Category: Web 2.0 & Democracy

American Antitrust Institute warns FTC about Google and Doubleclick merger

The AAI sent a report entitled “Google Acquisition of Doubleclick: Antitrust Implications” to the FTC today (November 6, 2007). They noted that “[P]ublicly available information suggests that Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, which is presently being considered by the Federal Trade Commission and European Commission, raises serious competitive issues under several different antitrust theories. In this white paper, we present some background and brief analysis of the principal competitive considerations under U.S. antitrust law.”

Here’s are some key excerpts (our italics):


“The integration of search, contextual, and display advertising, even if it offers efficiency benefits, may have exclusionary effects if advertisers using rival search engines or advertiser tools cannot replicate the benefits of such integration. For example, post-merger, advertisers using DART for Advertisers or other DART advertiser tools may be unable to get the same quality of access to data and reporting on their search or other campaigns with non-Google search engines or ad networks as they can with Google search or AdSense. Moreover, advertisers that use non-DART advertiser tools may be unable to get the same quality of access to data and reporting on their Google search or AdSense campaigns that is available to advertisers using DART’s advertiser tools. In these cases, Google’s dominant position in search (and contextual) advertising will be further entrenched, and DoubleClick’s leading position in advertiser tools will be cemented. As a result, the lessening of competition in the search market and advertiser tools market may outweigh whatever efficiency benefit may result from integration…Based on the information presented here, AAI believes there is a good argument that Google and DoubleClick are horizontal competitors in two relevant markets. The first is the market for distributing online advertising space of third party (non-search) web sites, where Google’s AdSense is the market leader. The second is the market for publisher ad serving tools, where DoubleClick’s DART for Publishers is the dominant product. While the competition between Google and DoubleClick in these markets may be more potential than actual, the two companies are perhaps uniquely positioned to capture significant market share in each other’s markets. If the evidence confirms that these markets are concentrated and that entry is otherwise difficult, as appears to be the case, then the merger presents a relatively straightforward case for challenge under the horizontal and non-horizontal merger guidelines. We see little in the way of merger specific efficiencies that would offset the loss of competition…If foreclosure were the only issue, it might be resolved by placing conditions on the merger, even though there are costs involved in enforcing a regulatory decree. But unless the horizontal concerns are rebutted, AAI believes that the prudent course is for the FTC to block the merger.”

Social Network Spying Machines

As we await the announcement form both MySpace and Facebook about their respective expanded profiling and and ad targeting plans, here’s a quote to ponder via this Reuters story (our emphasis): “MySpace said more than 50 advertisers have joined its HyperTargeting program, which mines the information on the social network’s member pages to determine their main interests and what kind of commercial messages they would respond to.

“It’s looking at what they say, what they do and what they say they do,” said Adam Bain, executive vice president of product and technology at Fox Interactive Media, the parent of MySpace within Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp.”

Read this, via Adweek. 11/5/07: “Analysts and agency executives say the moves to uncover what a News Corp. executive once called the “digital gold” of user-interest data and social connections could herald the evolution of behavioral targeting as the greatest advance in Internet advertising since Google perfected keyword-targeted search ads seven years ago.

“It changes everything,” said Michael Barrett, chief revenue officer at Fox Interactive Media, the News Corp. unit that includes MySpace. “Every form of targeting has been trying to get to what that individual is thinking about, passionate about and interested in. It defines the next generation of targeting.”

vhs used moviessamples movie adultanal movie freeblow jobs moviessample movie cartoon69genre definitions for moviemovies free adult downloadfree movie big sex Map

BBC Signs up with Doubleclick: Privacy out the window, along with Beeb staff?

It’s interesting to watch the tandem work of Google and Doubleclick, even prior to the proposed merger. Doubleclick was just signed-up by the BBC to handle its forthcoming interactive display paid advertising on BBC.com (the Beeb better explain to all its users what will happen with those digital crumpets placed on their computers–I mean cookies, pixels, and other digital spy techniques). Here’s how NMA magazine [sub required] reports it: “BBC Worldwide has appointed DoubleClick to handle display ads on BBC.com, following last week’s green light to allow advertising on the international site... It will also be responsible for the pre-roll advertising on BBC.com through its existing BBC World deal. DoubleClick will work with BBC Worldwide’s internal sales team…The ads will only be served to users outside of the UK…” (Doubleclick already works with the BBC, handling ads for BBC World and the Beeb’s magazine).

