John Battelle's Searchblog

It rules. Check out this post, where he celebrates a fan mashing up his music with a killer video execution (also below). Or this post, where he groks some killer mobile future tech.

Don't tell me the talent isn't getting the massive changes in the way the world works. Wake up, MLB!

From BBtv:

This is just so stupid I can't get up the energy to properly berate it. From TechDirt's coverage:

Brian writes in to let us know that Major League Baseball seems to be following the NFL's rules on how reporters are allowed to report on games. In the MLB's case, reporters can only post short video clips, can't post more than 7 photos per game and all non-text content must be removed after 72 hours. It's fairly amazing that news organizations agree to put up with these restrictions. The fact that news organizations caved into the NFL is what has allowed MLB to go down a similar path. Again, MLB has every right to set the terms by which it gives out press passes, but news organizations should push back against these policies, potentially buying tickets themselves, rather than getting team-approved press passes.

Rich finds out, prolly not. Here's why.

(Original link)

Google relaunches its apps as "Sites" - a way to "add an edit button to the web." Coverage.

A good day for Marissa, as health is one of her projects. Eric previewed it today at a conference, the Google blog writeup is here.

TechCrunch ain't convinced.

A very long, very flattering profile of Marissa Mayer. It's worth the read.

He's happy to focus on display.

Google is laying cable, baby. More from Om.

Just making note...related to click data, analysis from Henry here..and Hitwise says "not so fast" things are OK...

At the IAB yesterday Jerry Yang promised that Yahoo would follow a more open path, but didn't delve into specifics. But there are plenty of specifics to talk about. First, Yahoo Buzz, which launched this week, is a step in that direction, though it's a limited beta for now. Secondly, Yahoo Search has opened its platform for publishers, allowing them to pull Yahoo results and redesign them as the publishers see fit (not to mention the incorporation of Hadoop, an open source project, in Yahoo Search results) . And third, Yahoo is opening up its home page to selected content contributors.

I plan a longer post on Yahoo if/when I get a chance to talk with folks there. It's clear they are beginning to roll out a strategy, but, well, it's not clear to me what the big vision is. I see parts of it - boil the all-in-one advertising platform ocean, make Yahoo more open, create exchanges between publishers and advertisers - but I can't see the whole dern thing. And from the buzz at the IAB conference after Jerry and Sue's presentation yesterday, I ain't the only one.

Update: Sue Decker has posted more of her thoughts on Yahoo's strategy here. Also, I'm in touch with Yahoo to get a briefing, though skeds being what they are it might not happen for a few weeks...

Jason Kilar, CEO of Hulu, gave a very impressive demo today at the IAB. I was prepared to not be impressed. I was wrong. It's a smart company with a good plan, very customer focused. I can only imagine this is what the folks at YouTube wished they could have done. I have a few nits with what I heard, more after I corner Jason after the event. But honestly, it was pretty damn cool.

Jerry Yang had the grace to not cancel on the IAB keynote interview today, not sure I would have done the same were I in his shoes. We spoke briefly before he went on, he seemed in good spirits, though clearly the reality of Yahoo's situation sat heavy in the air.

He and President Sue Decker (that was a surprise) took the stage together, and Jerry spoke solo for a bit. Notes:

The journey has been anything but boring and we are on the cusp of something more interesting....will be talking about role of technology in the advertising business...what is Yahoo? We need to continue to innovate and lead....Yahoo as the "starting point"...focus on key starting points: home page, Yahoo mail, search, and mobile. And then three key vertical content areas: Finance, News, Sports.

Yang alludes again to open platform for Yahoo....but gives no details. Mentions "social aspect" - namechecks the social graph, says it's still early.

So far, no mention of the MSFT hostile bid, or the trouble the company is in. I think the audience is waiting for it...but they are not going to get it in his prepared comments.

Jerry introduces Sue. Sue is going to talk about Yahoo's advertising strategy in a post Panama world. Sue is the architect of Yahoo's approach to the ad network business (ie buying a ton of them)....Sue:

Need to simplify things...it's highly complex to do digital advertising...need a powerful platform...that's what Yahoo is building...we are building a cutting edge ad platform running across search, display, video...capable of harnessing Yahoo and non Yahoo properties....we're trying to revolutionize the online industry...a lofty goal (and one Microsoft, AOL, Google also are trying to do)....

