Posts about google

Sure to be a best-seller

O’Reilly has a GoogleMaps Hacks book. Can’t have a web site without one these days.

Google sells the world

Watch out: Google will become the auction marketplace for advertising in any medium. They just bought a radio ad company:

Google Inc. agreed to acquire dMarc Broadcasting Inc., a radio advertising firm, for $102 million in cash and additional payments that could be worth up to $1.14 billion if performance targets are met over the next three years.

Newport Beach, Calif.-based dMarc’s technology connects advertisers directly to radio stations. Its technology helps advertisers purchase and track radio ads and lets broadcasters automatically schedule ad spots. Google, Mountain View, Calif., said it plans to integrate dMarc’s technology into its AdWords advertising program.

“Google is committed to exploring new ways to extend targeted, measurable advertising to other forms of media,” said Tim Armstrong, Google vice president of advertising sales, in a press release.

“We anticipate that this acquisition will bring new ad dollars and accountability to radio by combining Google’s expansive network of advertisers with dMarc’s talented team and innovative radio advertising technology,” he said.

Google “news”

About a year ago, GoogleNews got in trouble for selecting a neonazi site as “news.” After a small furor, the site was taken down. Now MediaGuardian is reporting that Google is putting up “news” from the far-right British National Party, led by a man often accused of inciting racial hatred, above the news of reputable sources. My problem with this remains one of transparency: Google does not reveal its policies or sources and should. Because Google won’t reveal its sources, blogger Private Radio began compiling a list and it’s now fascinating reading, by the way.

Google and splog fraud

I can no way to report fraudulant splogs to Google — and that’s a scandal that will affect Google’s own reputation and the value of its advertising. Like others, I’m victimized by a limp-dick spammer copying my text to put up ads and get paid from Google. I’d tell Google about it to protect both them and me. But I can find no means to do that. Come on, Google, you don’t want to make money off theft and fraud. That would be … evil. And besides, it will make you far more vulnerable to the distributed ad networks based on trust that are coming …. soon.

Beware the Googeyman

Business Week media maven Jon Fine sent me a link to his latest column and said I wouldn’t like the idea presented there. He’s quite right. He proposes a vision of the future that is really just a long-dead dream of the big-media past, back before the internet and before big, bad Google, when the big companies controlled content and thought they controlled the world:

What if 2006 is the year big media players take aim at Google’s kneecaps? No, not with more lawsuits; the Authors Guild, the Association of American Publishers — on behalf, in part, of BusinessWeek’s parent company, The McGraw-Hill Companies — and Agence France-Presse have already sued the search behemoth. Rather, picture this: Walt Disney, News Corp., NBC Universal, and The New York Times, in an odd tableau of unity, join together and say: “We are the founding members of the Content Consortium. Next month we launch our free, searchable Web site, which no outside search engines can access…. From now on we’ll make our stuff available and sell ads around it and the searches for it, but only on our terms. Who else wants to join us? Membership’s free.”

Well, that would be hugely stupid. And though huge companies can be stupid, I don’t think they’d be that self-destructive. For the truth of life today — like it or not, lump it or not — is that Google is everyone’s front page. And, yes, that can make life difficult. Google kills brands; Google commodifies everything. But that’s not Google’s fault. That comes part-and-parcel with this new, distributed world where we control the entry to the content we want and where there is no longer a scarcity of content that lets a few big players control it and us. Wishing this weren’t so won’t make it not so.

So when AFP sues Google to stop it from quoting and linking to its stories, it is cutting off its nose to spite its face. When newspapers put content behind pay and archive walls, they are killing their own Googlejuice and thus their audience — that is, the audience are not now attracting to their print products and their brands. When book publishers try to stop Google from indexing books so they can be found, they are killing the words and thoughts in them and cutting them off from the world.

Meanwhile, the smart guys are hiring search-engine-optimization experts and trying to figure out how to get more people to their stuff thanks to Google. See the post below: Walled gardens are no more. Or, if they do exist, they are lonely places populated only by their few, cranky proprietors.

Fine raises the ghost of the last effort at a content consortium: The newspaper industry’s New Century Network. I had the bad fortune to have witnessed and suffered through that clusterfuck. It was a disaster not just because newspaper people can’t get along, as Fine hints, but also because they tried to solve their problems, not the public’s.

: At the same time, we have the self-annointed usability “expert” Jakob Nielsen (didn’t anybody ever tell him that reading lines of text three feet long isn’t very usable?!?) also goes after Google and search engines, calling them leeches because they create an open marketplace that suck more profit out of transactions as they get bigger and more efficient. His sequence sounds right but not his solutions. What we need is competition. What we need is an open ad marketplace. More on that in time….

: LATER: James Robertson has a blunt response. Mark Evans says Google-trashing is just jealousy.

: Seth Godin understands what Jakob is really saying:

Jakob, on the other hand, inadvertently explains why keyword advertising is such a brilliant invention.