John Battelle's Search Blog

GrokLaw, a blog run by a paralegal who must be hepped up on triple espressos, has posted an interesting journey into the seamy side of paid search. Basically, this fellow noticed a significant discrepancy between Google and MSN’s search results, and set out to understand why. This is a great illustration of a theme that is fundamental to Google’s mojo: purity of results. MSN comes across as basically sold to the highest bidder, with competitive manipulations on top of that. It’s not a pretty picture. When MSFT launches its new search engine, one hopes they will keep this in mind.

In this post on his blog, Dan Gillmor of the SJMN points to the contradiction between “company executives and others” who claimed MSFT approached Google about a buyout (see my earlier post and comments here) and Gates’ very clear denial of same earlier this week. Dan points out that Gates is the CEO of a public company, so he can’t very well lie about something so material to his stock price. Because of this he implies that Google insiders – such as the VCs who backed the company – are the likely sources of the story.

I’m not so sure. The sourcing in the Times piece seems intentionally non-specific:

“According to company executives and others briefed on the discussions, Microsoft – desperate to capture a slice of the popular and ad-generating search business – approached Google within the last two months to discuss options, including the possibility of a takeover.”

Which company does “company executives” modify, MSFT – which is closer to the sourcing, or Google? Who knows?! My guess is the Times kept it vague on purpose, to protect its sources. (more via link below)

]]>

Read More

Internet News reports:

“Software giant Microsoft is testing its answer to Google’s popular news aggregator and search site. “MSN Newsbot”, on MSN UK, France, Spain and Italy, signals at least one of Microsoft’s intentions as it seeks to build out its own search technology.”

This is one area where MSFT has some serious prior chops – MSNBC has been thinking about news online for a long time. Should be interesting to see how it shakes out in this market.

This one from Search-This, a SEO/SEM house. The buttons, when clicked, activate colored arrows that chart who supplies who with what…ie Inktomi powers MSN, Google powers AOL, etc. (Thanks to Josh Quittner for the reference…)

Once a year Google holds a contest for hardcore search-related coders. This year, the Europeans swept, interestingly. But no mention of what they actually did (as I recall, last year they asked for new features, and the winner made a local search app that Google ended up incorporating into Google Labs)? I’ll look around…Aha…Read Slashdot threads here to find out more on the problems the Google coders were solving…MarketingWonk has a round up here of the PR and Marketing implications…

In the past few months I’ve gotten a fair number of similar email threads forwarded my way by friends who know I’m writing about search. By the time they’ve gotten to me, the emails have wound their way fairly well through the six-degrees-of-separation web, with scores if not hundreds of souls cc’d, forwarded, and attached. The subject line usually blares something along the lines of “I can’t believe they can do this!” and “Oh My God, Did You Know?”

Here’s a sample email, with identifying information deleted:

——————-
Subject: This is hard to believe, but true, I tried it.

Google has implemented a new feature wherein you can type someone’s
telephone number into the search bar and hit enter and then you will be
given a map to their house.
Before forwarding this, I tested it by typing my telephone number in
google.com. My phone number came up, and when I clicked on the MapQuest link, it actually mapped out where I live. Quite scary.
Think about it–if a child, single person, ANYONE gives out his/her phone
number, someone can actually now look it up to find out where he/she
lives. The safety issues are obvious, and alarming. This is not a hoax; Mapquest will put a star on your house on your street.
—————

I understand the initial reaction of many to this feature (which is not that new). My God, They Know Where I Live! But this fear of a such a simple thing – a reverse directory lookup – bears further contemplation. Fact is, reverse directories are not illegal. But they are also not widely available – usually only cops and reporters had access to them. No more. (more via link below)

]]>

Read More

When Google flutters its wings, a typhoon may result in the AdWords ecology – those hundreds of thousands of advertisers who depend on Google for sales via the company’s paid listings. So points out CNet’s Stephanie Olsen in a good overview of advertiser reaction to Google’s most recent shift in its AdWords technology. The complications Olsen reports point to a larger story: the increasing complexity of this shifting market ecology. The question then becomes, can any one company maintain control of this? I don’t think so, you need robust competition; the recent defection of Paul Ryan (former CTO of Overture) to MSN will help insure robust competitors for years to come.

This has been in the works for sometime, but MSFT formally announced its earnings yesterday, and broke out the MSN unit’s numbers for the first time. Headline: It’s all about paid search. The highlights (from the MSFT IR site): MSN had 50% quarter-to-quarter advertising revenue growth, total revenue totaled $491 million in the first quarter compared to $427 million in the prior year’s first quarter. MSN Subscription revenue declined $17 million or 6% reflecting a decrease in the number of subscribers. MSN Network services revenue grew $81 million or 51% as a result of growth in paid search and strong general advertising sales across all geographic regions.

Ask Chief Steve Berkowitz (caveat: we ran in the same circles at IDG) gives one of his first interviews (to the CC Times) since being formally named CEO. Steve’s a good guy and he has quite a job – being #4 in a three-horse race ain’t fun. But he lays out his plans and makes his case in the interview.

Samples:

Read More