Category: Yahoo!

Doubleclick and Google Clout: First in a Series

“CEO David S. Rosenblatt of DoubleClick Inc., which serves up some 200 billion ads a month for customers, says that every campaign now allows for 50 different types of metrics.” Source: BusinessWeek. 2006.

“In 2005, Google captured as much as 64 percent of the [paid global search] market…” Source:Clickz.

“In June 2006, Google Sites led in search query volume with 2.9 billion searches conducted, followed by Yahoo! Sites (1.8 billion) and MSN-Microsoft Sites (818 million).” [U.S. market] Source: comScore

Google’s “landmark agreement” for search and advertising with News Corp./Fox Interactive (MySpace, etc). Source: release

Google’s $1 Billion investment and “strategic alliance” with Time Warner (via a 5% share AOL). Source: release

Doubleclick’s EU-based Falk subsidiary [acquired 2006]: “Falk AdSolution is now the third-largest ad management solution worldwide, serving over 18 billion ad impressions per month. With more than 70 employees and hundreds of publisher, marketer and agency customers, Falk is well positioned to cement its leadership in the online marketing industry.” Source: Company Profile.

“In December 2006, Google Sites captured 47.3 percent of the U.S. search market, gaining 0.4 share points from the previous month. Yahoo! Sites grew 0.3 share points, maintaining its second place ranking with 28.5 percent of U.S. searches, followed by Microsoft Sites (10.5 percent), Ask Network (5.4 percent) and Time Warner Network (4.9 percent)…. Google Sites led the pack with 3.2 billion search queries performed, followed by Yahoo Sites (1.9 billion), MSN-Microsoft (713 million), Ask Network (363 million), and Time Warner Network (335 million).” Source: comScore

Doubleclick’s 2006 acquisition of Klipmart, “the nation’s largest provider of online video advertising and management solutions for web publishers, agencies, and marketers.” source: release.

Resource: “What Microsoft’s MSN, Google, Yahoo and AOL KNow About You.” A very useful and well-written article by Elise Ackerman of the San Jose Mercury News. It’s a chilling description about how much information is already being collected about all of us.

silk movies pantyfemale movie single whitesmokin movies xxxsoundtrack movie philadelphiamovies in spankingsmovies squirt tgpstrap on sex moviestrap on sex movies Map

FTC and the EC—Investigate and Deny Google/Doubleclick

The Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission must investigate–and should halt–this acquisition. As the Center for Digital Democracy and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group told the FTC last November, we are concerned about the growing consolidation of control within the digital advertising technology industry. Now, we have the number one online search advertising “agency”–Google, swallowing up the leading provider of third party display ads online. Google will have even more information about each of us and a vast new array of targeting and profiling technologies to boot. We mention the EU because Google is a global business and Doubleclick acquired Germany-based Falk last year.

The evolving structure of the interactive advertising market will have a tremendous impact on the quality and diversity of content in the emerging digital media worlds. We also most protect ourselves from permitting a handful of giants–such as a Google–to digitally shadow our every move online. But the new deal underscores why its time to protect privacy online in the U.S. There needs to be a series of safeguards to ensure we fully understand and control all our information (and not just the narrowly defined data set of name, email, etc. now acknowledged by industry and regulators). There are other concerns beyond the scope of anti-trust and data privacy regulators. We must think about the consequences to civil society about a interactive world where everything is a precision targeted and profiled-powered commercial transaction.

Expect action from the Center for Digital Democracy.

software credit and card achdegrees accredited nursing onlineace creditsaccount card bank texas credit merchantcredit aa visa cardfor accreditation programs residential treatmentcredits tax adoptionfederal union credit airforce Map

New MIT Book Covers Children/Youth and Digital Culture/Politics

My wife Kathryn C. Montgomery has a new book about to be published. It’s titled “Generation Digital: Politics, Commerce, and Childhood in the Age of the Internet.” The following is from the MIT Press catalog:

“Children and teens today have integrated digital culture seamlessly into their lives. For most, using the Internet, playing videogames, downloading music onto an iPod, or multitasking with a cell phone is no more complicated than setting the toaster oven to “bake” or turning on the TV. In Generation Digital, media expert and activist Kathryn C. Montgomery examines the ways in which the new media landscape is changing the nature of childhood and adolescence and analyzes recent political debates that have shaped both policy and practice in digital culture.

