April 30th, 2007

Google accuses Viacom of 'Unclean Hands': Demands day in court!

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 9:23 pm

Categories: Content, Copyright, Google, Legal

Tags: Google Inc., YouTube Inc., Viacom Inc., Donna Bogatin

UPDATE:  Why Google threatens Internet, not Viacom

Google returned the legal volley to Viacom today, filing an official response with U.S. District Court in the Southern District of New York to Viacom’s March 13 lawsuit which alleges massive intentional copyright infringement of Viacom's entertainment properties.

Viacom seeks more than $1 billion in damages, as well as an injunction prohibiting Google and YouTube from further copyright infringement. In its “Defendant’s Answer and Demand for Jury Trial Today,” Google denied Viacom’s specific allegations, more than 50 individual times.

On July 27, Google and Viacom counsel are scheduled to meet with Judge Louis Stanton to plan the case schedule.

Viacom’s original “indictment” of YouTube:

YouTube is a significant, for-profit organization that has built a lucrative business out of exploiting the devotion of fans to others' creative works in order to enrich itself and its corporate parent Google. Their business model, which is based on building traffic and selling advertising off of unlicensed content, is clearly illegal and is in obvious conflict with copyright laws. In fact, YouTube's strategy has been to avoid taking proactive steps to curtail the infringement on its site, thus generating significant traffic and revenues for itself while shifting the entire burden - and high cost - of monitoring YouTube onto the victims of its infringement.

Google’s counter “indictment” of Viacom:

By seeking to make carriers and hosting providers liable for Internet communications, Viacom’s complaint threatens the way hundreds of millions of people legitimately exchange information, news, entertainment, and political and artistic expression.

Google puts forth a dozen “Defenses”:

1)  DMCA Safe Harbor
2)  License
3)  Fair Use
4)  Failure to Mitigate
5)  Failure to State a Claim
6)  Innocent Intent
7)  Copyright Misuse
8)  Estoppel
9)  Waiver
10) Unclean Hands
11) Laches
12) Substantial Non-Infringing Use

Viacom has “Unclean Hands”?

Google asserts Viacom’s claims are in some way morally tainted even if they may be legally sound; A “court of conscience” ordinarily does not grant relief to a party deemed to have engaged in unconscionable conduct itself, i.e., to one with "unclean hands" in the matter.

Google has “Innocent Intent”?

It didn’t sound that way during the company’s Q1 2007 earnings call:
Google CEO upholds YouTube copyright infringing business model!

ALSO: Why Google threatens Internet, not Viacom
YouTube: Why Google is running scared and
Google’s YouTube is DMCA takedown culprit, NOT Viacom

April 30th, 2007

Google zeal breeds more identity theft risks

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 4:27 pm

Categories: Google, Government, Legal, Privacy

Tags: Google Inc., Search Engine, Identity Theft, Donna Bogatin

Google CEO Eric Schmidt continues on his never ending quest to “organize” ALL of the world’s information, including ALL of the world’s citizens’ personal information.

Google proudly announces today: “partnerships with the states of Arizona, California, Utah and Virginia to make it easier to search for hard-to-find public information on state government websites.”

Hard to find no more. Thanks? to Google.

What “hard-to-find” information about the citizens of the states of Arizona, California, Utah and Virginia will no longer be hard to find at Google.com as well?

Individuals’ Social Security numbers, for starters.

According to Google:

These partnerships developed as both Google and officials with the four state governments recognized that the public is increasingly turning to search engines like Google to access government services, but that a significant share of the information on state agency websites is not included in its index of information sources on the web. As a result, many online government services can be difficult for the public to find.

In January 2007 comments to the Identity Theft Task Force of the Federal Trade Commission, The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) stated:

Government and private agencies that collect and store excessive amounts of often unnecessary personal information in systems that lack adequate privacy and security safeguards. The best long-term approach to the problem of identity theft is to minimize the collection of personal information and to develop alternative technologies and organizational practices. 

Minimize the collection of personal information by the government? That is NOT search engine music to Google’s ears:

J.L. Needham, who manages Google's public-sector content partnerships, said at least 70% of visitors to government websites get there by using commercial search engines. But too often, he said, Web searches do not turn up the information people are looking for simply because government computer systems aren't programmed in a way that allows commercial search engines to access their databases.

