John Battelle's Searchblog

This Google experiment allows searchers to vote and add "better pages" to SERPs.

More coverage here.

Facebook has released the details of its new approach to user control:

Under the changes outlined late Thursday, Facebook's 55 million users will be given greater control over whether they want to participate in a three-week-old program that circulates potentially sensitive information about their online purchases and other activities.

Facebook provided two different opportunities to block the details from being shared, but many users said they never saw the "opt-out" notices before they disappeared from the screen.

With the reforms, Facebook promised its users will now have to give their explicit consent, or "opt-in," before any information is passed along.

More coverage in the Times.

From the release (more here):

"We believe it's important to put our money where our principles are,"
said Eric Schmidt, Chairman and CEO, Google. "Consumers deserve more
competition and innovation than they have in today's wireless world.
No matter which bidder ultimately prevails, the real winners of this
auction are American consumers who likely will see more choices than
ever before in how they access the Internet."

Fascinating.

I heard a lot about this when reporting the book, and even asked (many times) to see it in its early stages. But this is a great insight and reminder - there is a very significant story, and culture, developing in the 16,000 strong and growing folks who are part of this village. A village who believes, for example, it can solve the world's energy problems. As I said, fascinating.

Via Salon, Bizweek reports:

In the wake of mounting criticism, Facebook executives are discussing changes to a controversial advertising tool that publicizes users' Web activities outside of the popular social network. Alterations to the recently introduced Beacon system could be announced as early as Nov. 29, BusinessWeek.com has learned.

Chris Sacca, whose blog I follow, is a director of special projects at Google. His latest has been figuring out wireless with a team of minded colleagues. This post is quite worth the read.

Turns out, a lot of people at Google cared deeply about these issues. So we built a humbling team of like-minded folks to explore what we could do to make the wireless industry more open. At first, it was comprised of all volunteers, though we have since grown to much bigger ranks including dozens of full-time RF engineers and policy gurus. In fact, we have now grown too big for the room in which we hold our meetings and chairs are scarce.

PS - a good speculation on what it all means (Google's entry into telcom) here on Gigaom.

Whoa. This is the first result on Google for "predictions 2007." I better focus for 2008. I was just reviewing what I wrote about a year ago, and to find it, I typed that phrase into Google, and was stunned. I am certain someone did a better job than me, on issues far more important than the ones I found interesting. Clearly, the Index has a way to go...

From our French researcher, a student-based study of Yahoo and Google, with conclusions that I both agree with (Wikipedia is starting to dominate results) and don't (general search engines have had their day):

The detailed examination of links returned is equally instructive. The first link offered by Google and Yahoo is identical in 27% of cases. In a previous study (using a slightly different protocol), conducted in December 2005, the proportion was 24%. The order of magnitude is thus similar.

The most surprising result came from the use of Wikipedia. This use was marginal in December 2005 (see study). At the time, for all 10 results on the first page, 2% of the links proposed by Google and 4% of those proposed by Yahoo came from Wikipedia. On the first link alone, Google offered no Wikipedia results (at least not in our sample) and Yahoo offered 7%.

The strategies have changed completely. Today 27% of Google’s results on the first link alone come from Wikipedia, as do 31 % of Yahoo’s.

How can this sudden interest in Wikipedia by both engines be explained? It is undoubtedly connected with the increasing difficultly engines have in calculating satisfactory ranking.

Google has changed its language with regard to paid links.

An example of what I've been on about (via TC) for years - Google hands over information in a case in Israel, the company insists it did so only after full legal process, which I am sure is true, the point however is that your tracks in this digital sand are most certainly discoverable.

Just wondering, given this news. From a Weisel report:

Voracious power needs: Given the rapid expansion of Google's user base and the increasing volumes of search activities, Google's power needs are large. The company has strategically positioned many of its data center to be closer to the power that is required to run its business, but if usage spikes, costs can increase and the RE<C initiative would be one way to increase the consistency of attractive pricing for its power needs. While the company does not disclose its power expenditures, we estimate all of Google's power needs reside it in its cost of goods line and that power is responsible for 20-30% of COGS (ex depreciation). This would suggest that Google could potentially spend $500-700mn annually in 2008 on power alone, resulting in three to four points of margin. As such, the cost savings associated with affordable renewable energy and a steady source of reliable power could ultimately put the company at a competitive advantage.

