Google & the Public Interest Policy Pod People

They’re coming. The “Google Policy Fellows” to help staff an array of public interest groups and policy think-tanks. “As lawmakers around the world become more engaged on Internet policy,” says Google, “a robust and intelligent public debate around these issues becomes increasingly important…The Google Policy Fellowship program offers undergraduate, graduate, and law students interested in Internet and technology policy the opportunity to spend the summer contributing to the public dialogue on these issues…Fellows will… work at public interest organizations at the forefront of debates on broadband and access policy, content regulation, copyright and trademark reform, consumer privacy, open government, and more. Participating organizations… include: American Library Association, Cato Institute, Center for Democracy and Technology, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Internet Education Foundation, Media Access Project, New America Foundation, and Public Knowledge.”

It’s wrong for public interest and consumer organizations to take Google’s money and especially provide a “Fellowship” in its name. We need to build more consumer advocacy capacity to address Google’s growing power, especially its threat to privacy. No matter what these groups say (and some already take money from Google; others receive broad media industry support), there are digital strings attached, as subtle as they may be. The Fellowship program is just another lobbying and PR effort coming from a company that has a broad policy agenda. Many of the groups above should be training people to represent the public versus companies such as Google, and other big online advertisers and new media conglomerates. Giving Google a say on the training of policy advocates, let alone a funding role, undermines the public interest movement.

The image “http://blowyourheadoff.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/invasion-of-the-body-snatchers.jpeg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

EC Second Phase Investigation of Google & DoubleClick: Good for Consumers, Competition and Privacy

Today’s announcement by the Directorate for Competition (DG Comp) underscores that the EC recognizes the serious consequences of the proposed Google takeover of DoubleClick. Competitors, consumer groups, and privacy advocates have provided sufficient information to the commission to warrant this relatively rare phase two inquiry. Google is quickly becoming the key digital gatekeeper for the online publishing and advertising marketplace. At stake here is more than just the skyrocketing Google share price, the convenience of our online searches, or even the current state of online advertising competition. The online marketing system is at the core of the dramatic changes transforming global communications–from broadband PC, to mobile, eventually even to television. If we are to have a more democratic and diverse digital marketplace of ideas and commerce, there must be meaningful competition and consumer protection in the online ad sector. This means Google should be prohibited from buying DoubleClick. Or, that at least meaningful safeguards are imposed that limit Google’s ability to leverage DoubleClick’s vast treasure trove of consumer data and its business relationships with many of the world’s largest companies.

Consumers need to be assured that they won’t be unfairly treated in terms of pricing and choice when buying online; advertisers will need protections to ensure that online marketing remains both affordable and competitive, especially when using Google. Privacy must be considered as well, with appropriate safeguards enacted

IAB creates new post: "SVP, Thought Leadership and Marketing."

As the IAB ramps up its political operation to defend the interactive marketing industry from consumer-friendly privacy safeguards, it has created a new senior position. The SVP for Thought Leadership and Marketing is… “to help drive the growth of interactive advertising through enhanced communications with marketers, agencies, and others about the power of interactive media to reach and influence consumers.” In another words, a seasoned PR hand. David Doty is now in that position; he came from Booz Allen Hamilton where he was Director of Corporate Branding and Creative Services.”

But what IAB requires is “thought leadership” that recognizes that interactive marketing can’t run a-muck. Consumer protections are required, as well as a socially responsible approach to digital advertising in a global environment.

consolidaton loans charege americancollege american loan corporationservices american online loan payment educationloan $3,000 cashapr 0 auto loanadvance california 14 payday loan 10loan day pay dollar 1000personal bad credit 10000 loan Map

3 5 loans bankday 2nd pay loanhome advantage loansacceptance loansadvance cash cost loan100 loan landfree loan payday 1sta payday loan Map

Facebook’s chief revenue officer’s pitch to advertisers: We’ve created “the most sophisticated and accurate targeting system available on the web today.”