The media have pictured the so-called “digital generation” in contradictory ways: as bold trailblazers and innocent victims, as active creators of digital culture and passive targets of digital marketing. This, says Montgomery, reflects our ambivalent attitude toward both youth and technology. She charts a confluence of historical trends that made children and teens a particularly valuable target market during the early commercialization of the Internet and describes the consumer-group advocacy campaign that led to a law to protect children’s privacy on the Internet. Montgomery recounts–as a participant and as a media scholar–the highly publicized battles over indecency and pornography on the Internet. She shows how digital marketing taps into teenagers’ developmental needs and how three public service campaigns–about sexuality, smoking, and political involvement–borrowed their techniques from commercial digital marketers. Not all of today’s techno-savvy youth are politically disaffected; Generation Digital chronicles the ways that many have used the Internet as a political tool, mobilizing young voters in 2004 and waging battles with the music and media industries over control of cultural expression online.”

MySpace Presidential `Primary

Rupert Murdoch’s MySpace has just announced “plans to hold their own Presidential primary. The social networking giant will hold virtual elections on January 1 and 2, 2008.” [via Webpronews]. Here’s what Fox Interactive execs said: “The MySpace community will give America its first Presidential primary winner in 2008,” said Chris DeWolfe, CEO of MySpace. Tom Anderson, MySpace president was quoted saying “Iowa and New Hampshire may be selecting delegates, but the MySpace vote will be the first test of where candidates stand in the election year.”

Will this be a truly secret ballot? Or will MySpace’s extensive data collection system merely add our presidential preferences to what it calls its “digital gold“—our data files? Supporters of online campaigning must do a better job raising the ethical and policy issues. Otherwise they will end up with an interactive election system which does not truly reflect the Internet’s democratic potential.

Congressional Internet Caucus—–Break Your Special Interest Ties

Today’s column by Washington Post reporter Jeffrey Birnbaum focusing on the sale of products and services at Congressional Internet Caucus events [“Soliciting for Good Citizens” reg. required] underscores why it’s time for the bi-partisan group to restructure its relationship with the Internet Education Foundation’s Advisory Committee.

This Congress is supposed to be breaking the ties between the powerful lobbying infrastructure and its political deliberations. Permitting the most powerful corporate media and telecom special interests to, in essence, determine the Caucus agenda is inappropriate (to say the least!). No group funded by the telecom and media industry should play a role as well in shaping the Caucus agenda. We hope the Net Caucus will clean house. Will Caucus co-chairs Senator Pat Leahy, Rep. Rick Boucher, and Rep. Robert Goodlatte do the right thing?

Time for Safeguards on “Micro” Targeting and Electoral Campaigns

The role which precision marketing plays in political campaigns, especially the use of largely stealth data collection and targeting technologies, requires serious debate and action. Voters—and the general public—have no clue that data about them is being collected, analyzed and profiled. Nor do they comprehend the disturbing range of segmentation techniques being designed as massive weapons of personalized persuasion.

Here is an example of what’s already being done to target voters—largely out of public view and consent. Political leaders—including the presidential candidates—have to come “clean” about the use of such techniques. We don’t believe any interactive marketing technologies should be applied without full disclosure and consent of the individual. Digital political marketing also requires policy safeguards.

Here’s an excerpt from a report that discusses the role of micro targeting in the recent election campaign of Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City. My bold.

“… we evaluated over 200 variables and segmented one of the most diverse cities in the world into seven separate and statistically distinct categories that were defined by primarily but not exclusively by psychographics – the motives behind voting behavior. Based on each of these segments we developed a range of potential messages and alternative executions. To develop the micro-targeting framework, we created a proprietary algorithm to predict how every individual voter in NYC would respond to different combinations of the potential messages and executions. The input to this model included:

· Demographics
· Psychographics
· Geography
· Voter history
· Lifestyle data
· Consumer data
· Responses to survey questions and alternative messages
Based on the predictions of the model we then identified the optimal
communications for each of the 4.2 million voters on file…”
source: “Silent Marketing: Micro-targeting.” Tom Agan. Penn, Schoen, & Berland Associates. 2007

Congressional Internet Caucus: It’s For Sale!