Er...but will the learnings be shared? Is this a new business Google intends to own, or an initiative it intends to spearhead? I'll ask...

Have to grok this, but this is a big, big deal. From the WSJ:

In a major break with industry practice, Verizon Wireless said it will allow consumers to use any compatible cellphone on its network and allow open access to the Web and third-party applications.

It's is a reversal for the No. 2 U.S. carrier, which is known to be particularly protective of its network, and an acknowledgment of the direction of the wireless industry. Google Inc. is spearheading a similar move with an open-standards software platform -- dubbed Android -- and already counts Sprint Nextel Corp. and Deutsche Telekom AG's T-Mobile USA as allies.

The buzz is mixed, to be kind, so far.
After Move On's rallying cry, Inside Facebook said this too will pass. But Arrington disagrees. And it doesn't help to have an AP story about it (this one is from last week), or further news that makes Facebook seem less than on the up and up. Venturebeat weighs in, wondering if there's a there there (there is, sort of, it concludes). Dare isn't happy.
Meanwhile, Danny points out that the real revolution in advertising is already happening, it's called search (I agree, but I see FB ads, or something like them, as a key step in the evolution of search ad platforms).
I have been talking to folks about this, and continue to, I know I've promised deeper thoughts, they are coming...slowly.

A recent blog post from the father of the WWW:

We can use the word Graph, now, to distinguish from Web.

I called this graph the Semantic Web, but maybe it should have been Giant Global Graph! Any worse than WWWW?...So, if only we could express these relationships, such as my social graph, in a way that is above the level of documents, then we would get re-use. That's just what the graph does for us. We have the technology -- it is Semantic Web technology, starting with RDF OWL and SPARQL. Not magic bullets, but the tools which allow us to break free of the document layer. If a social network site uses a common format for expressing that I know Dan Brickley, then any other site or program (when access is allowed) can use that information to give me a better service. Un-manacled to specific documents.

It's coming! It's coming! Really really this time!

By now everyone sees that Facebook's new ad platform is making a bid to be the next Adwords, and (I hope) everyone also sees that the next step is for Facebook to syndicate that platform a la Adsense.

Well, MySpace isn't going to be left out of this race. It wants its Adsense too, and indicates as much in this Reuters story.

NEW YORK (Reuters) - News Corp's (NWSa.N: Quote, Profile, Research) Internet division plans to launch an online network to sell advertising across Rupert Murdoch's sprawling empire and even to other media companies as early as the first half of next year.

Fox Interactive Media (FIM) President Peter Levinsohn told the Reuters Media Summit in New York on Monday that the network, internally dubbed "FIM Serve," is the subject of discussion across the company after first being built for its MySpace online social network.

That's what Jon Fine speculates in his BizWeek blog. It's possible, but I doubt it. Owning content means managing content. And that's rather messy. Were Google to get into the game, and were it to be honest about where the true profits in Adsense were, it'd buy Demand or Name. But that would be a bit too...validating, wouldn't it?

Google is one of several Internet related candidates on I Want Media's annual Media Person of the Year poll. Mark Zuckerberg and Rupert Murdoch are also there, as are a few head scratchers (Imus? Perez Hilton?). As long as you're making companies people, why not add categories, like, say....The Blog?

I recently (over the weekend) upgraded to a suggested new version of Mac OSX, 10.4.11 or somesuch, and it's killed my ability to work normally - Firefox and Safari both crash without notice nearly every time I launch em. So it's hard to do the kind of writing/reading I usually do on a Sunday night/Monday morning...more when I know more...

How do you all feel about Facebook's new platform? Are you using it? Move On isn't so pleased.

Yessir. I think I'll take off the next few days.

Indeed, grow up. But how? Why assume the only way to get paid is to charge directly? Why not assume a creator can be paid by inviting in companies who are willing to pay the freight so an audience or community can have the experience in the first place? And how can one claim that an honest marketer, who wants to underwrite an extraordinary voice, is somehow not helping to create the experience, a patron of sorts, by its economic support allowing a creator to connect with his or her audience?