Still, if users can't get the information they're looking for, they blame the search engine, not the government, Needham lamented. The remedy, which Google has been working on with state technology officers for roughly six months, is to create virtual roadmaps by which search engines can find the databases that store public records.

"We have a vested interest in ensuring that the results we provide in every area, including government services, are high-quality, authoritative and trustworthy," he said (as cited by the Associated Press).

Vested Google interest in the personal records of state residents indeed.

Marc Rotenberg, EPIC executive director though said many public health and financial records shouldn't necessarily be widely available because they often contain citizens' Social Security numbers.

Among much other personal, private, NO need for Google’s spiders to know data.

ALSO: Google user data cloud: Do you trust it? and
Google vs. Google on privacy, or not and
Google plots server farm land grab in Europe

April 30th, 2007

Yahoo: Right Media, or Social Media Junk CPM story?

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 1:39 pm

Categories: Advertising, Yahoo

Tags: Yahoo! Inc., Media, Inventory, Social Media, Donna Bogatin

What a difference five months and $680 million makes!

Yahoo hailed the advantages of its premium display advertising business in its Q3 2006 earnings call by touting it against “a whole proliferation of a lot of inventory in sort of the lower end of the non-premium range”:

A lot of the social media stuff, a lot of the network stuff that is being created, a lot of the ad networks are able to serve it. That is really focused on the low-end of the people who are not interested in the environments that they are in. They are simply interested in a specific performance ratio.

Defensively, in October, Yahoo bought a minority stake in Right Media, billed as the “largest emerging online advertising exchange.” Offensively, Yahoo is now acquiring the other 80% of Right Media, for $680 million in satock and cash.

Why? The inventory sold through the Right Media exchange is still of low-end, pre-emptable quality, not the high-end, premium priced inventory that Yahoo hangs its online advertising hat on.

In October, Yahoo underscored an “inventory glut” around social media, or User Generated Content (UGC); Yahoo reiterated today that USERS are only going to GENERATE more CONTENT, for more of the non-premium type inventory.

Yahoo on the “inventory glut” in October:

It has definitely been a huge change. You can see from the page views of a lot of the social media sites that exist today. That is going to change the market dynamics.

As the mix of online inventory continues to reflect an inexorable growth of lower quality UGC fare, the “market dynamics” continue to shift as well, downward. Negative pricing pressure will further deteriorate the market value of already lower priced inventory.

Why does Yahoo want in then? If you can’t beat them, rule them. Yahoo has to be a dominant player in any and every way the online advertising marketplace moves.

The market is going through a significant transition with new forms of inventory becoming available from a range of new and established competitors. This market shift represents great opportunity for Yahoo and we have already begun taking necessary steps. 

Right Media is the Yahoo “response to the changing mix of available inventory.”

Rather than acknowledge the low pricing power of the billions of ad impressions that Right Media transacts daily, however, Yahoo is selling its high-priced investment in the low-end exchange as an inventory price booster! 

Yahoo will also join the Right Media exchange and offers advertisers the ability to bid on Yahoo’s non-premium inventory through the open marketplace. This relationship gives Yahoo! an opportunity to lead and influence the development of this new and innovative marketplace. It makes it easier for marketers to purchase Yahoo inventory and has the potential to increase yield on non-premium inventory.

So said Yahoo in October. Now, Yahoo claims Right Media has delivered; 50% increases in pricing for the Yahoo low-end inventory accorded to Right Media over the past months. 

What is a 50% increase in Social Media Junk CPMs anyway? More junk? Is anything really significantly better than nothing? 

Moreover, Yahoo has not even accorded Right Media much in the way of its own inventory, to support its historical price boosting contention. 

No worry, Right Media to the metrics rescue, to report miraculous pricing power.

From Right Media, on the incredible 771% story of client “Tickle”: 

Like many web publishers, Tickle regarded non-premium inventory as leftover: it never seemed valuable enough to warrant taking time away from premium sales. Accordingly, they had no real strategy for managing non-premium inventory, choosing instead to offload it to a few ad networks and monetize it as best as they could. If they made a few pennies off it, it was better than making nothing. Without adding management resources, it was a difficult business to scale.

Tickle’s perspective changed when they realized how valuable their non-premium inventory really was: direct response advertisers are spending more money than ever on remnant impression

They found one solution on the market: Publisher Media Exchange. With an automated system that allows buyers to openly compete for every non-premium impression in real-time, Tickle scaled their business without taxing resources and increased non-premium revenue by 771%. 

