blog (!. (The irrelevent page was to an R.J. Roda Kirk, sculptor.)

Google’s search results were most representative of the blogosphere. Only three pages (two at, one ad pushed Kirk’s message. There were no irrelevent links, and 27 negative pages. Additionally, several pages critical of J.L. Kirk are new since the last time I checked:

My conclusion? Google is most reflective of user opinions, is unable to realize that all domains with in them are owned by JL Kirk Associates, and Ask somehow thinks that scientific articles written years ago that just-so-happen to have “J,” “L,” and “Kirk” in them are more relevant than user reviews of the company, and almost as important as the corporation’s own webpages.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *