WHEN Aaron and Kaylene Barker were looking for names for their first child, they wrote an entry in the family weblog inviting their friends to “name the Barker baby”. Among the hundreds of suggestions they received was an intriguing note suggesting that they consider the infant’s “Googleability”.

In the age of internet search engines and “egosurfing” – the practice of looking up your own name to see how many references you can find – the Barkers were urged to consider whether they wanted an unusual name that might figure prominently in Google search results or a common name that would provide greater privacy.

In the end, the Barkers named their new son Dallin Aaron – an unusual combination of family names that seems certain to produce a prominent position in any future Google search for “Dallin Barker”.

Not every parent is looking for prominence, however. When Meredith P wrote in her blog about the birth of her child, she gave his name as Finn*egan J*ames, so her blog entries would not start showing up in internet searches for James Joyce or Finnegans Wake.

“For some tech-focused families, ‘Googleability’ is now a prime baby-naming requirement,” said Laura Wattenberg, who runs an internet baby naming advice site.

Should parents really be worrying about how Google lists their children? “It seems obsessive and just a little bit disturbing,” said David Utter, a writer for WebProNews.

Yet parents argue that while it does not matter much to a baby where its name appears in internet searches, it may become critical once future teachers and employers start running background checks.

According to the Ask.com search engine, more than 80% of US executive recruiters use such searches to check the background of job candidates.

Times Recommends

• Over the Wall
• Why Africa welcomes the ‘new colonialism’
• Which will come out on top: paper or gold?