Don’t expect a get rich quick report from Yahoo though, so advises Susan Decker, Yahoo CFO.

ALSO: Web 2.0 Social Media: Voyeurs rule, not amateurs! and
MySpace: Worth it, or not? and
Push Google off its search advertising throne? Not so FAST!

April 30th, 2007

Google fights against Click Fraud? Yes, BUT No

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 9:59 am

Categories: Click Fraud, Google, Yahoo

Tags: Google Inc., Advertisement, Yahoo! Inc., Click Fraud, Fraud, Advertiser, Donna Bogatin

The Google machine is fueled by SPIN, I said earlier in the year: "Google’s secret weapon is a four letter word."

BUT, Can Google SPIN conquer everything, even the scourge of click fraud?

Google Trust & Safety exec, Shuman Ghosemajumder, continues to try his darndest!

I met one-on-one with Ghosemajumder and separately with his Yahoo counterpart, Reggie Davis, Vice President of Marketplace Quality, earlier this month in New York City.

By pure scheduling happenstance, my Yahoo meeting transpired before my Google meeting. Consequently, when I met with Ghosemajumder, I had already published a report on my discussion with Davis.

Nevertheless, my Yahoo story appeared online but an hour or two before my scheduled meeting with Google. I was a bit surprised then, that the first course of Google business in my meeting with Ghosemajumer was a Google desire to one-up Yahoo’s position on click fraud, as specifically headlined in my report.

My Yahoo story headlined Click Fraud: Yahoo wants audits!

Ghosemajumder assured me right out of the Google click fraud gate, Google wants click fraud audits too, BUT…

BUT being the operative word. Why BUT, why the need to qualify an affirmative?

“Only if they mean something,” Ghosemajumder said.

How So? Does that imply that Yahoo and all other concerned parties only want click fraud audits if they DON’T mean anything?

I put forth a considerable effort in soliciting Ghosemajumder to itemize under what terms Google WOULD accept click fraud audits, that WOULD “mean something.” (Google to host Click Fraud day for advertisers)

Of course, meaningful specifics about what would be meaningful are conveniently waved off, as details could risk helping the “fraudsters,” Google warns.

Ghosemajumder is playing the Click Fraud BUT game once again, in a blog rebuttal to a third-party click fraud advisory service championed initiative, “Cornerstone Principles for Pay-Per-Click Quality Improvement” introduced by Tom Cuthbert, CEO, ClickForensics.

An example of the latest Google Yes BUT No anti-click fraud stance:

Proposed Principal:  Advertisers should never pay for double clicks or repeat clicks from the same session.

(YES) I agree that advertisers should not be charged for double clicks. (BUT)

While the activity of comparison shopping is a common reason that multiple clicks to the same ad can occur within a short period of time, if the clicks occur so close together that they could only be caused by double-clicking or malicious repeated clicking, the extra clicks clearly provide no value to the advertiser.

But “same session” is not defined here, and it would be bad for advertisers to define it in a way that would exclude comparison shopping. For example, if publishers and search engines decided not charge for multiple clicks on an ad within the same day, they would redesign their ad systems to not show that advertiser’s ad the second time a user searched on the same keyword, since showing ads which produce no revenue is not desirable. But this would deny that advertiser the opportunity to have a user who was comparison shopping revisit their site, and that would rob them of sales opportunities.

Google SPIN cheerfully turns double-triple-quadruple clicking by the same person on the same AdWord as “comparison shopping.” Perhaps it is, but that doesn’t mean that the Google cash register should repeatedly ring up the same PPC sale.

So-called “comparison shopping” is not the complaint, re-charging for same visitor clicks on the same ad is the click fraud problem!

BUT, how can a Google advertiser resist the Googley plea of PLEASE don’t let those pesky third party click fraud analysts rob YOU of sales?

By steadfastly reiterating: Why Click Fraud is NOT case closed!

And repeatedly asking: Click Fraud Audits: What is IAB’s dog in the fight?

April 30th, 2007

Push Google off its search advertising throne? Not so FAST!