Who really runs the U.S. Congressional Internet Caucus–Members of Congress or the companies and special interests with the deepest checkbook? Take a look at how a forthcoming Congressional Caucus meeting on wireless issues is, literally, for sale. At the NetCaucus website for the event, chaired by Congressman Mike Honda [Chair of the Congressional Internet Caucus’ Wireless Task Force] is a pitch for “sponsorship.” Here’s how you can push your message before the Hill:

“Sponsorship Opportunities

We are seeking responsible industry players to help facilitate this important policy dialogue with a few key sponsorships. These promotional sponsorship options will help position your organization as a thought leader during the substantive discussions. Your assistance will help to bring together leading location-service providers, social networking sites, advertising service providers, wireless carriers, government officials and Congressional players will come together to start discussing the range of issues, policies and opportunities presented by this emerging marketplace.

Options include:
Dialogue pens: Distribute pens with your logo in conference bags and binders.
Dialogue breaks: We’ll announce your sponsorship of the morning continental breakfast or mid-morning coffee break and feature your logo or brand in the break area.
Dialogue Wi-Fi Hotspots: We will blanket the meeting area with wireless Internet access and include you as a promotional sponsor.
Post-Dialogue VIP Dinner End the conference on a high note and host a VIP event; choose from some of D.C.’s finest restaurants. ICAC staff will work with you to craft the perfect guest list.

Contact us for details & pricing.”

It’s time that the Caucus break its ties with the Advisory Committee and become a truly independent forum. Take a look at the Advisors!

Google Wants to Cash-in on Online Political Ads: What About Digital Free Time?

This is another in our series of warnings that unless campaign finance reform advocates act soon, the system requiring big money for campaigns will fully extend into all the digital platforms. Here’s an excerpt from a good story by Jim Puzzanghera of the LA Times [reg. required] that discusses Google’s new political ad sales team: “Google appears to be the most aggressive in reaching out to campaigns, suggesting that the Web giant thinks online politics may be approaching the point at which the company can make money from it….Campaigns spent about $12 million on online advertising in the 2004 presidential campaign, a tiny amount compared with the $1.6 billion they allocated to TV ads, said Michael A. Bassik, vice president of Internet strategy for MSCH Partners, an online political marketing firm. But campaign spending overall is shooting up. The amount spent on all political races in 2004 — about $4 billion — is expected to more than double in 2008. And just as many major companies are doing, political campaigns are expected to shift more of their ad dollars to the Web. Google wants to be ready when that happens.”

As for privacy, and the need to protect voters from the negative consequences of data collection, behavioral targeting, etc., see this quote from the LA Times’ story: “The Google network allows you to do very interesting things with targeting, with messaging, etc., in a way that you could never pull off with a 30-second TV spot,” Derek Kuhl, who is leading a New York-based political sales team [for Google] that will have three or four people, told the group.”

Here’s a link to the video of Google’s Eliot Schrage recently discussing the company and online politics, etc.

Did the FCC Really Censor a Dove Soap Ad? Beware the Slippery `Soap

If this is true, we find it highly inappropriate for the FCC to screen any content in advance. We also believe Dove and its ad agency should not have asked the FCC for comment. This is the proverbial “slippery soap” regarding content and the FCC. Read the following excerpt from Promo magazine and a story from “adland” [with pictures] via this link:

“The Federal Communications Commission would not allow Dove to run its latest television commercials because they feature “implied nudity” of women over 50, revealed Maureen Shirreff, group creative director of Ogilvy & Mather Chicago.

She noted that the spots are on the Dove Web site and are also being broadcast around the world. “They [the FCC] wanted to see some presence of clothing,” Shirreff said. “They were really nice, and we don’t fault anyone.” She added that O&M and Dove felt that it would be impossible for the spots to be edited, as was suggested by the FCC, to pass federal muster.”

aaya toofan mp3 aayamp3 crack abeeshepherd aberdeen wayne kenny mp3rottenberg mp3 abbiemp3 abdur raoofselamanya abadi mp3mp3 aayar paadiheliopolis aberfeldy mp3 Map