John Battelle's Searchblog

No. Really. Watch this space.

(image)
From a source who is in a position to know, news that Google's DoubleClick competitor will be ... free for all to use. Like Analytics. Think about that for a moment. How did Microsoft kill Netscape? Yup, made the browser free. How will Google try to own the entire ad serving biz? Make it free. Why would they do this? Because the most valuable thing in the world of advertising is not the commodity , it's the information the commodity will provide.

Providing a scaled ad serving solution? Free. Knowing the margins of every media and marketing company in the world? Priceless.

And who figured this out? Why, Google's partners, who have been nervous ever since the YouTube acquisition. Think about it. Newscorp was ready to sign a deal with Google for their ad server, sources tell me, but they got nervous about "the fox in the hen house." And then, what happened? Newcorp went and bought SDC, an ad serving technology and inventory optimization company. Sure makes sense now.

Hmmmmm. It just gets more and more innaresting. Note Barry Diller on Google today in an FT interview:

FT: Do you think Google has taken the right approach, has had the right attitude in its negotiations with the content creators?

MR DILLER: I don’t know. They’re an impossible situation.

FT: Why?

MR DILLER: Because they bought a company and paid fair value for it. They paid what they paid.

FT: Did they pay too much?

MR DILLER: I’m just saying, they paid what they paid. It is too early to tell, and they’ve got this wonderful site with a huge amount of traffic, and that traffic primarily is dependent upon things other people own. So, you go to them and you say, Okay, let’s make a deal. And they look at what you’ve just paid for the service itself, and say, Well, you know, we actually deserve some of that. And Google says, Well, no you don’t. So it is a very difficult tug between what is now an every hour mention, Google, in everything it does, and these people who actually own the stuff, so I’m not saying they handled it well or badly. I think it is a very tough negotiation, handled by Henry Kissinger.

My advice to Google? Don't make it free. Make it better, make it cheaper, and let those who use it own the data. Ah, hell, make it free, but let those who use it own the data and guarantee them you won't use it to your advantage. But then....why do it at all?

Hmmm.

I have a lot of respect for Pat McGovern, he backed me when I was young (at the Industry Standard ) and he let me make mistakes, but we butted heads more than we agreed, and unfortunately, we could not see our way to making that business work.

I had pretty much left it at that till I read this interview on MediaShift. Asked why the Standard died, McGovern claims that management (er, that'd be me) refused to sell and blindly pursued an IPO. For the record, he has this entirely backwards. I tried for all of 2000 to get Mr. McGovern to let us sell the company to a stronger buyer, one who believed in our vision of the Internet Economy. He refused, and pushed us to go public instead. It was this very conflict that led to our differences and, partially, to our demise. I had three very real offers on the table that I took to McGovern, and three times he refused them, telling me that instead, we'd make more taking the company public or, at the very least, telling the potential buyer to double the price. Given that the price was between $250mm and $750mm, such a response was, to my mind, non sensical. But he owned the majority of the shares, and his word was what mattered.

McGovern taught me a lot, and I'd wager he may have learned a thing or two from me as well. But while not many things get me upset, this attempt at revisionist history requires it's own revision. Now, onwards....

Will Social Networks and Vertical Search Combine to Challenge Google?

TripSync: Streamlines Travel Plans

Playing Nice with Google

New Service Creates Custom News Sites

Another Day and Another Video Search Service Announced, This Time from TV Guide

Will Social Networks and Vertical Search Combine to Challenge Google?

BeetTV says so:

Beet.TV has learned that You Tube will introduce new functionality to its platform tonight which will allow users to organize clips around specific categories.

Up to now, clips saved to an account or uploaded to dedicated channel are organized in what often seems a random process -- usually arranged chronologically, but not always.

The new interface will allow users to organize clips according to designated categories.

I can't imagine that such a feature was anything but "long time coming...."

Related: Gary has a list of YouTube like mobile apps...

A good roundup of the etech debate over YouTube's use of the DMCA can be found at NewTeeVee:

Cuban used the the evening to shed some light on his position. He thinks Google should be held liable for copyright infringements because YouTube doesn’t establish commercial relations with its users, in effect allowing them to upload videos with fake accounts and without any verification of their identity. This distinguishes the site, in his eyes, from traditional web hosters, who are protected from the misdeeds of their users through the “safe harbor provisions” of the DMCA. Says Cuban: “If you are a web host it should be natural to know who your customers are.”

Von Lohmann disagreed with the notion that there is a clear line between YouTube-like sites and traditional web hosting businesses. He illustrated his point by bringing up other companies that are also offering their services for free. “What about Hotmail? What about free web hosters? What about Six Apart?” he kept asking. “What about Pando? Should they be held liable too?”

Google does not take third party ad tags. That means that if you want to advertise on Google, you have to run your creative through Google. But a huge portion of the advertising world that Google is now going after - graphical CPM ads - runs through third party ad servers like DoubleClick.

Now, DoubleClick is for sale, the WSJ reports. Actually, I've heard it's been shopped since early last year, but anyway....Microsoft is seen as an interested suitor.

Google can't let this stand. It's a major risk to its business to force advertisers to change behavior - it needs a third party ad serving solution.

So it will, without a doubt, build one. More soon.

Continue reading "Reader Hercule DB Writes..." »

GigaOm on Google and its video problem...

Google's giving bikes out to employees, G B'scoped says. What, the Segway isn't enough?

With respect, I disagree with #6 here. See this post.

Man, I wish I was at etech. I am missing it for the first time in three years. A roundup...

More Google focus on mobile...and mobile ads are hot...