It's immature, indeed, to assume there is only one way to get a creator paid. I can't agree more with what Jaron writes in this Times Op Ed: "We could design information systems so that people can pay for content — so that anyone has the chance of becoming a widely read author and yet can also be paid. Information could be universally accessible but on an affordable instead of an absolutely free basis."

Darn right we can. And if I, or we, choose to make our content affordable by letting the right sponsors pay for it, sponsors who respect, value, and wish to support that content, how on earth is that model somehow presumably corrupt?

We're not all the way there yet, and many mistakes remain to be made. But there is no one correct model. I've argued previously that we must take the friction out of paying directly for content. And there are really only a few players who can do that. Amazon is trying now with Kindle. But honestly, there are really only three players who have what you really need to make such a model happen. Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft. What do they have?

Come on, you know the answer.....search.

And even were Yahoo or Google to execute what I suggested back some 3300 or so posts ago, it will never obviate the idea of free content and communities sponsored by commercial interests. Why? Because we are all involved in commercial pursuits - it's part of our culture. Having a conversation with those pursuits in ways that feed all parties, well, that's what a (healthy) economy is all about.

Welcome to the conversation economy, Jaron!

Lots to say here. But turkey looms...

Two US Senators yesterday urged the FTC to give Google's Doubleclick deal "serious scrutiny." While I imagine that's already been done, it's interesting to see the letter sent.

From Google's Lat Long blog, we learn Google is letter the wisdom of the crowds edit where map markers will be. Interesting start...

Everyone wants into the ad platform game, and as we all know, China is often a bit late to the party. But the first latecomer is nearly always Alibaba, and this time is no exception. The company today launched Alimama, an ad exchange.

One of the many reasons I've been a bit behind in posting is this news. I'm very proud of this new partnership.

A Monday morning catch up, given I was offline a lot last week:

More details on Jimmy Wales' search play, and a rumor about it looking a lot like social networking.

Facebook rumored to be making its first major M&A play, in China. (TC) But wait...it was just a rumor. I still am curious how FB makes acquisitions with anything but cash, given that massive valuation from Microsoft. Will it close another few hundred million so it has a real cash war chest, I wonder?

TC also wonders about a new approach to magazines from Google, based on a recent patent.

Google loses another early employee, Gokul Rajaram. (SEL)

Amazon introduces the Kindle. I'm not sure about this. I'll grok it as it comes into the world naturally. That is to say, I don't plan on buying it, but if folks I respect keep telling me how wonderful it is, I will.

Google Flickr-izes its index. Er, Picaserizes.

Rumors, more rumors, this one that Google wants Skype.

Obama got game when it comes to Net related policy.

...more when I get a minute. Which recently is never.

Mike pinged me yesterday to note that perhaps someone was listening over at the new Dow Jones - the walls are coming down from the biggest paid site, (AP report), and the Journal is integrating paid links into Digg, a smart move. My book rant on "The Point to Economy," a major meme in my ongoing research on the Conversation Economy, is here.

This week is very full, we had staff meetings all day Monday, an all day meeting with the folks at Boing Boing yesterday, all day today at GigaOm's NewTeeVee Live, and tomorrow I'm flying to Las Vegas for the day, to take part in a CMO conference. In short, exhausting but good week, but very little time to write.

I hate when I can't write.

Well, it was cool for a while, but SearchMob did not work for any number of reasons, including my lack of attention to it, spammers, technical difficulties, and, well, a failure to get critical mass. I'm yanking it today, and I plan to introduce easier to use community features that are less susceptible to spam soon. Thanks to those who contributed, but this particular commons turned to tragedy over time...

I love it.

Ten million seems to be the magic figure lately. Or...maybe not. It was the amount Sergey mentioned as the bogey when he announced the founders award at Google (an award that doesn't seem to stop folks from pursuing new startups our side of Google). Then $10 million came up as the amount Facebook was willing to fork over as an incentive to its own developers, as it launched and nourished its then-new Platform.

Now, Google has pledged another $10 million prize: for developers who will use its Android mobile platform. Shit, I'm in the wrong biz. Time to become a developer...

The search space is again heating up, as social search takes center stage due to the MySpace and Facebook incursions on Google's stranglehold. I had a very interesting talk today with Chamath Palihapitiya, VP of Product Marketing & Operations at Facebook, more on that soon. But it came to mind as I reviewed this interview on Om Malik's show (thanks for the tip, Ben). Marissa talks about a lot of things, but I can't help wondering how much of her time is worrying about social search, about which Venturebeat reports she's less than enthusiastic.

