On February 25, Naver announced that it would abolish its long-held most-searched keyword section. This marks the end of the 16-year-old section that had survived ever since being implemented in May 2015. Naver seems to be following the same path as Daum, which abolished the section earlier that month. Controversial as it is, the void in the web portals where the section used to be still strikes one as awkwardly empty, considering all those years it has been in the direct spotlight of the public.
Admittedly, the most-searched keyword section has functioned as more than just a platform that shows the trendiest issue in real time. This zone that lists keywords with a lot of searches has played a significant role in forming, even swaying, public opinion on an issue. Issues that show up in the section would attract the day’s attention, leading to numerous articles on them.
Being dependent on clicks, the section was inherently prone to intentional manipulations, which contradicts its original purpose of providing essential information conveniently. The vulnerability rendered even the keyword section itself highly controversial when it brought up politically roiling issues. In 2019, the section turned into a battlefield around the designation of Cho Guk as the Minister of Justice when several claims of his illegal involvements had been raised. Also, from time to time, the keyword section has been unfairly dominated by companies wishing to endorse new products by artificially putting them at high search ranks. All in all, the most-searched keyword section was at a dead-end street, confronted by claims that it was misleading and distorting public opinion.
Despite the criticism, removing the section is highly disappointing, given that web portals that big would be equipped with sufficient resources to solve the problems in other ways. Web portals could have introduced new regulations barring the manipulative exploitation of the section and persevered through attempts to undermine the section’s given roles. Therefore, the decision may be called a hasty one, as it resulted in turning a blind eye to the alternatives.
The sudden disappearance of something that has been a part of the daily routine of so many somehow seems irrational, considering all the benefits it unknowingly provided. While the section has been accused of instigating extreme political disputes between web portal users, it also focused public attention on critical issues. Disaster warnings were often listed in the most-searched keyword section, swiftly informing concerned citizens of necessary precautions. Other times, the keyword section functioned as a loudspeaker reporting incidents of unfair oppression against weak subordinates, known as gapjil cases. Effectively raising awareness on the issue, the section was on the side of the weak and oppressed, seeking justice during their darkest hours.
Recently, when fatigued by negative side-effects or complaints on a section, companies somehow choose to irreversibly shut down or remove the problematic section altogether, turning away from all the merits it continuously provided. What the most-searched keyword section might have needed was a proper medication to alleviate the side-effects, not a total termination. Now that all the latest keywords are no longer conveniently presented, a growing number of people will miss the issues that they should be aware of. Ultimately, the implications of the portals’ decision reverberate all the way down to the innocent citizens who have difficulty accessing vital information or those whose desperate cries of pain are not being heard.