What companies such as Facebook and MySpace say to their marketing clients and prospects is one thing. To users and members (and regulators), especially about protecting privacy, it’s another story. That’s one reason why we hope everyone will review this video from Facebook’s chief revenue officer Owen Van Natta presentation at a U.K. marketing conference held November 7, 2007. Van Natta explained that the new Facebook marketing system was designed to help marketers reach “people that influence people…the next generation of advertising is going to tap into trusted referrals in a way that has never has been done before.” Using the language of marketers, Van Natta pointed to the 25 million individuals daily on Facebook: “that’s a lot of reach and frequency.” “We’re going to spread your message virally,” he told the Internet Advertising Bureau UK crowd. You can “fan” your brand, he assured them. Facebook would enable them to tap into the “power of the influencer.”

Van Natta also discussed the test they had done of the new Beacon and related Facebook marketing system. Calling Facebook’s advertising approach a form of `social distribution,’ he said that “this is going to create some of the most effective advertising that marketers have ever seen…Facebook social ads are like trusted referrals from your friends.” It’s “the most sophisticated and accurate targeting system available on the web today.” The chief revenue officer also trumpeted the “targeting and insights” capabilities of the new approach: “nothing like this has ever been available before…incredibly power insights…actionable information.”

Van Natta also discussed the benefits for advertisers from the Beacon system, including how the use of the marketed products by Facebook members was tied in to their “mini-feed.” He discussed the new service called “Pulse,” which informs advertisers how many people are talking about their brand on Facebook. That’s “incredibly valuable,” Van Natta noted. He said they knew exactly who was getting the ad, and that advertisers would receive “actionable social data.”

We hope all Facebook users and regulators–here and in the EU especially–will watch this video. Facebook users have no idea they are now part of a viral marketing scheme, where information that is being sent to them is shaped by the kinds of arrangements made with advertisers. The idea that the information shared with marketers is “non-personally identifiable,” as he claims, is absurd. They know your interests, where you live, your circle of friends, etc. There is an important place for commerce in communications. But there need to be rules to ensure that what goes on is fair. And privacy must be protected.

We hope that users of Facebook (as well as MySpace) express opposition to the new aggressive data collection and targeted marketing system. Facebook is supposed to be an community where you can express who you are, and friends freely communicate. But it’s being transformed into a zone where advertisers with the biggest budgets can harvest your data, take advantage of your network of friends, and deliver targeted marketing and branding commercials. Facebook’s new approach combines behavioral targeting with viral marketing. That system threatens everyone’s privacy. Facebook is thumbing its nose at its users as well. This forced data collection and `target to your profile and friend’s’ scheme is, claims Facebook’s “chief privacy officer” Chris Kelly, actually good for you. “We saw a real opportunity here to democratize advertising,” he said [via Online Media Daily. Sign-up required]. “People will not be able to opt out of these social ads or turn them off, at least for now, unless they stop revealing information about themselves on Facebook.” That’s according to Techcrunch, which blogged live from Facebook’s advertising event.

Is this a democratic form of expression, or a Kremlin like digital gulag?

Facebook’s users are viewed as merely grist for a big data mining mill designed to sell targeted ads. Here’s how Zuckerberg described the new approach to advertisers (also from the same Techcrunch story): “Let’s talk about targeting. With Facebook you will be able to select exactly the audience you want to reach, and we will only show your ads to them. We know exactly what gender someone is, what activities they are interested in. their location, country, city or town, interests, gender,” work history, political views…Advertisers can build their own Facebook pages and design them any way they like: “We have photos, videos, discussion boards, any Flash content you want to bring to your page, plus any application a third party developer has made.”

Zdnet reported that Facebook Ads will enable “businesses to connect with users and target advertising to the exact audiences they want…Facebook will provide metrics to its marketers that include activity, fan demographics and ad performance so businesses can adjust targeting and content.”

This is a real violation of trust. No one is saying Facebook can’t make money. But it needs to be be done in a way that respects the privacy and values of its members. The time to express displeasure is now.

bbw samples free moviefree movie bbw samplesmay devil cry movieslut movies freetits huge free movieshorror movie trivianude amateur moviesmovie devil cry may Map

UK trade magazine reports on Google’s “sheer dominance.”

key excerpts from New Media Age, 11/1/07. “NMA Report – Competition.” Greg Brooks. Sub. required:
“One of the biggest problems facing search engines is Google’s sheer dominance of the sector. How have the latest moves from Yahoo! and Microsoft affected this?