For a publisher: Imagine being able to distribute an advertisers' campaign across your audience, as well as other publishers audiences....(hmmmm not sure publishers would want to do that, though I can see it if the publishers are aligned). This is clearly central to Yahoo's strategy, as well as doing the same with advertisers. Hmmm. Much to talk about there..

From and advertiser point of view - simplification of campaign flighting and operations (which I can tell you from personal experience is a major issue).

For agencies - streamline the buying process. For Ad Networks, connect your publishers to more advertisers.

An open platform could simplify the process. True, but it's a boil the ocean ecosystem play.

Too much time is spent on the bring part of the business, not enough time on the creative (I hear that).

OK, the comments from both are over, and now Randall is going to ask questions.

Jerry asks if the first question is about Microsoft. Joke about the Oscars.

So the Microsoft question: We can't say a whole lot about it. "It's been galvanizing for us." Yahoo is a unique asset, and we have to think it through...

Sue: There's a big impact on the workforce but...she is focusing on the day to day business. We had to clean up some old deals that were no longer market (I think this is a reference to their third party ad selling deals with folks like WebMD, etc. - version 1.0 of the strategy they are now talking about on stage).

Randall: Branded publishers are scared of commoditization of their inventory. What is your response? We see the exchange as a critical part of the broader platform...driving openness and scale....if we could decrease the friction it should increase the yield for publishers (er...well, not if you are selling high premium inventory. I think if you are sold out of high yield inventory, perhaps you can reach into this platform to get more, but then it's not YOUR inventory, it's not your engaged audience. So how does this help? I'm not getting this...but ...Lord knows I don't always get everything all at once...). She pitches the idea of publisher's adding Yahoo inventory to what the publisher's sell (this idea bears more consideration in another post). Also, Yahoo driving traffic to partner sites (ie the newspaper deals Yahoo has been leading).

Discussion of Yahoo's newspaper deals follows. I'll spare you the details. It's actually interesting, structurally, and I sure hope it works. She mentions that Yahoo's work in display is far more complicated than search and Panama - because inventory is negotiated, not auction, and very fragmented. APeX is the name - Advertiser Publisher Exchange...

Yes, it is more complicated. I think I need to spend some time grokking this with the Yahoo folks...

Yahoo has reengineered its sales force to be integrated across all channels - solutions based, not channel based. A good move.

To be honest, while it's clear these guys have spent a fair amount of time staring at this problem, it's not clear to me what the big vision is...and neither Jerry nor Sue landed any counterpunches with regard to the Microsoft threat. They were very careful to say...pretty much nothing.

But Jerry pulls one out in the end: By 2013, he says, online advertising will be the biggest medium in the US, by ad spend. Now that's something folks gathered under the banner of the IAB can certainly applaud.

As I noted before, I'm at the IAB conference for the next few days (the mobile phone shot above is of Randall Rothenberg, IAB CEO). Wenda Harris Millard, the new Chair of the Board (on which I serve) just laid out a line I really loved:
"We must not trade our advertising inventory like pork bellies."

She refers to the commoditization of branded advertising inventory via ad newtorks and algorithms. It was quite inspiring. But folks were not sure whether to clap. I say: Bravo!!!

Work checking out:

Concerns loom as Google begins testing health records system (ars)

The Search for the Golden Geek (to lead Facebook) (AllThingsDigital)

Superdelegate layer in Google Earth (Official Google Blog)

Maybe Microsoft Should Stalk Different Prey (NYT)

I've got an IAB Board meeting and annual conference in Phoenix starting today, and last week was winter break for my kids. So we combined the two and spent a few days as a family in Scottsdale, home of my hometown team. Yesterday my son and I walked over to the Giants' training facility and were pleased to find it open, with about fifty or so die hard fans taking in a glorious early camp practice. I shot a few pictures off my mobile phone, here they are, to warm your still wintry hearts.

My son Ian is stoked to be here.

Barry Zito (#75) is ready to have a better year. He lives in my neighborhood in Marin, and I'm told he's glad to have his transition year (from the A's to the Giants) over with.

Ah, baseball. Some things never change.

Click Forensics, a company that certainly benefits from press about high click fraud, has come out with another scary statement: Click Fraud accounts for more than 28% of clicks on content networks, which I assume means AdSense and similar types of syndicated networks. The overall rate of fraud is more than 16%, the company claims. Seeking Alpha covers it here.

The thing is, we've heard this before, and before that, and probably before that, and the response from Yahoo and Google is always the same: Click Forensics has got it all wrong. We catch nearly all fraud before anyone has to pay for it. All of this is overblown and misunderstood.