Well, it sure took a while (11 years), but Northeastern University claims to own the patent on Google's approach to search (its intellectual property spawned a company called Jarg). So it sued last week. Thanks to Gary, who has the docs, for the tip.

Google responds in the linked Cnet story that the suit is "without merit."

Not a surprise.

Reader JG writes: Then again, power users don't click ads. So maybe this is the elephant in the room that no one is talking about.

Continue reading " Reader JG writes: Then" »

Why won't Yahoo or Microsoft ever spin out search, as I and others have counseled in the past? I had an opportunity to bat that question around with a particularly well informed fellow this week, and the most interesting part of the answer became quite obvious to me: They need search to protect what they already have: Brand advertising.

Before you declare "What are you smoking, Battelle!?" - it is Friday, but it's not quite noon, guys - let's pick this one apart a bit.

Traditional thinking around categories of advertising draw a very clear line between search advertising, which given its deep roots in CPC is seen as driven by direct response (DR), and brand advertising, which has awareness and demand creation as its main goals.

Most agencies, until recently, have stuck search (SEM, SEO) inside a speciality arm of their holdings, usually lumped in with their DR functions. Brand, on the other hand, was where all the cool kids live, making award winning creative that compelled, convinced, cajoled.

The history of online advertising has been marked by three major eras. The first era - 1995-2000 - was dominated by brand advertising, in particular, crappy brand advertising that, for the most part, didn't work very well for any number of reasons. The second era was dominated by direct response advertising - the rise of search and the yellow pages model. The third era - the era we are in right now - marks the reconciliation of these two forms. If you look at the percentage of online spend presently represented by search, you can see what I am talking about: Search is the largest single factor, at 40%, followed by display + rich media, at about 30%, and classified at 18% or so.

So why am I arguing that the two will merge? Because I have been listening to customers - the marketers. And they are starting to realize a couple things.

First, they are noticing that when they run brand advertising both online and off, searches for their brands increase. Second, they are noticing that when searches for their brands increase, sales (or at least valuable, measureable leads) follow. And they certainly want searches for their brands to increase. But they have noticed something else as well: There's a lot of stuff that comes up when folks search for their brands that they don't control. In particular, there's a ton of messaging out there - the equivalent of brand advertising, in a sense - that reflects the world's view of their brand.

So the trick is this: How to coordinate the two sides? In a world dominated by conversational media, how does one truly integrate demand creation (branding) with demand fulfillment (search)? The answer is not as easy as one might think.

Search results, as we know, are more than paid results. Organic results are critical to a person who is searching on a brand. If I see an ad for the Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, for example, and I put that into Google, what do I see? (see image above)

I've marked in green all the sites that, from the point of view of a marketer, not in that marketer's control. Each of them, it turns out, are conversational media sites - forums, blogs, photosharing sites, wikipedia - where the brand is being actively discussed. Try this search for any number of specific brands, and it's surprising how often this occurs.

In short, there are a lot of conversations out there that marketers can't "control", but that are vital to the brand's perception, consideration, and performance. I have to run to an appt, but I'll be updating this post with thoughts on what this means for Yahoo, Microsoft, Google, and Facebook, as solving for this issue is a key task that major advertising platforms - and all of the aforementioned companies are just that - must execute upon. Facebook's announcement this week was a first step toward this, but it lacks several key factors necessary to create a fully realized ecosystem. But so far, no one else has that ecosystem either.

More on what such a system might look like when I get back...

I've posited this in the past, now Compete shows data that backs it (in as much as you buy Compete data):

What you find is that the top 1% of searchers performs a full 13% of all searches in a given month. If you extend this to the top 20% the number of queries increase to roughly 70%. So in contrast to the standard 80-20 pareto it appears that in web search there is roughly a 70-20 distribution. So what if we break this out by engine?

I (and I bet you) count myself in the category of power searcher - probably 25-50 searches a day. My mother, well, more like 1-5 a day. If that.

What I do wonder is whether Google et al are creating products for ME, or for my mother. This data would argue that they should be for me.