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 8:01 am

Categories: AdWords, Advertising, Google Ads, ROI, Search, Search Advertising

Tags: Google Inc., Internet Search Advertising, Advertisement, Ask.com, Donna Bogatin

Another day, another company that claims to be the one that will dethrone $150 billion market cap, and “everyone’s favorite garage band,” Google from its search advertising kingdom.

Who is the latest to put forth the would-be Google slayer, along with potential killer of perennial runner-up Yahoo and slow out of the gate Microsoft?

FAST, an Oslo-based enterprise search company: "Why shouldn’t you be in control of your search and contextual advertising?" The search technology vendor exhorts in touting the “unveiling” of FASTMedia, an end-to-end business platform for media companies:

As a media company, you know that search and contextual advertising is the fastest growing online advertising segment. But how can you tap this explosive revenue opportunity when the "big three" dominate search-based advertising? Is outsourcing your only option or can you compete on your own?

FAST AdMomentum is an end-to-end advertising and search monetization solution that gives media companies the control and independence needed to protect and extend online advertising revenue.

Indeed, Why SHOULDN’T companies be in control of their own advertising?

That is the question I have been asking IAC owned number five search engine Ask for months!

I spoke at length with Ask CEO Jim Lanzone: “Jim Lanzone’s vision for Ask.com: ‘Real Deal’ Interview” and chatted with IAC CEO Barry Diller about Ask at the Media Summit New York City: IAC CEO Barry Diller on Ask.com.

Last month, I underscored Google, LookSmart power Ask.com advertising, asking “If Ask.com is the “glue” for IAC’s most admired brands, why is it not standing more on its own two Web advertising feet?”

Diller was also asked at the IAC Q4 2006 conference call if it wouldn’t be more advantageous long-term to handle all advertising in-house? 

Diller: As far as doing it ourselves, we thought originally and we continue to do work in this area. We do do it ourselves; we do all sorts of ad products inside Ask.com for ourselves, for our own account. But as far as the ad network business, there are, as you know, three players in it currently. I think there probably won't be a fourth. At some point, I can't say what will happen out of the growth of advertising in this area, but right now, I would much, much, much prefer to rent it. I think that we will be well-served by that, certainly for a period of time.

Why? Because “in-house” for Ask is a very small house. The Ask ROI bottom-line calculation is which yields more $$$ for IAC: One hundred percent of what WE can potentially book, or XX% of what we know GOOGLE books?

The Google search advertising crown is indeed firmly bestowed upon Google’s worldwide shoulders.

Not only does Google have a commanding lead in the absolute number of advertisers it can immediately bring to a media site’s contextual table with no cost-of-sales attached, the large pool of AdWords buyers means more advertisers bidding up each others’ prices, so higher CPC fees for all!

I said it to Yahoo’s Panama, and I say it to FAST’s AdMomentum: The way to out Google Google is not by trying to be a more Googley Google.

Google innovated its way to search advertising royalty; It will only be unseated from its throne by superior innovation.

ALSO: CBS Radio to Google, YouTube: No thanks, we built TargetSpot!

April 30th, 2007

Yahoo all in Right Media @ $680 million

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 4:58 am

Categories: Advertising, Business Models, CEO Interviews, VC, Venture Capital, Yahoo

Tags: Advertisement, Yahoo! Inc., Media, DoubleClick Inc., Donna Bogatin

UPDATE April 30:  Yahoo: Right Media, or Social Media Junk CPM story?

Yahoo bought a 20 percent stake in Right Media last October and is now set to pay approximately $680 million, in equal parts of stock and cash, for the remaining interest in the company.

UPDATE April 4: Who needs Right Media? DoubleClick plans to announce today that it is setting up a Nasdaq-like exchange for the buying and selling of digital advertisements. The new DoubleClick advertising exchange will bring Web publishers and advertising buyers together on a Web site where they can participate in auctions for ad space.

DoubleClick views the exchange as the centerpiece of a growth plan and may derive the majority of revenue from the new service within five years, said David Rosenblatt, CEO: “We already have the largest sellers and the largest buyers. This will link them for the first time.

NOVEMBER 1, 2006: Does Right Media have the right solution for increasing yield on non-premium advertising inventory online? Yahoo CEO Terry Semel believes it does.

Yahoo recently took a 20% equity position in the nascent firm, at a cost of close to $45 million.