Microsoft has a new search head.... (more)

Oh, via SEL, Timesearch. I love the concept.

More Panama good news.

So Yahoo is feeling generous, unlimited mail storage, TechCrunch reports...

Wow, Best Buy bought my ISP. Huh.

The Microsoft iPhone.

Every so often, Rich gets up and rips one off. His most recent is called "How to beat Google, part 1."

From it:

Our entire industry is scared witless by Google's dominance in search and advertising. Microsoft and Yahoo have been unsuccessful at staunching the bleeding of their search market share. VCs parrot the Google PR FUD machine that you need giant datacenters next to hydroelectric dams to compete. They spout nonsense about how startups should just use Alexa's crawl and put some ajax on top of it. Ye gods.

Grow a spine people! You have a giant growing market with just one dominant competitor, not even any real #2. You're going to do clean-tech energy saving software to shut off lightbulbs in high-rises instead? Pfft. Get a stick and try to knock G's crown off.

Google, Microsoft, Yahoo... It's now a war of distribution as much as innovation. Why do I say this? Read on, a release from Google:

LG ELECTRONICS AND GOOGLE TEAM UP TO ENHANCE THE MOBILE EXPERIENCE

LG Handsets to integrate Google Search, Google Maps for mobile, Blogger Mobile and Gmail for mobile

Seoul, Korea, and Orlando, Florida March 28, 2007 - LG Electronics (LG), a leading worldwide provider of advanced wireless handsets and accessories, and Google today announced a global collaboration to pre-install Google's services on millions of LG mobile phones. Mobile users around the world will now be able to easily search for information, find locations, update blogs and manage email while on the move.

"Building on our efforts to set new standards for wireless handsets, we are excited to partner with Google to offer extra value to consumers with enhanced mobile Internet experiences,” said Mr. Paul Bae, Vice President of the Product Planning Team at LG Electronics Mobile Communications Company. "LG's mobile devices, combined with Google, will provide consumers with easy access to their favorite Internet services even without a PC and make it easy for them to stay connected while in motion.”

Say it with me: Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution!

Previously in the distribution wars: Dell, Facebook, AOL, Pack....

Remember when the DOJ went on that enormous fishing exercise under the guise of defending/resurrecting COPA, the Child Online Protection Act? Well, a Ed Felten tell us that the Federal judge just killed the act dead. We hope.

This is the end of a long legal process that started with the passage of COPA in 1999. The ACLU, along with various authors and publishers, immediately filed suit challenging COPA, and Judge Reed struck down the law. The case was appealed up to the Supreme Court, which generally supported Judge Reed’s ruling but remanded the case back to him for further proceedings because enough time had passed that the technological facts might have changed. Judge Reed held another trial last fall, at which I testified. Now he has ruled, again, that COPA is unconstitutional.

My pal Jonathan Weber emailed me with a special code for any Searchblog readers who might want to register for the conference I referenced here. Use code SPK0607 for $150 off!

Playing Nice with Google

New Service Creates Custom New Sites

Another Day and Another Video Search Service Announced, This Time from TV Guide

Will Social Networks and Vertical Search Combine to Challenge Google?

Real Estate Search Stats: March 2007 Trulia Trends Report

(image)
I've covered how uncomfortable I am with the Patriot Act since the dawn of this blog in 2003, but this post from Mary really drove it home. It covers a Washington Post story that details how, in just two years, the FBI issued more than 140,000 - yes that's 140 THOUSAND - "national security letters," in essence, requests for detailed information on the Database of Intentions that have no requirement of probable cause or judicial review.

Last Friday the Post ran a story from an anonymous but verified source. Read this story. From it:

Three years ago, I received a national security letter (NSL) in my capacity as the president of a small Internet access and consulting business. The letter ordered me to provide sensitive information about one of my clients. There was no indication that a judge had reviewed or approved the letter, and it turned out that none had. The letter came with a gag provision that prohibited me from telling anyone, including my client, that the FBI was seeking this information. Based on the context of the demand -- a context that the FBI still won't let me discuss publicly -- I suspected that the FBI was abusing its power and that the letter sought information to which the FBI was not entitled.

Rather than turn over the information, I contacted lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union, and in April 2004 I filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the NSL power. I never released the information the FBI sought, and last November the FBI decided that it no longer needs the information anyway. But the FBI still hasn't abandoned the gag order that prevents me from disclosing my experience and concerns with the law or the national security letter that was served on my company. In fact, the government will return to court in the next few weeks to defend the gag orders that are imposed on recipients of these letters.

The piece concludes:

...At some point -- a point we passed long ago -- the secrecy itself becomes a threat to our democracy. In the wake of the recent revelations, I believe more strongly than ever that the secrecy surrounding the government's use of the national security letters power is unwarranted and dangerous. I hope that Congress will at last recognize the same thing.

I completely agree.

It's set to become a web site only soon, Matt tells us. InfoWorld has been around for three decades, but IT ad spending is clearly moving online, and it's hard to justify a weekly trade covering a space that lives online.

When I was running the Standard, InfoWorld was a sister publication, and a good one at that. I really hope the publication thrives online, but its owner, IDG, will have to take painful measures to make it relevant in a world where coverage is owned by online pubs and blogs already deep in the flow. The transition to online only means losing 70-80 percent of operating costs. Good luck, guys.

Microsoft's Ray Ozzie gave a speech last month that is worth pondering. In it he said that there is "a sea change going on in the industry" and "one of the things I've been working on is driving a services vision throughout the company."

