Findings from an  Internet snapshot from June 18, 2009:

• Wikipedia emerges within the top two search results for 4/5 of the leading topics.
• At least one social media source emerges within the top 10 search results for every term. In most cases, the social media sites emerge directly above a traditional, major news source, such as WSJ.com.

In a follow-up snapshot on June 24, a marked shift takes place, reaffirming the Iran election story as a watershed moment for online news and communications:

• YouTube emerges within the top 10 search results for all search terms in the second week.
• Wikipedia remains within the top three search results in the second week for four of the five search terms.
• Twitter emerges within the top 20 search results in week two – specifically, the Twitter results for Moussavi and Ahmadinejad. Of course, traditional news sources such as the BBC (and CNN, in week two) bubble to the top of search results, as do general information sites such as Yahoo.com and Infoplease.com.

What this means is that general human curiosity is driving people to look to all available sources for information.  The conflict in Iran presenting the latest and perhaps most sophisticated example of how the world has changed for journalists, the media and increasingly active media consumers alike.

So what else do the search results signify? Is consumer generated media (news by the people, for the people) eclipsing traditional sources? Are people more frequently linking to Wikipedia than the New York Times for information about Iran? What does it mean that Mashable is among the top three search results for “Iran Election?” What role does Twitter play? As major events break (Iran, Health Care, Michael Jackson) we will continue to dive into the data and present answers to these questions, both through our own analysis and through feedback and opinions of others. After all, if weve learned anything in the last few weeks, it’s that the power is in the hands of the people… What do you think?

According to a recent 52-nation online survey conducted by The Nielsen Company, the general consensus among consumers across much of the world is that the media did a poor job informing the public about the issues leading up to the current financial crisis.

In every region, except Latin America, the percent of people who agreed or strongly agreed that media coverage was inadequate outnumbered those who disagreed — by two-to-one.

Q: The news media did not do a good job of informing me of issues that led up to the global financial crisis

EU – Europe
APIMEA – Asia Pacific, India, Middle East and Southern Africa
LA – Latin America
NA – North America

The two regions where consumers were most dissatisfied were Europe and North America. Not surprisingly, these were the areas hit hardest by the current economic crisis. GDP in Western Europe and North America were the lowest among all regions covered.

In North America, 51 percent agreed that coverage leading up to the crisis was inadequate compared to 20 percent who disagreed. In Europe, 48 percent agreed compared to 22 percent.

On the other hand, consumers in many Asia Pacific nations, where the impact of the economy hasn’t been as harsh, were generally less critical of the media.

Discrepancies between nations also reflect varying levels of consumer confidence.

Although Nielsen’s broader survey of global consumer confidence reported a near-universal decline across the world’s population, expectations plummeted significantly in Russia, Hungary and Latvia. These were among the countries where media fared worst. Moreover, among the top five countries where consumers believed there was not enough coverage of the global crisis, four also are where media fared least well overall.

Attitudes about early media coverage were most positive, however, in the Philippines, Pakistan, Indonesia, Venezuela and India, all of which scored above the global average.

Factors that drove the failure to communicate were varied.

Some critics have argued that the financial media was too close to those it covered. What is more, the speed of negative events following the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing caught not only journalists by surprise, but also economists and government officials.

Yet it hasn’t been all bad news for the media. Globally, many of the 25,000-plus consumers polled between March 19 and April 2 believe their performance has improved over time. In much of the Asia Pacific region, the public thought the media was doing a good job in providing information about what the issues are and what governments are doing to address them. And in North America, 50 percent said the current media “is helping me to better understand what governments are doing to solve the problems.” This is almost a complete reversal from opinions about earlier coverage.