The Journal pokes a beehive about YouTube’s revenue, which is not what it should be and is a real thorn for Google. In light of the Viacom case, this is very interesting stuff. Then Cuban claims the porn issue means Google will lose – it only sells ads on non porn content, meaning it’s filtering, meaning it’s not a safe harbor DMCA defensible play. No matter what, this is going to be landmark stuff. The funny thing is to hear Google acknowledge it has a mess on its hands as it deals with the shift from search ads to brand ads, and not just with YouTube:
Mr. Armstrong, who is 37 years old, describes Project Spaghetti as an effort to fix the plumbing behind all of Google’s ad initiatives. The inefficiencies, he says, are a product of Google’s rapid growth and its innovation. Streamlining the systems and developing new ad formats, he says, should eventually improve the company’s bottom line.
Funny to hear it put this way at a company that the world thinks has its shit totally together. It’s never like you think it is, inside. I’ve been writing for years about this DNA shift – from engineering company to media company. It’s great to see a well reported piece really dig into it.
Cuban is just making things up now. Filtering (in the DMCA sense) is about whether or not they show the video (i.e., editorial control), not whether or not they sell ads against it (i.e., monetization).
Apology: Cuban didn’t actually mention monetization, so my previous comment is irrelevant. That’s what I get for not following the link first…