So what's he working on? LiveSide has some thoughts:

While Ray Ozzie has been keeping details of his Software as a Service platform quiet, some small bits of information are emerging from other members on his team. Two of his direct reports, David Treadwell and Amitabh Srivastava are both listed as working on developing the next generation Live services platform known as Windows Live Core:

"This start-up effort will define the vision and create the implementation for cloud-based platform services that will allow the creation of compelling applications that make deep use of network-based information."

Other members of the Windows Live Core team that we've tracked down include David Cutler, who led the development of Windows, Abolade Gbadegesin, former architect of networking in Windows Vista and Elissa Murphy, Principal PM for Windows Live Core. This team has "joined Ray Ozzie to focus on next generation cloud services; to build an highly efficient computing fabric for Microsoft data centers and a services platform for agile development of high-quality cloud services."

I am encouraged by the idea that Ray is out there trying to boil the Microsoft ocean. More fuel, Bill!

Well, Gary has found a conference and related papers that start to build a body of academic work around this here place. I must say, I'd sure like to be in Colorado about now, thinking about the implications of the blog world.

Will Social Networks and Vertical Search Combine to Challenge Google?

Real Estate Search Stats: March 2007 Trulia Trends

50K+ Full Text & Image "Historic" Articles About College Hoops, Free via NewspaperArchive.com

Hoover's Archive of CEO and Analyst Video Interviews

Yahoo Unveils Widgets 4

I'm testing a service with Simply Hired that allows you all to post jobs on Searchblog. Currently, there are no jobs in the service, but perhaps you folks might need to hire some folks, and you'll give it a whirl. I'll highlight cool jobs every now and again. In fact, I think I might post a few FM open recs here. Check it out.

Also, if any of you are interested in flat rate or text sponsorships, I'm testing these as well via the FM engine. Check it all out on the right below the tower ad unit.

...I'd write long, overly analytical posts on these issues:

Metaweb. I spent some time with Danny Hillis today. What he's trying to do is deeply important in terms of how the web is going to work - or not. I will write something soon, I promise.

YouTube. Man, this one is not going away, and there's a lot to say about the new NBC/Newscorp thing. First, don't pay attention to the content. I don't think it matters. Pay attention to two things: One, the community - will it show up? And two, pay attention to the distribution they struck. Note how it's all the folks on the web who are worried/terrified of Google? Uh huh.

Vista. I spent the day with a lot of technology folks, it almost felt like a day back in 2004 when I was interviewing sources for the book (it just ended up that way, no idea why). Anyway, almost universally folks were wondering what Microsoft is going to do about Vista being a disappointment. There was a vague sense of concern here - it seems the technology cycle we all understood is over - but we don't understand the next one quite yet. It can't just be Google...can it?

Two Fridays ago I took a day to write. I plan to do it again soon. I really, really miss it.

Thanks to Gary and SEL, news that Yahoo has appointed Reggie Davis, a lawyer (bio thanks to Gary), to focus on click fraud. From the release:

Davis will serve as the company’s first senior executive dedicated to continually enhancing the quality of Yahoo!’s display and search listings marketplaces.

As vice president of marketplace quality, Davis is responsible for developing and executing a strategy aimed at driving more rapid innovation, greater transparency and faster delivery of product and service enhancements to build an even higher quality advertising network for Yahoo!’s customers. Davis will hire a dedicated staff to manage across all of Yahoo!’s cross-functional quality teams and ensure that customer input is integrated into all efforts to address click fraud, traffic quality, network placement and other marketplace quality issues. Davis and his team will also be responsible for increasing Yahoo!’s dialogue with advertisers and publishers on quality related matters.

This just in from the LA Times:

News Corp. and NBC Universal plan to announce as soon as today that they are creating an online video site stocked with TV shows and movies, plus clips that users can modify and share with friends, according to people close to the negotiations.

The two companies enlisted help from some of Google's biggest Internet rivals. The News Corp.-NBC Universal partnership has deals with Yahoo Inc., Microsoft Corp., Time Warner Inc.'s AOL and News Corp.'s MySpace to place videos in front of their collective audience of hundreds of millions.

Paid Content gets props for early coverage.

Tim has a nice post on how access to a vast corpus of books is changing academics. And how that is just the beginning...

Nah, they're not spinning out a newco with Yahoo, but it's a start. According to LiveSide:

Microsoft today announced the creation of a new group spun out of Windows Live, the Live Search and Ad Platform. Live Search (formerly Windows Live Search, formerly MSN Search) will join adCenter in a new group that will not report to Steven Sinofsky and Windows Live, but will be headed by Satya Nadella, and report directly to Kevin Johnson, the Platform and Systems division head.

Who doesn't love a good data visualization? This one's a doozy. From the writeup on Seed:

This map was constructed by sorting roughly 800,000 published papers into 776 different scientific paradigms (shown as pale circular nodes) based on how often the papers were cited together by authors of other papers. Links (curved black lines) were made between the paradigms that shared papers, then treated as rubber bands, holding similar paradigms nearer one another when a physical simulation forced every paradigm to repel every other; thus the layout derives directly from the data.

Link to the big map. Thanks, Bill!

(image)
Terry Semel knows he needs a win, and it sounds like he's got one. He told an AdAge audience that Panama would "some very exciting numbers" this quarter, according to Reuters. "I'm totally all smiles," Semel said. "We are very excited and very happy and I'm smiling broadly."

Wow, a lot in the feeds today. What I found particularly worthy:

Digesting Google's PPA ads, from TechCrunch. I am still digesting. This is good analysis. I am ambivalent about the new text link ad unit, so is Mike. "They’ve crossed a hazy ethical line here" he says. The NYT covers it but does not dwell on the link ad unit.