Calling Right Media the “largest emerging online advertising exchange for buying and selling ad inventory,” Semel said at Yhaoo’s Q3 conference call:

The market is going through a significant transition with new forms of inventory becoming available from a range of new and established competitors…in response to the changing mix of available inventory…we  will also join the Right Media exchange…This relationship gives Yahoo an opportunity to lead and influence the development of this new and innovative marketplace. It makes it easier for marketers to purchase Yahoo inventory and has the potential to increase yield on non-premium inventory.

Right Media is also funded by RedPoint Ventures and has raised a total of about $55 million to date.  

I spoke today with Michael Walrath, Right Media founder and CEO, to discuss his vision for Right Media.

Walrath, a DoubleClick veteran, founded Right Media in 2003 to “transform the business of online advertising.” For Walrath, there has traditionally been an uneven playing field in interactive media and he is on a mission to bring “efficiency, value and standardization” to every transaction.

How does Right Media attain such goals, while aiming to make a tidy profit?

More than two billion impressions are traded daily through the Right Media Exchange and Right Media gets a piece of each one.

According to Walrath, Right Media Exchange is the first of its kind open media exchange for the interactive advertising industry:

An open marketplace is a better place to do business. Buyers, sellers and service providers of any size connect to each other easily, access more media and trade at fair market value. Right Media's role is not to dictate how media is bought and sold, but to provide an environment where companies can make better choices, grow their business and add value to the community.

Right Media Exchange boasts more than 11,000 advertisers, ad networks and publishers in its network. Walrath is confident that “everyone wins”:  

Ad Networks drive better results for their advertisers and publishers,

Advertisers control performance globally and maximize ROI,

Publishers allocate each impression to the highest bidder and maximize revenue,

Technology Providers create, market and distribute technology solutions to a broad community of users through an open platform and set of APIs.

Right Media Exchange’s platform helps optimize the buying and selling of digital media:

Top-tier publishers with billions of non-premium ad impressions have to think strategically about turning all of those undersold assets into real revenue. When publishers simply put that inventory in the hands of third-party intermediaries, they inevitably leave money on the table.

Top-tier publisher Yahoo may not want to leave money on the interactive advertising table, but it is happy to commit a lot of money to sit at Right Media’s open media exchange table.

UPDATE: Yahoo: Right Media, or Social Media Junk CPM story?

April 30th, 2007

CBS Radio to Google, YouTube: No thanks, we built TargetSpot!

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 4:42 am

Categories: Advertising, Google, Google Ads, Local, Marketing, Media, Radio, VC, Venture Capital, Video, YouTube

Tags: Google Inc., Advertisement, Radio, YouTube Inc., CBS Broadcasting Inc., Donna Bogatin

UPDATE: TargetSpot targets June 28 launch date.

Jeffrey M. Haley, CEO, Radio Advertising Bureau, on the $20 billion industry: "Revenues have been flat for the past five years ut the radio industry is committed to growing revenues and finding new ways to make it more efficient and easier to buy advertising."

How so? TargetSpot to the (would be) rescue.

APRIL 26, 2007: What is TargetSpot? 

A revolutionary new advertising platform that enables businesses of all sizes and budgets to advertise their products and services to the ever-growing Internet radio listening audience. Streaming video capabilities soon as well. 

With TargetSpot, you can create ads using a suite of easy-to-use production tools or simply upload your own ads, and then use innovative Targeting, Campaign Management and Bidding systems to determine who hears your message, where they hear it, how they hear it and when they hear it. 

Sound Googley familiar, as in Google Radio Audio Ads perhaps? Google is not the brainchild behind TargetSpot though, CBS Radio is!

CBS Radio is founding partner of the new venture and will use the technology on its more than 100 music, talk, sports and news radio stations broadcasting live online. 

Doug Perlson, CEO and co-founder: 

This is the first platform to allow all businesses, regardless of size, to easily and cost-efficiently utilize streaming media advertising. TargetSpot democratizes what has traditionally been the domain of large advertisers with big creative budgets. 

Has Perlson been listening to the Google Ad Sales pitches? TargetSpot touts:

Reach listeners nationwide or locally.
Advertise to a demographically desirable audience.
Target customers across the country, by region, by state or by market, or in your service area, right down to the Zip code.

How did TargetSpot come to be?

TargetSpot has been in development for over a year and originated from CBS Radio's desire for a in-house end to end ad serving solution for the streaming radio stations it operates.