Is Facebook Ads illegal? Probably not, but .... one would hope this issue had been vetted prior to launch, given the launch was in New York...

There is at least one problem with this idea: It may be illegal under a 100-year-old New York privacy law. The statute says that “any person whose name, portrait, picture, or voice is used within this state for advertising purposes or for the purposes of trade without the written consent first obtained” can sue for damages. Moreover, such a use is also a criminal misdemeanor.

According to William McGeveran, a professor at the University of Minnesota Law School who wrote about these laws in a blog post today, the law would apply to Facebook users anywhere if the ad were displayed in New York. Arguably, it could apply if the ad was displayed on a computer screen within the state.

I doubt this is going to go very far, but at the very least it shows a lack of due diligence...a quick change in the TOS would have addressed this.

Tim: It's the data, and OpenSocial isn't working for him.

Google Earth adds weather layer...Googaia is becoming reality....

TC on the True Knowledge NLSE.

Pay attention, citizens. This is not good precedent.

I noted earlier that our Web 2 conversation was among the best I've had the pleasure of moderating, and posted the video here. But the really good part was all the way at minute 21, which is a long wait. So I asked our video wizards at Good Productions to send me just the clip where Ballmer goes purple and talks about Microsoft search "dunking on the competition." It's priceless.

He's so quoteable. On Google's Android phone platform:

"So we have great momentum, we've brought our Windows Mobile 6 software to market, we're driving forward on our future releases and we'll have to see what Google does," said Ballmer. "Right now they have a press release..."

I was involved in starting the Foursquare conference, a private media conference that takes place each year around this time in NYC. I'm not involved anymore, but I do pay attention to who's there. This year Mark Zuckerberg and his CFO stole the show, it seems. There is not much press at the event, but this piece in Portfolio.com slipped out. The quotes are worthy of repeating:

First, financing. C.F.O. Gideon Yu told Portfolio.com today that the company is preparing to raise an additional $260 million to close its Series D financing round....

...[Facebook's ad system] will allow businesses to set up their own Facebook pages and then reach out to real, live users -- that is, potential customers -- based on the interests they have described in their profiles.

If those interests include not seeing advertising, that is too bad. "There is no opting out of advertising," Zuckerberg said....""The ads are going to feel like content to a lot of people."

...Asked why Facebook chose not to participate in Google's new social networking consortium Open Social, Zuckerberg replied, "Who says we didn't choose to be a part of it?"

In fact, he added, "We didn't really find out about it until an hour after it launched."

And then there's this vignette:

At one point, Google co-founder Sergey Brin emerged from a side room at the conference, which was held at the Pierre Hotel in Manhattan, and headed straight for Zuckerberg. Bystanders held their breath, waiting for some kind of showdown.

But like a couple of championship boxers at a pre-fight weigh-in, they didn't so much as acknowledge one another. Brin just smiled as he walked straight past Zuckerberg, who kept his gaze straight ahead.

Cross posted from the FM Blog:

eMarketer projects that US online advertising will more than double as a percentage of total media, rising from only a 6% share of total media in 2006, to slightly more than a 12% share in 2010.

What to make of this?

We'd like to announce two changes to site targeting in Google's content network. First, because site targeting now offers more precise targeting options, we've given it a more appropriate name: placement targeting. Second, we're introducing a new cost-per-click bidding option so you can now pay per click or per impression.

Introducing placement targeting

When site targeting was first introduced two years ago, advertisers could search for specific URLs or topics to find individual sites in the Google content network and run their image and text ads on these sites. Over time, we've introduced other features like targeting by demographics and richer ad formats such as click-to-play video ads. Now, advertisers can target not only websites but also precise subsections of sites, such as the football pages of a news site, the show times section of a movie site, and even a specific ad unit (a block of Google ads) on a particular webpage.

Because of these new changes, we've changed the name from site targeting to placement targeting. The term "placement" can be used to refer to any site or subsection of a site that you choose to target. As the number of placements available for targeting continues to grow, you'll have even greater control over the parts of the Google content network on which your ads appear.

As you move up the chain of value in the ad world, you must have a few things. You must have flighting - the ability to run ads at a specific time in a specific place on a specific site. And you must have service - the ability to change those flights when you want, as you want, and to learn what is working, what is not, and why. And, you must have integration - the ability to make your ads conversant with the flights you've bought.