Yahoo, Google Revs are similiar from SEW. Yahoo is in no way out of this game. It's two ends to the middle, CPA/C to CPM.

Scoble continues to beat on his old employer's search results.

Kedrosky is a robot spammer, Google says! Slow down, Paul!

is Web 2.0 Over? from Venturebeat. Analysis of venture funding.

Google unveils the Plus Box. Click on the "plus sign" and you get more data. Innaresting.

The Kinderstart case is dismissed, Matt reports. Earlier coverage.

Where the ad growth is, from Lost Remote. Er...surprised?

Clarification from Google on net neutrality via GigaOm. This is not an easy issue to clarify...

Digg on Google clarifying its plan with phones. No hardware, folks.

Craig alerts me to a days old NYT search spam piece and related research from MSFT. From the Times:

Tens of thousands of junk Web pages, created only to lure search-engine users to advertisements, are proliferating like billboards strung along freeways. Now Microsoft researchers say they have traced the companies and techniques behind them.

A technical paper published by the researchers says the links promoting such pages are generated by a small group of shadowy operators apparently with the acquiescence of some major advertisers, Web page hosts and advertising syndicators. ...

....Surprisingly, the researchers noted that the vast bulk of the junk listings was created from just two Web hosting companies and that as many as 68 percent of the advertisements sampled were placed by just three advertising syndicators.

I'm not surprised, actually. It makes a lot of sense. The folks who are the best at this are the ones "winning," so to speak. Just like the big engines....

More:

The researchers found that for some keywords like “drugs” and “ring tone,” more than 30 percent of the results from major search engines were fake pages created by spammers.

They discovered that the average spam density — a measure of the percentage of Web pages that contain only advertisements — was 11 percent for 1,000 keywords they used in their research.

The researchers said large advertisers were to blame for a significant share of the spam problem.

As many of you know, in a previous life I ran the Industry Standard. My partner in editorial pursuits was Jonathan Weber, a man I hold in very high regard. He's running New West now, an innovative regional newssite based in Montana. He asked me to come to his New West Summit, and I certainly couldn't refuse. It looks like a great event. If you have an interest in how the economy of the Rocky Mountain region is changing, I highly recommend it. And it's not a bad place to be in June, I can attest to that. Jonathan is a consummate host!

Google is endlessly fascinating for us, and Henry Blodget continues the speculation with talking points for a debate about whether Google will become "King of all Media." He makes the (accurate) observation that Google may conquer distribution, but it does not create content, so it doesn't threaten traditional media companies. Yes, save this one fact: Traditional media companies either owned distrubtion, or depended on it for the bulk of their revenues (ie advertising in scarce distribution markets). But the debate continues...

Google vrs KinderStart - Case Dismissed

Time to "Fetch" and other Federated Search Tools

Adobe Apollo Officially Launched

Who Created the First Blog?

iFilm Infringement Could Blut Viacom's YouTube

I've read this once, and want to read it again, but I think he gets the main point: Google knew what it was getting into when it bought YouTube - the battle for the future of video on the web. It might be a public, legal suit, it might be the threat of one which gets the parties to a business agreement. But it's far from over.

News from Yahoo on mobile search:

Today we are launching Yahoo! oneSearch on our Yahoo! Mobile Web service, which is accessible to the more than 85 percent of you in the US who can use a browser on your mobile phones.

If you ever tried using mobile search before today, you’re familiar with the list of links you get as your search result, just like those you’re used to getting on your PC. But is that what you really want on your phone, where networks are not yet DSL-fast and some of you have to pay to load every page? All the consumers we’ve talked to back us up on this: You want instant answers, right on the results page — not a list of links. That’s just what Yahoo! oneSearch does — we give you the answers you want in just one search.

Eric Schmidt interviewed by students at Stanford.

Google offers "themes" for personalized home page. Cheesy, but, interesting. d

A meaning-based search launch, CognitionSearch.

Google introduces pay per action test. Huh.

I've got an all day non-work related commitment Tuesday, so posting will be light....

SEO Tests with StumbleUpon

WIRED Magazine ReDesigning Website

Google Invites Beta Testers for Radio Advertising

blinkx Launches Wiki & Handbook for Video Search

New From Microsoft Research: MyLifeBits Online

Late last week Steve Ballmer gave an speech at Stanford in which he stated that Google is a "one trick pony" - that trick being search, of course. He also noted that Google's staff growth is "insane" and called Google, in short, "cute."

Lordy, Steve. That's simply baiting the bear, isn't it? Now, lemme think. For its first ten years (Google is nearly ten years old now), Microsoft was a "one trick pony" - that trick being DOS. IBM, the incumbent, most certainly saw you as "cute." And as you piled on staff up there in Redmond, handing out options like it was crack, I bet someone gave a speech claiming you were "insane."

I love the fire in the belly. But where's the plan of attack? I'm guessing you have one. No, I'm sure you do. Can we hear it?

Another sign that Microsoft, or someone else, could buy business from Google: Comcast is using the Wall St. Journal as a broadcast medium to potential partners that its deal with Google is up soon, and it's looking for someone to buy the business. Price tag? $100 million. From the non-public article:

Comcast Corp. is negotiating to use Microsoft Corp.'s Internet search services on its broadband portal, a sign the cable titan isn't happy about its current search deal with Google Inc., according to people familiar with the matter.

Comcast, the country's largest cable operator, also has been talking to Google about extending their relationship. Currently, Google provides search results when users of the Comcast.net portal enter queries into the search box on the site. But Comcast thinks it should get a larger share of the revenue generated by the arrangement. It also is unhappy about other terms of the deal, these people say.