TargetSpot’s core technology was built in collaboration with Oddcast. Perlson was recruited to turn the technology into an independent business and to expand into streaming video as well. Perslon hails from Seevast (formerly Kanoodle) and About.com.

Union Square Ventures, a founding financial partner, on the opportunity:

TargetSpot is a full-featured ad network that supports a wide range of hyper-targeting technologies that make it possible for local and national advertisers to comfortably place, target, and buy internet radio. TargetSpot also features a self serve bidded advertising market like what is provided by Google and others in the search advertising world to make it easy for the small business to purchase audio advertising.

The TargetSpot platform:

• Powerful Targeting - Target your ads locally or nationally with full control over the audiences you want to reach.
• Free Ad Creation - Access a suite of free and easy-to-use tools to create your own ads!
• Easy Management - Manage and control every aspect of your ad campaigns through one interface.
• Market-Based Bidding - Purchase your ads through a market-based bidding system that is designed to give everyone a fair chance at reaching desirable audiences based on what they are willing to pay.
• Timely Reports - Access timely reports so you can monitor the effectiveness of your advertising on a daily, monthly or annual basis.

TargetSpot starts with CBS Radio online, next streaming video…then terrestrial radio?

Is Google worried? Google Audio Ads are aligned with ClearChannel, under 5% of its inventory that is.

CBS Radio is going the who needs Google route, for now at least.

SEE: Google Radio: Can Clear Channel REALLY save it? and
Why Google will NOT rule the world! and
Google: The REAL Dish on EchoStar TV ad sales deal

April 29th, 2007

Microsoft to Google: Slow down! Is Steve Ballmer right?

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 2:32 pm

Categories: Business Models, Google, Microsoft

Tags: Google Inc., Advertisement, Steve Ballmer, Microsoft Corp., Donna Bogatin

Google may not be INSANE as Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer recently lobbed, but CEO Eric Schmidt may very well be biting off more than he and his merry band of Googlers can successfully chew.

Google’s high-speed battle with Microsoft I analyzed last month, and the race continues!

What has transpired since Ballmer’s public chiding of Google’s faster than the speed of light way of doing business?

Google buys Marratech e-meeting startup: Nerd paradise?

Is Google truly a friend of entrepreneurs when it “thinks small” in scooping up fledging start-ups at barely more than asset value in order to neutralize potential competition, bag engineering talent and fatten up its library of code.

Where is JotSpot, after last year’s Google buyout of the small application Wiki start-up? The Jotspot.com Website remains unchanged six months after the Google absorption, much as the Dodgeball Website remained in a time-warp following its move to Google servers.

The Dodgeball founders got tired of waiting for their Google migration to bear fruits.

Google Radio: Can Clear Channel REALLY save it?

How “hot” will Google profits be from brokering someone else’s radio inventory? Off the bat, Clear Channel will "receive the majority of the ad revenue."

Don’t count on the AdWords blind auctions, in Google’s sole favor, advertisers bid up their own prices, no obvious ceiling to monetization, $150 billion market cap GOOG fuel. Perhaps, Google may break even for its efforts.

Google DoubleClick merger: Who wins, who loses

Google insists its $3.1 billion is being committed for one simple motivation: To “make advertising on the Internet work better,” for everyone.  Who would resist such Googley do-goodness?

Users who proactively protect their privacy by opting out of the DoubleClick DART cookie ID, perhaps?Or, maybe publishers and marketers not wishing to put all their advertising eggs in one big, transparent only to Google, banner, search, video…online basket…Google DoubleClick marriage (can be) risky business.

Google: The REAL Dish on EchoStar TV ad sales deal

Google’s offline advertising expertise to date has solely been about tests, radio advertising tests, newspaper advertising tests, magazine advertising tests…The outcomes to date of all of Google’s offline advertising tests?

The jury is NOT still out, the jury has been sent home, along with Google's dMarc Broadcasting radio advertising platform founders!

What else did Google do since Ballmer’s “la la la, its twenty percent, twenty percent, we don’t have to do anything new, we just have to do it twenty percent more next year" parody of the Google Wall Street darling?

Report another blowout quarter: Google paints $3.7 billion pretty picture.

There is a flaw in the Google work of art, however, it is a one-dimensional painting: 99% AdWords pure.

