Google has forever changed the process of seeking information, forever altered how we search out facts.

Whether or not it’s better now all depends on the situation. It depends on what someone looks for. It also comes down to how they want to seek out material.

A generation ago we had a wide range reference sources. They filled reference rooms in libraries. The reference areas were stocked with encyclopedias, almanacs, dictionaries, atlases, thesauruses, quote books and much more. Many of them had newspaper archives.

We were taught not to always go to the same source. Some were better for certain things. Others were better in other cases.

Now the first thing everyone does is Google. A huge list comes up for most topics. There’s plenty to explore if people are willing to take the time.

What they should not do is attach themselves to the first several results and then stop. Sometimes the most pertinent, detailed results show up on page five or page six of the search.

To try out an example for my column I searched for George Washington. He wasn’t the first George to come up on the list with his first name. That was British singer George Michael, who died in 2016.

Other Georges listed ahead of Washington included crime victim George Floyd, actor George Clooney and several more that I honestly didn’t know.

The Washington search results were interesting. They proved my point that you have a look at more than just 10 or 12 entries. Some really good resources were placed lower on the list. As with any search, people might look up a topic for different reasons. It might be a young student writing a report. It could be someone who is thinking about a trip to Virginia. It could be a writer of history wanting to write something new, something that hasn’t already been published. That would be a difficult task. It would take pleny of archive research.

It’s important to remember that a Google search is only a first step. It’s like what our $400 sets of encyclopedias did in the past.

One of the volumes that tended to get read the least was the research guide. That was unfortunate. It was a pathway for learning more, for discovering some of the books and articles that might be found in a school or community library.

The encyclopedia articles were fine as a starting point, but they were never intended to be the entire extent of someone’s knowledge.

The situation might be worse in 2023 with Google. It depends on how many people use the search engine, find something basic that they need and stop there.

Like any tool Google is only as useful as someone makes it. A minimum effort will lead to a low grade on a school assignment. For an adult wanting to learn something, it’s just a missed opportunity.

Research isn’t a simple process. It takes practice. It takes a willingness to seek out the unexpected, to look into something that takes an interesting angle.

It’s much like a reporter looking for a story. There’s no shortage of things to write about, even in a small town. It can at times be challenging to find something different, something that can really stand out in the minds of readers.

Those stories are worth the time to look for and pursue. They take more than a minimum effort. When they come together they provide an added reward.

Basically anything worth doing is worth doing well. If anyone over 16 can’t make more than a half-hearted effort, he or she might want to examines their priorities. Life is worth striving for excellence.

— Jim Muchlinski is a longtime reporter and contributor