Last March, the BBC signed a deal with Google’s YouTube, calling it a “ground-breaking partnership.” Meanwhile, the BBC is drastically cutting staff and reducing news budgets, as it faces reduced public funding. The reduction in funds for the world’s premier public service programmer–and the staff cuts–is a story unto itself–which we will eventually address. But the BBC should not be permitted to endorse a business model for online marketing where its users–even if not UK citizens and residents—are tagged, tracked, targeted, and sold to the highest behavioral targeting bidder. Unless safeguards are imposed, online advertising could have an adverse impact on the diversity and integrity of the news. This deal should also behoove the BBC news staff to launch a major investigation into the Google and Doubleclick merger, inc. how such a merger will impact public affairs programming.

9 joy ringtone downringtone miles 5008525 ringtones makebarrington 30 amcringtones aaron tippinhetherington hong kong alastair1953 marmon ford herringtons ringtones 70 Map

European Commission & Privacy Authorities Should Investigate Behavioral Targeting & Privacy Threats

As US and EU policymakers and privacy advocates gather for a discussion of the 1998 EU Data Directive and the subsequent “safe harbor” deal with the U.S., it’s time the EU recognize that they are overlooking new threats from online marketing. Anyone who follows online advertising in Europe knows that advanced forms of targeted interactive marketing and data collection is being pioneered in places like the U.K. While the Article 29 Working Groups has, fortunately, expanded its investigation on related issues, esp. IP address retention, it’s time EU-based privacy officials cracked down on behavioral targeting [BT]. Here is an excerpt from a recent online marketing trade article that illustrates how quickly BT is now part of everyday life in the EU:

“Behavioural targeting has come a long way in the U.S. in the past four years, but the rapid growth across Europe (and even in South Africa), is proving that a technology can be seamlessly integrated at the local, national and international levels without batting an eye…A major advantage that the European market has parlayed into behavioural targeting success is the clear identification of which categories behavioural targeting responds to the most positively, and then the clear understanding of how to make those categories successful…So, where is behavioural targeting going next in Europe? Recently we have seen behavioural targeting successfully implemented in The Netherlands (with Telegraaf Media Groep), one of the largest media companies in Portugal (Cofina) is in implementation and a major publisher in the Scandinavian
market is about to implement the technology. This expansion out across Europe into new markets is a direct result of the success seen in the U.K. and other markets and shows that behavioural targeting is just hitting its stride.

From: The past, present and future of behavioural targeting. Jeremy Mason. imediaconnection. Oct. 9, 2007.

ringtone 1260 nokiaringtones 3390 nokia3595 nokia ringtones freeringtone polyphonic free 6600 nokiaringtones absolutely verizon freemusic 100 no ringtones free chargecent get know wanna ringtone 50nokia ringtone 3595 downloadable Map

loan agriculture 607486loan construction 95loan signature 15000property actual macdonald alla commitment loanguarantees subpart loan m 24 cfrsex movies anime28 2 loans ballooninter of activities library loan Map

Doubleclick at the Brand Summit: Glimpse of Ad-enmeshed editorial future

There was an interesting exchange at a recent imedia Brand Summit event, which you can witness on this video at approximately 7:12 minutes. Chris Young, Doubleclick’s EVP for “Rich Media & Emerging Division” (I kid you not. That’s his job title) asked a question of speaker Sean Finnegan. Finnegan is the CEO of OMG Digital, a new Omnicom global division advancing interactive marketing. Finnegan was touting a viral campaign to drive (literally) young folks from bars directly into `were open all night’ McDonalds. Doubleclick’s Young reflected on the work his company and other major online marketers are doing to create an “embedded relationship, friendship, with the consumer.” He cited the trend among Doubleclick’s clients to develop “long-form webisodic content, creating a series.”

Finnegan’s reply was very telling–and should serve as another wake-up call for all those who care about the further merging of editorial content and advertising. He explained that agencies are “merging the digital groups with the entertainment marketing groups,” expanding what they had been previously doing with such approaches as “plot integration.” Interactive advertising, marketing, big brands, and editorial content all intertwined is the basic business model for much of the new media world. That’s why we should address now–before it’s too late–what the rules, safeguards and alternatives should be.

downloads mp3 99centace how long mp3mp3 pauly adriennemp3 99 problemsvideos adult mp3hadith mp3 40 qudsiabiyoyo mp3 songheart breaky mp3 achy Map

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%).