Wall Street is starting to hunger for more on the Google plate than billion of dollars worth of high-margin online text ads, especially now that Google has shown its willingness to draw down its cash reserves for a big acquisition and step-up its high-cost data center build-out.

Google is also starting to show a little wear and tear on its diversifications roll-out:

Google Office enterprise security snafu

Google dumped by Dodgeball founders

YouTube: Why Google is running scared

IS STEVE BALLMER RIGHT?

 Loading ...

April 29th, 2007

YouTube hosts Authors @ Google: Beware, NO talking back!

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 6:12 am

Categories: Culture, Google, Social Media, Video, YouTube

Tags: Google Inc., YouTube Inc., Donna Bogatin

YouTube’s top marketing exec Suzie Reider is fond of extolling the real “conversations” that YouTube hosted videos spark amongst YouTubers, warning prospective marketers not to “mess up” the “authentic” YouTube community.

Why then does Google not wish to spark authentic conversation around its own videos that it posts to YouTube?

Google proudly promotes its “Authors @ Google” program bringing “authors of all stripes to Google for informal talks centering on their recently published books.”

Moreover, Google shares “these remarkable conversations with the world outside the Googleplex via YouTube.”

Unfortunately for the world outside the Googleplex, however, Google has cut off the conversation about the conversations, at YouTube:

We invite you to check out all the extraordinary people who've taken part in the Authors@Google program so far, and enjoy one of our videos today…(BUT) Adding comments have been disabled.

YouTube advises its marketers to embrace YouTuber interaction, come what may. Why then does Google not encourage its own community of YouTubers to interact with its own Google videos?

Google’s YouTube posting of Andrea Mitchell’s appearance at the Googleplex presents the ultimate irony.

Andrea Mitchell discusses her memoir, "Talking Back," at Google's Mountain View, CA, headquarters. This event took place on March 16, 2006, as part of the Authors@Google series.

(BUT) Adding comments have been disabled for this video.

In other Google words to YouTubers, don’t YOU talk back to Mitchell’s “Talking Back”!

ALSO: WEB 2.0 SOCIAL MEDIA: VOYEURS RULE, NOT AMATEURS!

April 28th, 2007

Google CEO gets Clinton support for Google Health initiative

Posted by Donna Bogatin @ 6:40 pm

Categories: Google, Government, Hillary Clinton, Political Campaign, Politics, President Clinton, Presidential Race

Tags: Health, Google Inc., Health Care, Hillary Clinton, Donna Bogatin

Google CEO Eric Schmidt to Hillary Clinton: Welcome to Google!

Senator Hillary Clinton: I am thrilled to be at the “best place to work in America” that is “helping to invent the future” and has “revolutionized the way we live, work, think…”

So began a one on one in February between the leader of one of the most powerful corporations in the world and the Democratic frontrunner in the race to become the next leader of the most powerful country in the world.

The Clinton chat with Schmidt before an audience of Googlers took place after Clinton privately meet at the Googleplex with Silicon Valley leaders.

The Schmidt led Q & A offered presidential candidate Clinton an opportunity to present her stands on major election issues, such as Iraq, the environment…

Schmidt concluded the chat by offering Senator Clinton an opportunity to also present her stands on major issues of concern to Google, such as Google’s medical push.

Schmidt set-up to Clinton:

These are the people that make Google a success. You are a Google user. How can Google help your vision happen?

Clinton return:

When Eric was showing me around, we stopped at the Google Health team office, we can not get to Universal Health Care coverage unless we have a much better information base that is very reliable that people can turn to make decisions on their own, to be empowered as consumers of health care, that is something I know you are working on and we really need you to be aggressively pursuing that.

We do need more Information Technology generally in health care, if you’ve gone to a new doctor, they probably took a new history on paper, they probably don’t have electronic medical records, if you go to a doctor out of state, they’ll have to do it all over again, because they probably can’t transfer what you have at your doctor.

The health sector is woefully deficient in Information Technology, any way you can help us move our health sector into the 21st century will help us to get a base of information on which we can make better decisions to provide health care for everybody.

Sound familiar to the December 2006 “Connecting Americans to Their Health Care: Empowered Consumers, Personal Health Records and Emerging Technologies” speech of Google Vice President Adam Bosworth?

YES. See Google scary now? Personal Health Records, sponsored by Google, next for exactly how familiar.