Adam McLane

Gospel.com launches today

Gospelcom
Gospel.com launches later this afternoon. It’s so new that I can’t even find a logo for it indexed on Google yet. But this afternoon Brian Tol and his team are promising that one of the coolest Christian websites on the planet will launch.

OK, so it’s not Google
Google
Let’s get that clear. It’s not one of the coolest websites on the planet. But it is going to be a very valuable resource for believers as they will finally have a place where they can easily find trusted content. See, one major problem with the internet for believers is that there is almost no way to gauge good content from good search engine rankings. When you search the internet… you have to sort through a bunch of junk to get a few good things and that’s a waste of time.

So let’s say I want to find an article about "financial planning for Christians." Like 75% of all web searches I head over to Google. When you do that search, as you know, you’ll get 1,670,000 responses. The problem? How do I know the difference between good advice and crap advice? With the way that Google currently works there is no way to determine the difference between some "Christian financial planner" and his advertising and a legitimately good article with advice. (ala Dave Ramsey) Unless you are looking for Dave Ramsey you are just as likely to read bad advice as you are good advice. This is a problem Gospel.com addresses.

Here’s what I like about Gospel.com. When you search a topic there it isn’t a level playing field.
When you search for the topic "financial planning" at Gospel.com you’ll find articles from solid biblically-based resources. How can I say that? How can you know that? Well, the only content you’ll find on Gospel.com is content from Gospel Communication Alliance members. This means that the content that is available on Gospel.com is content that is from a ministry/alliance member who has agreed to be held accountable for content and only publishes content that fits within the evangelical doctrinal statement of the Alliance.

In other words, Gospel.com will make it easier for you to sort the good content from the blog posts and advertising content. And as a side benefit… the good content will get better indexed on Google… thus raising the good contents search ranking on Google, Yahoo, MSN, and the others.

Let’s be clear though: Gospel.com is not some cheesy "alternative" internet world. That simply isn’t the intention of the site at all. It’s not a copy of something else like GodTube is a blatant rip-off of YouTube. This is, pretty much, a brand new brainchild. In other words… instead of copying this idea and making it "Christian" a bunch of creative and forward thinking Christians invented something that is very cool and useful. It’s actually a valuable resource that I am looking forward to using. And with something like 6 million people already going to the site every month (with it not even open) I think Gospel.com is going to make a significant impact quickly.

So, this is my ringing endorsement for Gospel.com. Go there, bookmark it, make it your homepage, love it, use it, tell your friends about it, comment about it, bookmark articles on Digg… on and on.

Did I mention the best part of all? No ads. (Plenty of links though, but no advertising so far.)

Posted

in

by

Adam McLane

Tags:

Comments

6 responses to “Gospel.com launches today”

  1. Brian Avatar
    Brian

    Thanks for the great review, Adam. We just went live a few moments ago.

    Reply
  2. Gene Avatar
    Gene

    Sorry, Adam. One of the first places I found using gospel.com was an article from ACTS International that not only do I not agree with, but I think is truly an piece of inflammatory rhetoric that I would not want to be associated with. Thus, I am not sure that following comment rings true for me:

    “In other words, Gospel.com will make it easier for you to sort the good content from the blog posts and advertising content. And as a side benefit… the good content will get better indexed on Google… thus raising the good contents search ranking on Google, Yahoo, MSN, and the others.”

    At least on Google, Yahoo, MSN I know I’m taking potluck. But to think that someone is now actually lending their endorsement to what I read really saddens me.

    Reply
  3. adam Avatar
    adam

    Nothing like lifting up the body of Christ is there, Gene?

    Reply
  4. Gene Avatar
    Gene

    I’m glad to lift up the body of Christ. What I read was a very poor representation of it, if it was it at all. What I read was only a little less sad than what Westboro Baptist does. I’ve never heard you sarcastically respond to someone who criticized them by saying, “Way to lift up the body of Christ.” If you don’t want me making comments, why ask for them. If you just want positive one’s, I apologize. Then I shall keep silent for I had nothing good to say of what I read.

    Reply
  5. adam Avatar
    adam

    I just didn’t know the body of Christ was called to tear others down? If you have something to say to the author of the article or the ministry that presented it, you could contact them directly. Certainly, everything that you say I wouldn’t agree with… that’s because the body is large and the opinions are wide.

    If you think that the content you saw at Gospel.com doesn’t live up to the stardards they’ve set out, report it! But to offer critiques like “it’s a little less than Westnoro Baptist” is obviously not meant to edify.

    Honestly, if you look at a resource like gospel.com and brush it off by singling out one thing you don’t like… your standards make for a very small world. Thankfully, I’m not as discriminating with my friends… because most of the friends I have online I disagree with significantly often.

    I invite comments. But if you are going to attack something that I obviously like, expect me to bite back and not just rollover.

    Reply
  6. Gene Avatar
    Gene

    Adam, I did indeed make my objections known in the article that I objected to. Interestingly, I find that while my comments were posted at the time, they have sense been removed. I suppose under the small print terms that say that they will remove comments that they don’t like. (Not there exact words, but close to it.)

    Having been there and first reading such an article and then finding that uncomplimentary responses are removed doesn’t speak well for that site. As to other sites they link to, some of them may be just fine. They do provide many links. But why I bothered to post in your blog at all is because I disagreed with your assessment that “Gospel.com will make it easier for you to sort the good content from the blog posts and advertising content.” In my case, the first article I read was nothing more than a blog. And why did I compare it to Westboro? Because in my opinion, that was the shoe that fit.

    And as far as my standards, they may be different than yours, that doesn’t make them small. It doesn’t make them large. They are just different. But in saying that they are going to help “make it easier for you to sort the good content”, you are saying that Gospel.com can be depended on to lead us to gtood stuff. I depended on them, but they failed to lead me to good stuff. If that makes me small minded because I don’t accept everything that Gospel.com did as good, then I’ll accept that label. My critique remains, that at least at Google, Yahoo, and MSN I know better than to think a reference should be trusted in advance. I’ll remember to apply that same standard to Gospel.com in the future as well.

    Reply

Leave a Reply