Germany state privacy commissioner warns about unique threats with Google/Doubleclick

It’s so telling that Google keeps trying to change the subject, suggesting that concerns about privacy and its proposed takeover of Doubleclick should be confined to a larger discussion focused on the online marketing industry as a whole. Google should stop trying to shift the debate, and forthrightly address the unique issues. Yes, we need a discussion–and a national, effective privacy policy for online communications. But the Google planned acquisition of Doubleclick raises unique concerns. That’s why this press report about the letter sent by a German state data protection commissioner is important. They get it. Here’s an excerpt from an English-language news report, that includes link to the letter sent to the European Commissioner for Competition: “The Data Protection Commissioner of the German federal state of Schleswig-Holstein Thilo Weichert has expressed grave reservations about Google’s acquisition of the advertising marketing company DoubleClick. “At present we have to assume that in the event of a takeover of DoubleClick the databases of that company will be integrated into those of Google, with the result that fundamental provisions of the European Data Protection Directive will be violated,” the head of the Independent State Center for Data Protection of the federal state of Schleswig-Holstein (ULD) in Kiel writes in a letter addressed to Neelie Kroes, the European Commissioner for Competition. The merger of the two Internet companies “would thus lead to a massive violation of data privacy rights” of consumers in the European Union… The coming together of Google and DoubleClick would thus as a consequence lead to even more detailed analyses of personal data and make the creation of user profiles possible. “Such an approach contradicts fundamental data privacy principles of the European Union: limited specific use, transparency, the right to object, the protection of sensitive data and the right to having data deleted,” the head of the ULD observed.”

movies nylon free sexsex free movies shemalegay movies ebonyhentai movies flashjapanese movie eroticmovies lesbo lickingmovies masterbation malenon movies nude Map

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

Canadian Privacy Group Raises Key Concerns on Google, Doubleclick and Threat to our Privacy

We urge everyone to read the CIPPIC petition filed yesterday in Canada asking for a investigation of Google and Doubleclick. Among the key questions raised is whether the two companies are violating Canadian privacy law (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act-PIPEDA). The full document is on the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic website. But here are some key excerpts raising very important issues. Bravo! (and Merci) CIPPIC.

“37. Google’s servers automatically record information when the user visits Google’s website or uses Google products. Google server logs record the search request, URL, Internet Protocol (IP) address, browser type and language, and the date and time of the request, and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify the user’s browser. Google stores server logs indefinitely, but “anonymizes” them after 18 months.

38. The act of collecting user search queries and IP addresses invokes PIPEDA, requiring Google to provide adequate notice to users of any collection, retention, use, or disclosure of personal information other than that which can be reasonably implied (in this case, collection, retention and use necessary to deliver search results to the individual user). Without such notice, Google cannot be said to be obtaining meaningful consent from users to any other information practices, including retention and use for targeted marketing purposes.

39. The fact that Google’s search service is entirely dependent upon targeted marketing to users is not evident to the ordinary computer user. It cannot therefore be said that users implicitly consent to the use of their data for marketing purposes, even if such use is central to Google’s business model. Indeed, most users likely do not reasonably expect Google to retain their search queries in connection to their IP address for much longer than necessary to deliver the requested search results.

62. Google collects a variety of personal information about its users and uses that information to, among other things, improve its target marketing services. Online advertising services are constantly being improved, sometimes in ways that involve greater collection and use of personal data. This raises the question of what level of data collection and analysis is necessary for the purpose of target marketing; at what point is Google collecting more personal data than necessary for advertising purposes? No doubt Google is limiting its collection of data to that which is relevant for the marketing purposes, but the test in Canada is necessity, not relevance.

63. CIPPIC submits that a determination of what is necessary under Principle 4.4 should be driven not by what is possible or desirable from an advertising perspective, but rather what is actually necessary for Google to provide the service. The same test should be applied to all online advertisers, not just Google.”

clips nude movieof free movies lesbiansmovies asian pornfree movies porn longspears sex britney movieporn trailers movie samplemovies black porn freefuck dog movies Map

Google’s Mobile Search Advertising Ambition: Control the Market

From Online Media Daily [“Google’s Mobile Ad Move Gets Everybody Talking.” Tameka Lee. September 14, 2007] excerpt:

The search giant “is acting fast to take control of the mobile search ad market–a crucial move if it expands as predicted,” said Silicon Alley Insider’s Dan Frommer. And with The Kelsey Group predicting mobile search to generate more than $1.4 billion in ad revenue by 2012, Google is trying to get a jump on what right now is anyone’s game.

Google had been testing mobile text ads since last year, but decided to expand the effort–informing all AdWords advertisers through emails that if they didn’t opt-out, their sponsored links would now be served to mobile searchers…

According to a Google spokesperson, the company went full-scale with mobile search ads, partly because of the sheer volume of mobile-ready ads in place, and because “the mobile space is an increasingly important part of how users are accessing information.