So why does Click Forensics keep at it? Who's right here?

Just sent this link - an internal email from Kevin Johnson, Microsoft President, to employees (and posted to Microsoft's press area as well). Can't find much news in it but...

A while back I wrote a piece in which I expressed concerns about how Google might use data it has on individuals, and suggesting that I and perhaps others have hit their "Google saturation point." The post elicited alot of comments, including Matt Cutts of Google, who promised to respond with some policy clarifications. Well, the response got stuck in his mailbox, but he just posted it now. Here is the highlight:

For example, our internal user data access agreement explicitly mentions that Google employees are not allowed to try to access data on any public figure, any employee at a particular company, or any acquaintance. To do so would be grounds for immediate termination. So for the case that you’re worried about (running a start-up using Google’s tools), we have mechanisms and policies in place that specifically protect your privacy in that situation.

But...this allows them, from what I can tell, to access information on anyone who is not a "public figure, any employee at a particular company, or any acquaintance."

The way it's worded, it seems to be pretty easy to get around. "Hey Joe, do you know Battelle?" "No, who's he?" "Never mind, can you just go check out his files for me?"

Anyway....

Tactic or honest response? Sergey on Microsoft:

"The Internet has evolved from open standards, having a diversity of companies," Brin told The Associated Press after the event. "And when you start to have companies that control the operating system, control the browsers, they really tie up the top Web sites, and can be used to manipulate stuff in various ways. I think that's unnerving."

...can be found here. Not a good month for Yahoo, though it's hard to say what drove their drop - it was not the core Yahoo sites, it was "all other."

Fun to do this quick piece with the Open Road TV folks....

The SF Web 2 Expo is coming up in April, and the LaunchPad is once again happening. If you're part of an interesting startup, you should consider applying for the LaunchPad. This year they are doing it as we did it at the Summit last year - VCs are judging the whole shebang. Check it out here.

I've been thinking about media for a long time now, and if asked to give advice to folks who are *not* in the media business, I often offer this chestnut: You're in the media business too, whether you like it or not. As part of a long term sponsorship, American Express asked me to opine over on their site, you can find my first post here. An excerpt:

Today, I’ll assert, no matter what business you think you’re in – be it making widgets or providing a service, you’re now in the media business, plain and simple. Those that recognize this shift will succeed, those that ignore it will atrophy and eventually become irrelevant.

Now, what do I mean by the media business? Well, let’s start where all good businesses start: with the customer. Your customer’s media habits have changed dramatically in the past ten years. More likely than not, your customers spend nearly 15 hours a week online – it’s where they play, communicate, interact with services, and shop and research major purchases. In short, your customer has developed a major new media habit. The question is: Has your business?

More here. I plan to write more on this later.

So it's about time to create an alumni relations program! (Thanks David)

Update: oops, this is a university program, not a Google alumni program...

I gave an interview to Yahoo Finance in November last year. Here's the result....three months later!

According to this study. (via Yahoo's Search Blog)

Yahoo is on the ropes, but this project has been showing promise for a long time. Check out the news today:

Yahoo! recently launched what we believe is the worlds largest Apache Hadoop production application. The Yahoo! Search Webmap is a Hadoop application that runs on a more than 10,000 core Linux cluster and produces data that is now used in every Yahoo! Web search query.

The Webmap build starts with every Web page crawled by Yahoo! and produces a database of all known Web pages and sites on the internet and a vast array of data about every page and site. This derived data feeds the Machine Learned Ranking algorithms at the heart of Yahoo! Search.

Some Webmap size data:

* Number of links between pages in the index: roughly 1 trillion links
* Size of output: over 300 TB, compressed!
* Number of cores used to run a single Map-Reduce job: over 10,000
* Raw disk used in the production cluster: over 5 Petabytes

(Note: This is the first of a number of posts I'll be doing using mobile technology thanks to a sponsorship from Microsoft and FM. More here).

Sometimes you just need to go to a show (click on the pic for a larger image I shot while there). I certainly did after the past two months of four hour meetings, travel, and general madness. A good friend introduced me to Umphrey's McGee, a killer jam band out of Chicago. This was my third or fourth time seeing them, and they always just kill it, wherever they play. If you want a real treat, subscribe to their podcast here. What does this have to do with Searchblog? Well, as I've written before, I find the music industry very predictive of the media markets in general. Umphrey's is the kind of band that heralds a new approach to media, entertainment, and distribution. The band has a strong following in its native Chicago, but it has found another strong following online. The music doesn't lend itself to traditional packaged goods approaches to marketing, but that doesn't matter - online distribution and word of mouth has helped the band play to packed halls all over the country. I saw them at the fabled Fillmore, twice in fact, and they did the place proud. The third show is tonight, go see them if you can...