Google’s domination of the UK paid-search market has gone unbroken since AdWords burst onto the scene in 2000. Advertisers would like nothing better than to see some healthy competition for their search budgets. But six months since Yahoo! introduced Panama, and over a year since Microsoft launched AdCenter in the UK, Google’s grip is tighter than ever…
“Google’s lead in terms of volume continues to grow, as the latest statistics from Hitwise show (see graph). Agencies say it’s the only must-have for clients…

The emergence of Panama is a strong indication that a competitive market is driving improvements to relevancy and forecasting. But it remains to be seen if anyone can challenge Google’s position,” says Michael Stroud, head of online marketing at Lloyds TSB…

Daniel Kerzner, regional director for north-west Europe at Starwood Hotels, adds, “Google remains a solid, reliable volume driver for us. Its dominance is a potential threat to business, however, if it continues to exploit its lone position in the marketplace”…

…the figures don’t make a pretty picture for Google’s rivals. Hitwise data for September 2007 shows that Google handled 85.2% of all searches in the month, with Yahoo! on 4.91% combined, Microsoft own-brand search commanding 3.95% of search, and Ask.com down to 3.55%…

“AdCenter has tried to leapfrog Google with more targeting features to drive efficiency, but has left basics like attracting more customers behind,” says Paul Bongers, head of paid search at BT, which uses Zed to plan and buy its search campaigns. “You can have the greatest search engine in the world, but if the customers aren’t there it won’t matter…
So far the new features haven’t enabled Yahoo! and MSN to gain on Google, which has actually increased its dominance of UK searches

Google Becomes a member of the Nielsen "family." Threats to our Privacy as we watch TV

Few readers may recall when Norman Lear’s “Mary Hartman” realized that she and her fellow patients at a psychiatric facility watched a Nielsen ratings-connected TV set. Lear’s critique that the TV rating system that has determined success for the TV business is deeply flawed and–frankly, crazy– is still true. But Google (and Doubleclick’s) move to monitor and analyze our viewing on TV and other platforms is just as insane–if we want to protect our privacy. “Google has been reporting millions of second-by-second data points to its TV Ads clients,” explains MediaDaily News. “Ultimately, Google expects TV’s interactive capabilities to improve to the point that it is generating the same kind of immediacy and backchannel as the Internet.” [from an interview with Mike Steib, director of Google TV Ads].

We doubt cable and DBS subscribers recognize that they are now involuntary members of the Nielsen/Google data tracking combine. Here’s how Multichannel News reports on the deal: “By combining Nielsen demographic data with aggregated set-top box data, Google plans to provide advertisers and agencies with comprehensive information…We have millions of set-top boxes that belong to EchoStar from which EchoStar is pulling data and is providing it to us for the Google TV Ad system: It’s a lot of data points,” Steib said…Advertisers can better understand exactly how their ad is performing and make near real-time changes to their TV advertising campaigns to deliver better ads to viewers, according to Google.

“One of the things we haven’t been able to provide to our advertisers to date, when we report back the very next day the impressions that they’ve received from the set-top boxes, we have not yet reported demographics and audience composition,” he said. “We are now going to be able to make that information available to our advertisers”…Google and Nielsen claim that as a result of their new partnership, this is the first time that advertisers and agencies will have such a level of detailed measurement available in a single place and at such a large scale.”