Google, with this evolutionary move, is working on the first two of these key items. The company is still entirely focused on scaled, software driven approaches. But it's working its way toward approaches that only work when humans are involved. Very interesting.

My first big question on Facebook Ads: What's in it for the average Facebook user? Dove right now has 35 fans. Saturn has about the same. I know, it's been one day. But.........when I used Google, there's a value to me from the ads that is very very clear. Those ads were relevant, they were useful, they *added value to the dialog I was having with Google.* That value meant spammers came hard at the system, trying to game me into clicking on their links, but that was to be expected when so much value was out there in the open. Why aren't there Facebook spammers? Well, because...there's not any explicit value for the average Joe, is there? Or is there? What am I missing?

Well, the news is out, and it's at least far more interesting than it was threatening to be. But it's not as interesting as I wish it were.
But, for a small team cranking for four months time, it's directionally very promising.

So what to make of it? First, I'll assume readers are familar with the basics. If you want a refresher on what was announced, head here.

But I have some questions, the answers to which I've either missed in the coverage, or are so far not addressed. My guess is it's the former, but in any case, before I write anything about it, I want to talk with Facebook folks. So I'm going to do more reporting first.

But on first review, I am impressed. The next step is much more difficult: will these prove out for marketers. At the end of the day, performance outs. Google proved it. Facebook has to as well.

I'm tempted to say "I have no idea lately" but that's not fair, I do. I'm nearly 100% focused on FM these days, and while it's an honor to be pitched, daily, hourly, by search related companies looking for coverage on Searchblog, I simply can't grok new search companies. Those of you who have suffered me these past months know, I am writing now about whatever turns me on, including search, but also ad models, facebook, privacy, whatever. I really wish I could write about pure search more. Why? Well, here's a good reason. Really. I swear. The pitch headline was this: "Discovery Engine for Steaks."

I really miss my days as a pure search writer. Man, that was so good, let me say it again: A Discovery Engine for Steaks!

But I need more time to post on Facebook's stuff. I was at a meeting in San Jose when it broke. I mean, WHO COMMUTES IN THE VALLEY? MY *GOD*, it took me nearly three hours to get from San Jose to Marin at 5 pm today. Who does this every day? Any of you?

Anyway....some fun links for the day:

Henry on the Google economy.

The Facebook press releases.

Forbes on Facebook. And the Merc. Mark Z: "marketers are going to be part of the conversation" - sheesh, where have I heard that before?

Search your genome, baby.

Yahoo says sorry for China, in a way.

Newspapers are sorry that Google exists, in a way.

A Google like performance in China for the new stock.

Asked by Reuters about buying Yahoo at a tech conference, here's his response:

My answer is a considered 'no comment'.
We want to succeed in the online advertising space. What happens with Yahoo, we'll all have to wait and see.

Facebook will launch its new ad platform today in New York. I am not there - I have cut back my travel significantly to be near family for the time being - but I'll be watching closely. After taking a perception hit with the launch of Google's Open Social, Facebook needs a good reception to continue its current status as Hottest Thing On The Planet. I agree with Cnet's Stephanie Olsen in this piece, when she quotes a tech exec as saying: "The company that can process the most data will win." I'd modify that - the company that can process the most data intelligently and in context, wins.

I'll post once the news breaks.

Go, Danny, go!

Go, Mark, go!

and...

Go, pmarca, go!

and then...go Tim!

and...screw in the hinges, Seth!

Om Malik's one-day conference on the future of video is heating up. YouTube founder Steve Chen has joined the lineup, as has the head of digital media for MTV, the head of MySpace TV, and many more.

Om has extended a 15% discount to pals of Searchblog, head here for the deal. Hundreds have already registered, it looks to be a great day of discussions. See you there!

Tommorrow Facebook is set to unveil a new advertising strategy, and Venturebeat has a source saying this is what they plan to do:

In a project code-named Pandemic, Facebook will remove the somewhat popular “sponsored groups” that advertisers can buy on the site. Instead, it will introduce pages that advertisers can buy, and which can include interactive games or other applications of the advertisers’ choosing.