Hmmm. Gotta love "these people."

A NYT story dated for Monday says Lycos will re-enter the US search/portal market under the brand Jubii, the name of a Danish subsidiary.

Er. OK. I have a soft spot for Lycos, it bought the assets of Wired Digital, which I owned a very small portion of in 1997 (I don't own any of it now). I've always rooted for the company, though it's never won anything, to be honest. So, with that in mind...Go Jubii, Go!

I was in the Portland airport recently and I saw an image of a happy, professionally smiling face welcome me as I logged into the free wifi there. The image is at left.

It was very, very familiar. I felt like I had seen it, or rather, her, hundreds of times. Then it hit me. Once we can search by image, I mean, really by image, we'll be able to find ALL the instances of this gal, all over the web. Imagine what happens once we can find every single stock image of glad handing corporate models? It'll be just like it used to be, searching for "copyright (insert date here)" or "about us" back in the early days of text search. Ah, nostalgia!

Continue reading "Reader Kamal Writes..." »

Yahoo's China woes continue...(BB and Wired)

And BB on Google and privacy....

Fine piece. Read it here...points out the distribution issue. But to take it home, read this...and this....

Thanks to AC for pointing this and this out to me. Google keeps buying...

We walked to the game, played a bit of catch in the stadium, then Bonds homered, Cain pitched well, some new talent showed off their bats, most of the vets stayed through the fifth, Benitez didn't blow his save, it was sunny and gorgeous, and the "Lemonade Like Grandma Made" man signed a ball for my son. It doesn't get much better than this.

A loyal reader sent me this tidbit: Microsoft is offering its large enterprise customers free service and product credits if those customers push Live search inside their enterprises. Called "Microsoft Service Credits for Web Search," a Powerpoint overview of the program sent to me states:

"Employees search the web daily with tools from Google, Microsoft, or Yahoo. OEMs and web sites are already earning credits based on searches that their users bring. Now, your organization can earn credits for Microsoft web searches and redeem them for Microsoft or preferred partner deployment and training services. More searches earns more credits towards the services you value."

The value is non-trivial - the presentation estimates companies can get from $2 to $10 per computer annually, plus a $25K "enrollment credit". For sites that have tens of thousands of computers, that can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in free stuff from Microsoft. Most large enterprises spend millions on Microsoft services and software each year. It's not hard to imagine a CFO getting slightly moist over savings like these.

In short, Microsoft is leveraging its massive installed base - and its cash - to push search. It's not a bad idea, though there are possible drawbacks. The presentation goes into detail about how a large company might promote this program to its employees, suggesting three levels of communication - "low, moderate, and high." Moderate and high promotions include "In-house training session on ‘how to get the most from web search’ using Windows Live Search," "Remove all existing toolbars," "Set Homepage to Live Search," and "Email message of encouragement from CEO." IE 7 is mandatory for the program, as one might expect.

Interesting. This could work, but it could sure backfire. How would you feel if, to save a few bucks, the CIO and CFO dictates that you now have to use IE7 preset to Live Search? I can imagine a backlash where usage of Firefox goes way up in large corporations so as to avoid that "Browser Helper Object" installed in IE 7....

Today begins my annual rite of spring, the trip to Scottsdale with my son to watch...baseball! Posting will be light to very light....

WSJ: How Webmasters Become Dependent on Google Rankings

More Than 1 Million Pages of Historical Government Documents Removed from Public View Since 9/11

The Internet Archive Needs Your Help in Capturing 2 Billion Web Pages

Merriam-Webster Online Adds Direct Links to Microsoft's Live.com for Each Definition

Personalized Video: Divvio's Preview Release; ChoiceStream and MeVee Too!

But it's not what I'd like to see. From Google's blog post:

When you search on Google, we collect information about your search, such as the query itself, IP addresses and cookie details. Previously, we kept this data for as long as it was useful. Today we're pleased to report a change in our privacy policy: Unless we're legally required to retain log data for longer, we will anonymize our server logs after a limited period of time. When we implement this policy change in the coming months, we will continue to keep server log data (so that we can improve Google's services and protect them from security and other abuses)—but will make this data much more anonymous, so that it can no longer be identified with individual users, after 18-24 months.

Why 18 to 24 months? Well, I'd wager because Google is all over personalization and doesn't want to hobble itself. More soon...

It's a fraught issue, but over at GigaOm there's a primer on current Google positions worth reading....

Update: Google says "we're not changing our view!"

A statement from Google sent to me (along with a Save the Internet post):

"Google's position on net neutrality has not changed one bit. We strongly believe that Congress must take action to ensure a free and open Internet, in the face of a highly concentrated broadband market. Furthermore, Google's position -- which we testified to last year in Congress -- is that broadband network operators should not be permitted to charge any content owner extra fees or extra tolls. We continue to support net neutrality legislation by Senators Dorgan and Snowe, and by Representative Markey, and we remain steadfast members of the coalition supporting net neutrality."

And from Vint Cerf, who I pinged:

"We haven't really changed. We think that consumers should know about any restrictions in their use of broadband services and that [broadband] providers should not discriminate among application service providers."

One of the longer bomb predictions made by a number of analysts and pundits in the past 12 months has been the following: Microsoft will take its pile of cash and massive market valuation and buy Yahoo. Hell, I even suggested it. The logic goes something like this: Combine the two companies' reach and search share, their CPM advertising businesses and various other plays, and you have a behemoth that can take on Google.