We hope Congress and the FTC will step in to prevent the entire TV viewing population from becoming involuntary drafted into the Nielsen/Google data collection, profiling, and targeting system.

casino free download adultrules casino card poker 3casino resort acquariuscasino nm travel accommodation directoryreview casino addpoker real 105g casino chipsresort acquarius casinoaccount florida merchant offshore casino Map

Acxiom [Echo] Targets Your Data

Today’s Wall Street Journal story on Acxiom’s broadening use of online and offline data is an important story. As we noted to Journal reporters, Acxiom has been acquiring behavioral targeting firms to broaden its reach. Last month, Acxiom took over EchoTarget, a “re-targeting and behavioral network.” Acxiom, said Greg Smith (former EchoTarget CEO and now an Acxiom honcho), “recognized” that “clients are really taking BT [behavioral targeting] seriously.” Here Acxiom’s vision for its future, according to Rich Howe, chief marketing and strategy officer [my italics]:

“We can go to our clients that are looking to tie all their marketing programs in a single platform. The largest clients we deal with have these large marketing data warehouses that are already built, and large investments made, and they want to fully monetize that by including the digital capabilities. You are not going to do away with direct mail. It will continue to be a big part of the spend for big customers. We can complement all of the techniques you have had in that world with the other channels like email and search and Web site optimization, and of course trying to leverage display advertising as a means to build product or just sell products. It is multichannel play. That is the game we are playing.”

Yesterday, Acxiom officially unveiled, according to MediaPost, [my italics] “its Relevance-X products designed to allow marketers to make online media buys using an ad network targeting specific customer segments based on their predictive lifestyle and purchase intent profiles. “We’re really excited about this,” said Rich Howe, Acxiom’s chief marketing and strategy officer. “We’re bringing our knowledge and experience in direct marketing to the online channels to give clicks context–going far beyond basic information such as age, gender and household income to include the attitudes, beliefs and lifestyles of consumers that are much more predictive.”

Acxiom also acquired last Spring a company called Kefta, which it called “the leader in real-time, dynamic personalization solutions for the Internet.” Here’s a another quote from the Acxiom release on the deal [our italics]: “Kefta’s dynamic targeting solution delivers timely, relevant content to website visitors based on their unique online behavior and individual characteristics, thereby helping marketers boost response, revenues and customer loyalty. By recognizing and responding to the different needs of customers online, Kefta helps marketers deliver relevant and personalized marketing messages in real time on websites, search engines, banners and e-mails.”

In a 2007 “white paper” titled “Creating High-Precision Marketing Intelligence with Consumer-Centric Analytics,” Acxiom explains that its “integrated consumer information management” approach includes access to [my italics] “Real-time data — Real-time interactions with consumers (reflected in “hand-raising signals” such as in-bound calls, requests for information, responses to e-mail campaigns and on-line search/research click-stream data) that is captured from across an enterprise and analyzed further deepens the ability to understand specific consumers and to predict future behavior. Acxiom ConnectionPoint-XTM provides this real-time capability to fuse these behavioral signals about consumers’ interests or demand with a consumer information database.

Meanwhile, the Journal story says that Acxiom “briefed the FTC on its targeting plans and the regulators didn’t raise significant objections.” The FTC spokesperson cited in the story suggested that wasn’t true. We need to know what exactly was presented to the FTC by Acxiom and what, if anything, was said by the FTC. But it does illustrate one of our core concerns. The FTC has to face the facts about the new realities and threats to our privacy from data collection and interactive marketing. The FTC has to act now and protect consumers.

PS: Just a FYI for EU privacy officials & advocates. Your data is being analyzed by Acxiom as well. Here’s a press release excerpt: “Axiom(R) Corporation today announced the introduction of an enhanced consumer segmentation solution that will allow marketers to grow their business through a better understanding of their consumers within a country coupled with the ability to compare those consumers across countries. The new solution, Personicx(R) International, results from the combination of Acxiom’s customer data management expertise and the extensive data assets attained when Acxiom acquired Claritas Europe and Consodata last year. Bruce Carroll, Acxiom’s Strategic Development Leader explained the difference Personicx International will bring to marketers: “Traditionally, marketers rely on country-specific demographics and geodemographic systems such as Acxiom’s Personicx product. These solutions are optimised to perform within a given country and as a result do not allow for effective comparison of consumers between countries. Personicx International changes that… The new system is being made available internationally starting with the U.K., Germany, France, Spain, the U.S., Poland, the Netherlands, and Portugal and underlines Acxiom’s intentions following the acquisitions it has made over the last 18 months. “Creating Personicx International would not have been possible without access to the large data assets we now have,” Kevin Zaffaroni, Acxiom’s Leader for Europe, Asia and Australia, said. “We’re taking existing information but using new approaches to help marketers do things and achieve results that just weren’t possible before.”