How do you use your phone? Do you search a lot on Google? Yeah, me too. Apparently, this surprised Google. I don't think it should have...or honestly, surprised anyone who makes business decisions there...(thanks JG)

A long time coming. Long time. I remember writing about this here, so long ago, I can't recall when.

Another reorg at Microsoft. But where is the chief of aQuantive? The other shoe will drop soon. Meanwhile, as predicted, Steve did not get the big job. So he's leaving.

Today, pitchers and catchers report to spring training. In three weeks, I take my son for our annual weekend in Scottsdale.

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

Then read this.

Today has been filled with news about who got laid off at Yahoo. But this news, that the fellow who was responsible for helping Yahoo run innovative new ventures inside the company, is leaving for Google, well...man. Ouch.

Need I say more about this post from Kevin? No, it's not about biology, but man, I love it when Kevin pens stuff like the headline above. From it:

And now that crowd-sourcing and social webs are all the rage, it's worth repeating: the bottom is not enough. You need a bit of top-down as well.

Much talk about this news, which is debatable, I suppose, if you're Google - it's one research company (IDC), claiming that Google's overall share of the online advertising market has slipped.

But I see this as inescapable. The brand advertisers are marching onto the internet, because that's where the audience is. And when you look at where the audience spends most of its time, it's not at Google. It's at highly engaging sites, applications, and services. This is one reason Google is so busy throwing new application pasta at the walls.

I'm tied up in meetings as I was last week, and posting will be slow. I hope to chime in here and again, but...

I dunno. This all seems like kabuki to me. I'm rapidly falling toward finding this uninteresting, but...here's Microsoft's response to Yahoo rejecting its bid:

MICROSOFT RESPONDS TO YAHOO! ANNOUNCEMENT

Reiterates Full and Fair Proposal for Microsoft-Yahoo! Combination

REDMOND, Wash. — Feb. 11, 2008 — Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ:MSFT) today issued the following statement in response to the announcement by Yahoo! Inc. (NASDAQ:YHOO) that its Board of Directors has rejected Microsoft’s previously announced proposal to acquire Yahoo!:

It is unfortunate that Yahoo! has not embraced our full and fair proposal to combine our companies. Based on conversations with stakeholders of both companies, we are confident that moving forward promptly to consummate a transaction is in the best interests of all parties.

We are offering shareholders superior value and the opportunity to participate in the upside of the combined company. The combination also offers an increasingly exciting set of solutions for consumers, publishers and advertisers while becoming better positioned to compete in the online services market.

A Microsoft-Yahoo! combination will create a more effective company that would provide greater value and service to our customers. Furthermore, the combination will create a more competitive marketplace by establishing a compelling number two competitor for Internet search and online advertising.

The Yahoo! response does not change our belief in the strategic and financial merits of our proposal. As we have said previously, Microsoft reserves the right to pursue all necessary steps to ensure that Yahoo!’s shareholders are provided with the opportunity to realize the value inherent in our proposal.

I spent most of this past week in meetings or on an airplane. I missed some good stuff. Like:

* The 15 year anniversary of Wired was in late January. The first issue (which was one of the most amazing journey's I've ever been on, creatively), is broken down here.

* Speaking of Wired, a co-founding editor, Kevin Kelly, is still writing amazing shit, this post is his latest missive.

The internet is a copy machine. At its most foundational level, it copies every action, every character, every thought we make while we ride upon it. In order to send a message from one corner of the internet to another, the protocols of communication demand that the whole message be copied along the way several times. IT companies make a lot of money selling equipment that facilitates this ceaseless copying. Every bit of data ever produced on any computer is copied somewhere. The digital economy is thus run on a river of copies. Unlike the mass-produced reproductions of the machine age, these copies are not just cheap, they are free....When copies are free, you need to sell things which can not be copied.

Believe it or not, this idea has important implications for the future of advertising online.

* Google launched a "Team Edition" of its Office Killer. Ars notices that it seems to want to sneak by the IT Department. Not a good idea.

* Ask works with Digg to launch a site called Big News.

* Everyone thinks social applications will thrive in a recession. I tend to agree, for different reasons. More on that later, I hope.