Fine, except I don't buy it anymore, mainly because I think both companies are not well positioned to deal with a successful merger. And, I think there might be a better way. Now, those of you who read regularly may recall my LiveSoft post a year ago, in which I suggested that Microsoft set its Internet businesses free. Well, thanks to many folks who work in the industry (and one in particular who will remain anonymous for now), my thinking has evolved. I no longer think Microsoft should spin out LiveSoft, nor do I think it should buy Yahoo. Instead, it should roll out a new company that focuses on one thing: Search monetization. But it shouldn't do it alone. Instead, it should be a joint venture with Yahoo.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?

Hear me out. Everyone knows how difficult it's been for both Yahoo and Microsoft to beat Google at its own game - search. Yahoo has been beat up for years over its lackluster monetization efforts - after initially gaining plaudits for its bold purchase of Overture. And over at Microsoft, search is still at the Windows 1.0 phase, and the rumblings I'm hearing out of Redmond are not encouraging. People are leaving, search share is dropping, and recruitment is tough.

But then again, both companies bring a lot to the table. Yahoo did a great job combining several engines into one solid organic search performer, and early reports on Panama are also solid. Microsoft has an innovative approach in its demographically-driven AdCenter. Both companies have significant traffic of good intent. For building search companies, Yahoo is in the right location. Microsoft has huge market cap and cash. Both need to do something, quickly, to prove to Wall St. that they can compete with King Google.

So why not join forces, like back in the good old days when Overture fed both Yahoo and Microsoft? Such a venture solves any number of tough problems. For example, it lets Yahoo and Microsoft focus on what they are good at. For Yahoo, that's digital lifestyle applications and services and the CPM ad revenues that come with them; for Microsoft, it's Windows and Office (and MSN, I guess....). Despite the packaged goods mentality displayed by the "well, we're done with Vista, now we can focus on search" approach, the initial response to Vista is proof enough Ballmer & co. might want to keep its engineers focused on the product that drives the majority of your revenues - Windows. And little birdies all over the Valley tell me folks at Yahoo are tired of the search-driven fire drills there, they want to get back to the cool stuff like Pipes....

A second and substantial reason to do this is to stop trying to kill each other in the race to catch Google. Separately, neither company is going to catch Google anytime soon. Why not work together, combine resources, and give the world what it really wants - a legitimate answer to Mountain View?

The company might work like this. Because Yahoo is further along with Panama and YPN than Microsoft is with AdCenter, Yahoo gets more credit in the JV for that asset class. Microsoft, because it has more cash, funds the lions share of the JV. Should each company also toss in organic search? To be discussed, but not necessarily required.

The new company, let's call it Soverture, is owned 50% by each party. Each party also throws in - and this is very important - a long term (ten years?) contract binding it to using Soverture's services in both direct search monetization (AdWords) and across its properties where it has a syndication play (Facebook, eBay international, etc.). Top talent is assigned into the company, and it's located in the Valley, so recruitment is easier.

Soverture is then released to develop a killer search monetization solution, one that is unfettered from the current political and structural woes of its parent corps. Spin another 20% out in an IPO, and set the company on a path of providing an alternative to AdSense. The timing is perfect - a ton of AdSense contracts are coming up soon (Ask, for example), and with all that cash from Microsoft, Soverture can afford to buy the business while it develops its way to parity with AdSense.

OK, I'm going to stop writing now, and ask you all: Is this crazy? I know there are tons of reasons why this would NOT happen, but it also makes a lot of sense, no?

The Last Days of Internet Radio?

Ask Local Adds Advanced Web 2.0 Search Features

Black Hat SEO Blog Ranks for 'But Viagra' the White Hat Way

HP Site Has Built-in Search History

FreeBase Automates Internet & Organizes World's Information

The Compete blog has some data for you to crunch on...

...clearly, Viacom's takedown orders were not enough. The process of negotiation-by-lawsuit has begun.

WSJ, Slashdot, Seeking Alpha (Henry Blodget), more Seeking Alpha

And here's Google's emailed PR response:

"We have not received the lawsuit but are confident that YouTube has respected the legal rights of copyright holders and believe the courts will agree. YouTube is great for users and offers real opportunities to rights holders: the opportunity to interact with users; to promote their content to a young and growing audience; and to tap into the online advertising market. We will certainly not let this suit become a distraction to the continuing growth and strong performance of YouTube and its ability to attract more users, more traffic and build a stronger community."

And an updated statement from Google, attributed to Kent Walker, general counsel

"YouTube has become even more popular since we took down Viacom's material. We think that's a testament to the draw of the user-generated content on YouTube. We've been very successful forging thousands of successful partnerships with content owners -- like Warner Music, Sony/BMG, Universal Music, BBC, and the NBA -- interested in finding new audiences for their programming. These partnerships offer the YouTube community access to some of the best content in the world, ranging from entertainment and sports to politics and news. And we're only getting started."

And ResourceShelf has the actual complaint here.

Light posting today. Much afoot. Watch the TellMe news (apparently Microsoft may buy them). Recall my write up of TellMe here back in January....

How? By buying Yahoo, of course. This article reports the good folks at AT&T have considered it. A monumentally bad idea, to my mind. Imagine a major telco owning a search company. Imagine further them owning a bunch of media, applications and content. Imagine the business model such a company might be inclined to push. Tiering, anyone?

This sounds cool.

gCensus.

Matt dishes on Google and Dish. Recall my Friday musings some years ago (which ended up in the book), I discuss the future of advertising on TV....

So much happening.

I am in Austin for SXSW, a wonderful group of people are here. I have a few posts brewing but for now....