Pending the outcome of an internal debate within Facebook, these pages may include a number of vertical categories, such as movies, music, restaurants, travel, nonprofits, and others.

Facebook has already developed applications for these categories, that we understand to compete directly with many successful third party applications on Facebook already in these categories.

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwn.

Sure, Facebook is going to compete with its own developers, that's something any grown up in this business would expect. Mark said as much at Web 2. I am still hoping for something a bit more .... innovative. Hope Venturebeat only has half the story. Or less.

Not news anymore, but here's the release, in the extended entry below.

Journal coverage here.

Continue reading "Google and Partners Announce Open Platform for Mobile" »

How many ad networks can you buy? As many as you can afford....

Newsweek's Steven Levy tags along as new Googlers learn about the world. It sounds like a great program.

Chris DeWolfe and Eric Schimdt, along with Joe Kraus have gathered the press corps on very short notice to announce a relationship - one quickly finalized, no doubt - around OpenSocial. MySpace will adopt the Open Social API standard. Will Facebook? Will they? huuummmm? What with Facebook announcing its own challenge to AdWords coming next week, the timing is certainly fortuitous.

God, history just keep repeating itself, doesn't it? The parallels with the history of search are eerie. Someone leads (Friendster/Alta Vista), then falters, others launch, and catch up, a market leader emerges (Yahoo/MySpace), then a new entrant sprints ahead (Google/Facebook), then the "old" leaders have to partner to respond.

What's interesting is that the "old" partner in the case of social networking is Google. Will this be a leap ahead, a real threat to Facebook? Or will Facebook stay ahead?

I am on the the call now, but I can't stay they whole time. The embargo was just lifted, so here's the release, below.

On the Facebook issue:

"We are talking to everyone, we are not announcing further partnerships now, we anticipate more..."

But I'm guessing Facebook is not one of them....yet. Folks pushed on the call on this point, and the answers were not definitive - it's clear that overtures have been made, but none have been taken.

------

MYSPACE AND GOOGLE JOIN FORCES TO LAUNCH OPEN PLATFORM FOR SOCIAL APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT

Collaboration on “OpenSocial” to Spark and Simplify Web Innovation

LOS ANGELES / MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA—November 1, 2007—MySpace, the world’s largest social network, and Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced that they are joining forces to launch OpenSocial— a set of common APIs for building social applications across the web. The partnership spearheads an initiative to standardize and simplify the development of social applications. Today’s announcement underscores MySpace’s commitment to supporting standards that foster innovation in an increasingly social Web.

“Our partnership with Google allows developers to gain massive distribution without unnecessary specialized development for every platform,” said Chris DeWolfe, Chief Executive Officer and co-founder of MySpace. “This is about helping the start-up spend more time building a great product rather than rebuilding it for every social network. We’re pleased to collaborate with Google to establish a landmark standard for social applications.”

As a founding member of OpenSocial, MySpace will provide critical user mass and platform guidance. The OpenSocial standards are designed to evolve through contribution from the open source community and as new features are developed by various partners. Global members of the OpenSocial community include Engage.com, Friendster, hi5, Hyves, imeem, LinkedIn, Ning, Oracle, orkut, Plaxo, Salesforce.com, Six Apart, Tianji, Viadeo, and XING.

“As the most trafficked website in the country and the most popular social network in the world, MySpace is one of the leading forces in the global social Web,” said Dr. Eric Schmidt, Chairman of the Executive Committee and Chief Executive Officer of Google. “We’re thrilled to grow our strategic relationship with MySpace by joining forces on this important initiative.”

“An as application developer, we’re excited to see MySpace adopting the OpenSocial standard for social application development,” said Joe Greenstein, CEO of Flixster. “Application developers have been working with MySpace for a long time—this takes what we can do together to a whole new level. The sheer scale of MySpace makes this extremely exciting for us.”

“We’re all citizens of a larger Web—no network is an island onto itself,” said Aber Whitcomb, CTO of MySpace. “We look forward to continuing to develop great technology with Google and all of the OpenSocial participants. It’s exciting that social networks are getting social with each other.”

The launch of OpenSocial is the first release of technical details for the forthcoming MySpace Platform. Starting tonight, developers can start writing applications for OpenSocial at http://code.google.com/apis/opensocial which the MySpace Platform will support at launch.