* Raises some very interesting issues.

Yahoo Board to Reject Microsoft Bid

I certainly hope this means major changes at the company, and a rallying cry for Yahoos everywhere. They need it. From the Journal:

After a series of meetings over the past week, Yahoo's board determined that the $31 per share offer "massively undervalues" Yahoo, the person said. It also doesn't account for the risks Yahoo would be taking by entering into an agreement that might be overturned by regulators. The board plans to send a letter to Microsoft on Monday, spelling out its position.

Ouch. Owwww! yeeeeeooowwwwwww!

That's Topix's response to Google's entry into the local news biz.

This is the same story I've been on about forever: it's about community. Community. Community.

Running the Internet as an application...

My site is in a transition today, to a new hosting service...stay tuned...

Huh, who woulda thunk, Time Warner is separating out AOL's access biz (no really, who woulda thunk). What might be next?

Quick trip to NYC, I'm sure while I'm in the air, Google will launch a bid for Sears Holdings...

The Web 2 Expo is happening again at Moscone this year, and if you have a company or product you want to launch in front of the 10K plus folks who are coming, why, let Brady know about it!

Facebook, watch out, the big guys are in the house...having MySpace launch a platform means real competition, and that is good for folks who were worried about Facebook changing the game on them once revenue became a reality.

Remember when I ranted about O Hare airport? Well, at 5.15 this morning, a lovely time to be in a car on my way to SFO, I was informed that my flight was summarily cancelled.

The weather, in a word, blows. So I am not in Chicago, seeing clients. I'm at home, wondering if I can get to Chicago at all...posting should be heavier than I thought!

The WSJ is reporting that Google CEO Eric Schmidt reached out to Yahoo's Yang:

Google Inc. Chief Executive Eric Schmidt called Yahoo Inc. CEO Jerry Yang to offer his company's help in any effort to thwart Microsoft Corp.'s unsolicited $44.6 billion bid for Yahoo, say people familiar with the matter.

This help would come, of course, in the form of Yahoo being assimilated into the great Google paid search machine. This would make both Yahoo and Google tons of money, to be sure. But Yang already decided against this late last year:

Yahoo executives had considered such a maneuver as part of a strategic review last year, according to people familiar with the matter, but Mr. Yang in October had signaled that it had decided against it.

"We believe having a principal position in both search and display advertising is critical to creating...long-term shareholder value," Mr. Yang told analysts during Yahoo's earnings conference call in October.

Why does he believe it? The secret is in the data. Having paid search data - who clicks on what, when, and where they go - is critical to having better display advertising offerings. Losing that data to Google would hurt Yahoo's business.

So...perhaps Jerry should call Eric back, and suggest that they do a deal that includes that data....

Punch, counterpunch. Someone tell the chief counsels to shut the f. up. More than three quarters of this Microsoft response is legalese. Please.

In a blog post that will be its only response, according to an email I was sent, Google fires pretty much everything it has at the Microsoft/Yahoo deal.

... Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and

illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC? While the
Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to
establish proprietary monopolies -- and then leverage its dominance into
new, adjacent markets.

Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft -- despite its legacy of
serious legal and regulatory offenses -- to extend unfair practices from
browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus
Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email
accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily
trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take
advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of
consumers to freely access competitors' email, IM, and web-based services?
Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions -- and consumers
deserve satisfying answers.

This hostile bid was announced on Friday so there is plenty of time for
these questions to be thoroughly addressed. We take Internet openness,
choice and innovation seriously. They are the core of our culture. We
believe that the interests of Internet users come first -- and should come
first -- as the merits of this proposed acquisition are examined and
alternatives explored.

Amazon Audible. MSFT Yahoo. Yahoo Maven. And on and on it goes.....

It's become an old saw - Microsoft will bid for Yahoo, because neither company can figure out how to crack the Google code. Now that it's happened, will it ... happen?

(PS, did you catch the reference to the project here?)

My previous coverage of this includes a prediction it'd happen in 2007 (nice timing), and a modest proposal the two companies join their search efforts. Here's my interview with Steve Ballmer at Web 2 last year, where this topic certainly comes up.

I'm still not sure this works. I don't see how the two cultures merge. But perhaps that's not the point. Perhaps at the end of the day, Yahoo becomes Microsoft's long half-hearted media arm, and the folks in Redmond can finally stop worrying about what their focus is. As I wrote back in May 07, perhaps it's time for Microsoft to be more like GE.

More later...