Reading the Google merger tea leaves in the trade press

Just for the record, here are 3 excerpts from trade articles we believe are relevant to the merger review.

1. “Ad networks given last chance to question Google-DoubleClick deal” [NMA Magazine (UK). 13.09.07]

British ad networks have expressed strong concerns to the EU over the $3.1bn (£1.53bn) Google buyout of ad serving giant DoubleClick. As the deadline for responding to the European Commission’s Directorate on Competition draws near, the industry warned that there would be problems with the merger…Networks have responded to consultation from the Commission about any problems they have with the merger deal, announced in April. This is the last formal way for companies to express their concerns with the merger, although some remain cynical as to whether it will make any difference.

Phil Nott, sales director at Adrevenue, said networks should still send through their objections. “People have accepted this is going through too easily. If they knew they could send in their views and get a chance to block it, then maybe more would speak up about their concerns.”

2. Do Home Pages Have a Place in Web 2.0’s Future? Advertising Age. Oct 1, 2007.

“The report, out today, will serve as a “sanity check” for some early Web 2.0 adopters and technophiles. And, he said, “for more traditional marketers, there’s a whole new world we have to introduce them to.” One of the most surprising things the team found was how many people are starting their online shopping with search — more than 54% of the study’s panel, in fact. The idea that more consumers are coming to brand sites through the side door of search means search engines are starting to circumvent brands when it comes to online shopping. While a consumer looking for a pizza stone offline might drive to her nearest Williams-Sonoma, in the online world she’s more likely to just type the product name into Google and see what comes up.”

3. “Out of the Box: More Than Nine Billion Videos Served.” Brandweek. October 01, 2007
In July, Americans viewed more than 9 billion videos online, according to comScore’s Video Metrix report. Nearly 75% of U.S. Internet users watched an average of three hours of online video during the month.

Google Sites topped the July rankings with the most unique viewers and most videos viewed. Nearly 2.5 billion videos were viewed there (a 27% share of videos)—a full 2.4 billion at YouTube.com. Yahoo! Sites ranked second with 390 million (4.3%), followed by Fox Interactive Media with 298 million (3.3%) and Viacom Digital with 281 million (3.1%).

Google Hides Behind Online Content to Protect its Data-Gathering/Targeted Marketing Business

Google’s D.C. public policy lobbyists need to do better than echo the same phrases that advertisers have used for decades. Whenever questions are raised about unethical and consumer harmful business practices, advertising companies–now including Google it appears–trot out the same old canard. Google’s policy people say that we should all be thankful that online advertising has given the public “consumer benefits in the form of more online resources and more relevant information…Simply put, advertising is information, and relevant advertising is information that is useful to consumers.” We are happy to debate the issue about the role online advertising plays in the future of diverse content, especially news. We have real concerns about the gatekeeping role Google and a few others will play as the online content market rapidly evolves. But Google has not answered the basic question, months after its announced takeover of Doubleclick. What privacy advocates are saying is that the way Google conducts its interactive marketing business (especially in the light of the proposed takeover) is a privacy concern–not online advertising itself.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt (see his new Financial Times op-ed) wrote that although Google is concerned about privacy, the solution does not “…automatically mean new laws. In my experience self-regulation often works better than legislation – especially in highly competitive markets where people can easily switch providers.” But, of course, with Google’s dramatic expansion, along with the rush to consolidate (Microsoft, Yahoo! and Time Warner, among others), it’s questionable whether we will have competition. Besides, we require national laws, not self-serving declarations from CEO’s whose business model depends on the collection and expanded use of personal information.

albums mp3 786403 loans bya 7alaly mp3 malitill mp3 937er mp3 jungs203 rehab loans94 mp3 jetta7g bgm mp3 Map