On to the tidbits:

- If you have Vista (and I have more to say about that soon) Microsoft is starting to roll out non browser-based search integrations. It's also working on dealing with the competitive threat of Google Apps.

- Ask keeps pluggin' away with innovations, this time in local search.

- You all know I dislike the Patriot Act. I am not alone. Just as we all expected, the powers of the Patriot act proved too much to resist, the FBI has been caught and called out for putting on Patriot's secrecy ring....my precious! A related video is worth a view.

- Good to see the remixing trend getting more support....this time from Battlestar Galactica.

- Everyone's happy to work at Google? Not this guy.

- Matt Cutts goes on the record saying Google isn't inclined to trap user data. Watch this space.

(image)
Grab a favorite beverage if you're going to read this one. It's rather long.....

OK.

If you believe that conversational media (post 1, post 2) represents an important emerging category in the overall media landscape, the question must be begged: how does one pay for it? What is the central economic model for conversational media?

I have a short answer, and a very long one. The short one is this: Conversational marketing. The long one gets into how conversational marketing is simply the tip of a very large iceberg, representative of a sea change in how all businesses converse with their constituents - be they customers, partners, or employees. Yes, I'm going somewhere with all of this - my shorthand for it is "The Conversation Economy" - but for now finding a succinct definition is exceedingly notional - and frustrating. Regardless, the more smart folks I talk to in the media, marketing, and business world, the more I am convinced we are entering the age of the Conversation Economy. But to get there, we need to crack the code of conversational marketing. So that's what I'll focus on in this post. The next (and final) one will, I hope, tie it all together.

And because I am writing this all day today, I plan to experiment a bit with how I write for the web (I've referred to this as web-enhanced writing). In short, I plan to serialize this post over the day, posting it as I write it. Every hour or two or three, I'll hit "publish" and you'll see wherever I am in this process of Thinking Out Loud. Given the way I know I write, I'm sure that each successive post will not only be longer, but an entirely revised version of the stuff I've already published. I hope by the end of the day to have a decent draft finished, and perhaps, you'll visit from time to time and toss your comments into the mix.

So onwards. (Pressing the publish button for the first time now....)

Update - this post is getting so long, I'm going to put it in the "extended entry" format. Continue reading by clicking that link below....

Continue reading "Conversational Marketing: PGM v. CM, Part 3" »

Today, I am writing. Yep, taking the entire day off from meetings and scheduled phone calls and travel, and just writing. Oh, what a luxury!

First off, a few tidbits have piled up in my inbox. Here they are for your consideration.

IBM and Yahoo have teamed up to create the UFOCrawler. No kidding. "UFO Crawler, a new search engine specifically tuned to search for information about the paranormal and unexplained will be launched Friday by the Anomalies Network. The UFO Crawler is taking off thanks to IBM’s newest search software, IBM OmniFind Yahoo! Edition. Like many organizations, the Anomalies Network was faced with the need to improve access to its growing collection of information, while also looking for a tool to create a competitive advantage for the business through search." Or, in other words, a fun way to promote IBM and Yahoo's enterprise search offering.

Speaking of Yahoo, it launched a new edition of MyYahoo yesterday. From the email notification: "Some new features include:

Pre-built personalized pages
Category pages for topics and "content suggestions"
Further customization of their page with drag-and-drop modules
Feed previews and a full post reader on the page
Editable Personal Assistant with instant access to things like Yahoo! Mail, horoscopes, local traffic, etcRedesigned modules from Yahoo! and partners, with games, music, commerce, sports updates, weather, finance portfolios, TV listings, etc.
Sharing feature, enabling users to send their My Yahoo! page or favorite modules with friends and family.

And we can't have a Yahoo upgrade without a Google response, this one is to their Local Business Center. This is important, I've been banging on them about how Google does not take advantage of the architecture of participation for local merchants, now it is. From the email I got: "today Google released new features to its Local Business Center (www.google.com/local/add/businessCenter), further enabling small businesses to reach potential customers looking for local goods and services online. The Local Business Center, a free service, allows business owners with a physical location to add their business information to Google Maps, and edit or delete existing listings. The new features include photo upload, custom attributes, local correction and listing statistics."

Danny Hillis is talking more about his MetaWeb project, and the Times has the story. Danny and I are trying to find a time to sit down and really talk. We spoke of this project three years ago when I interviewed him for the book. He's a very, very smart fellow. Markoff's lead: " new company founded by a longtime technologist is setting out to create a vast public database intended to be read by computers rather than people, paving the way for a more automated Internet in which machines will routinely share information." More, including screen shots, at Radar.

I've told you before about the Web 2 Expo, it's the cousin of our original Web 2 conference (now called the Summit). I'm pleased to report that more folks have registered for the Expo than we originally predicted, and not only that, the lineup of keynote speakers is really excellent. Jeff Bezos, Eric Schmidt, and Jeff Weiner are confirmed as keynotes, plus Mena Trott, Caterina Fake, Joe Kraus, and tons more. I'm going to be interviewing a lot of these folks on stage.

The event is April 15-17 in SF at the Moscone center. It's bigger and far more hands on than the Summit, and if you plan on going, the early bird registration expires next week, Monday I believe. The organizers have offered Searchblog readers a special registration code that will knock another $100 off the price for all of you. If you are interested, send me an email and I'll email you back the code.

Found via IWantMedia, this GoogleWatch piece on Mark Cuban, ever the critic of YouTube, poking that company in the eye by demanding it turn over the names of users who posted IP from his independent studio, Magnolia Pictures. Oh, the irony.

Google updated its Finance app with video and after hours charting; and rumors are rife that Apple and Google are up to something (recall Eric joined Apple's board). I'll have more to say on the latter, later.

The woes at MSFT search continue: Christopher Payne, the boss of search at MSN, is leaving. I have been talking to a lot of folks in the MSFT world, and search is a true charlie horse for the company. It needs an order of magnitude shift to win, and that's a very, very tall order. More as I can write more...

From the IAB release:

The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) and PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) today announced that Internet advertising revenues for 2006 are estimated at $16.8 billion, a 34 percent increase over the previous revenue record of $12.5 billion in 2005. The 2006 Q4 revenues totaled just under $4.8 billion, making it the highest quarter reported. Fourth-quarter revenues for 2006 represent a 32 percent increase over the same period in 2005, and a 15 percent increase over Q3 of 2006, estimated at slightly under $4.2 billion.

First, check out Research Google, a CSE rolled by reader Chris that includes 160 or so Google related sites.

Then, check out cRANKy, which is "age relevant" search, thanks to reader Joel.

Lots of chatter while I was away. Cnet's story is here, the posts outlining details are here and here.

This one is public, so you can all read it.

Mr. Schmidt said the Internet giant continues to pursue deals that will let it show media companies' copyright content on YouTube but said there is a "genuine disagreement." Traditional media argue their content has a certain intrinsic value, while Google says "prove it," he said, speaking at a Bear Stearns investor conference yesterday. "That's often a difficult conversation."

Asked by a member of the audience whether Google is "arrogant," as charged by some in traditional media, Mr. Schmidt said, "I'm sure we're arrogant." But he chalked up such complaints to a negotiating tactic, grousing that one of the ways traditional media negotiate is by leaking details of deal negotiations to the press and then threatening to sue.

It's always when I'm on the road. Microsoft's counsel today made some inflammatory comments (more here) about Google and copyright, infering that perhaps Google's entire approach to media was in violation of copyright. Google pointed me to a response by the head of the CIAA, here.

This is not Microsoft's - or others - first attempt at playing to Big Media's fears of Google. More as I have it...

Update: Google has provided me with this comment from David Drummond, their Senior Vice President Corporate Development and Chief Legal Officer:

The goal of search engines, and of products like Google Book Search and YouTube, is to help users find information from content producers of every size. We do this by complying with international copyright laws, and the result has been more exposure and in many cases more revenue for authors, publishers and producers of content. In the publishing industry alone, we work with more than 10,000 partners around the world to make their works discoverable online, and in video, we recently added new partners including BBC and NBA. We look forward to working with even more partners to make more content discoverable online.

Just as Google is in a pitched debate with major media companies over YouTube, Microsoft pokes at its soft underbelly. I love this stuff. It literally writes itself.

Today I am in South Florida, in my role as author - speaking to a group of communications execs at a conference here. Posting will return soon...

Well, no we didn't, but as I've said before, when is Google going to gift the world with a non broken version of Alexa? Google Peter Norvig does a good job of anecdotally proving the obvious. (via another Googler, Matt Cutts).

For example, let's look at the log stats for my site and for some of my friends who have recently published their stats for 2006. We list the actual number of visits and pageviews, and the Alexa numbers for reach and pageviews. The difference is quite profound.

A SF Chron article takes a look. Fine overview if you've not been paying attention..

I know it's been working on this deal for some time. Google has syndicated real estate listings and most likely will have a lot more noise to make in this business soon.

Some great comments - and debates - all over the site lately. Thought I'd point a few out.

On my post about Quintura, some of Searchblog's most prolific and accomplished commentators have a strong discussion of approaches to search. Worth the read.

Over at my post on Google's 10-K, reader Lars, who has some serious credentials in new media, goes off on a nice long rant, it's also worth the read....

On my Panama post, a few readers chime in with gloomier outlooks for Yahoo...

Thanks for all the comments. In fact, check out the graphic at left. Look at the number of comments on this site, compared to the number of posts. 4.5 times more comments than posts. Put another way, I've created 3000 or so discrete bits of "content" on this site, and you all have created nearly 14,000. Cool.

Heading up to Niketown today. Posting will be light till my plane gets delayed and I'm stuck in the Portland airport posting rants about how terrible the MLB Game Day Audio is.

Google filed a 10-K this week (thanks Gary) and there were a few tidbits in there. If you're a Google geek, it's worth a read.

Google had more than 10,00 employees at the end of 2006, for example, and spent nearly $2B in capex in 06. Advertising is 99% of all revenues for three straight years. The UK is 15% of Google's revenues. The US has declined from 66% to 57% in three years. TAC (traffic acquisition costs) are blended into overall revenues so it's more difficult to figure the TAC percentage as a portion of Adsense, (a bit of other stuff may be in that figure), but if you take TAC as all Adsense related, you come up with $3.3B paid out, on $4.16B in Adsense (Google Network) revenues, or 79%, which is consistent with previous numbers.

Astonishingly, cost of sales is 8 percent. Very low and very efficient. Contractual obligations to publishing partners came in at $1.17B.

The YouTube acquisition is detailed, technology from that was valued at just $24mm. Goodwill (if ever there was an irony...) is the majority of the price. There's $45mm in liabilities assumed...

dMarc and other was also listed. Not sure how the "others" was factored in, but again, the majority was "goodwill." Again, it was an on the come play...

I am sure I've missed tons of stuff in here, but that's why the link is there.

The headline, which I've buried: Google is sitting on more than $11B in cash and liquid instruments as of the end of 2006.

I wish I had more time, running to the first meeting of the day. So read Google's announcement, and then read Danny....