Category: journalism

Google as “media company” & favoring its own sites–a report from a search engine trade show

John Battelle was on a panel at the recent Search Engine Strategies (SES) conference in New York. Here’s an excerpt from his blog post–which I hope you will read in full [our emphasis]: Google’s brand promise – to be neutral, to be above monetary interest – is in conflict with, well, the rest of Google’s brand promise, to be a superstar stock, to grow faster than any company in the history of the world. And all of that is in conflict with …. Google’s brand promise, to get consumers to the best answer, fastest, regardless of who owns the content. Because…sometimes, that content is now owned by Google…Why when you search for stocks does Google Finance come first? Let’s be honest here. It’s not because some neutral algorithm chose Google Finance. It’s because Google owns that data. Google’s representative admitted as much on our panel today. And, given that, can one reasonably ask why, according to Comscore’s data, the preponderance of results that come up in Google’s universal search are YouTube? Might it be because they are they best results? Sure. Might it also be because Google owns YouTube, which is madly trying to monetize the second, third, and fourth click with new models that it hopes to heck are going to pay off?

The Net’s “Long-Tail”–a Leash Controlled by Two Giants & FTC Bungles Merger Review

Just a few added thoughts on the proposed Microsoft-Yahoo! deal. We think there needs to be real soul-searching by Congress and the FTC on how it addressed the Google/DoubleClick deal and the related spate of new media mergers in 2007. We told both Hill leaders and the FTC that they needed to explore the larger dimensions of this deal–including its impact on the diversity of online publishing (that’s because whomever controls the “monetization” engine of the online ad biz becomes the critical controller). When Microsoft, Yahoo!, Time Warner and the others went on a post GoogleClick shopping spree, we said the FTC should reject these mergers until they had examined the entire online ad market. But the commission failed to do so, in our opinion.

So now as a proposed Yahoo! takeover by Microsoft is considered, one serious concern is that a merger brings with it newly acquired assets that further add to concerns over consolidation and data privacy. The FTC approved without safeguards the $6 billion takeover of aQuantive by Microsoft. The FTC approved without safeguards the takeover by Yahoo! of behavioral targeting ad network Blue Lithium. The FTC approved without safeguards Yahoo!s acquisition of online ad exchange (and data collection system) known as Right Media. There have been other purchases as well by the two companies.

Congress will need to investigate the implications to both competition and consumer privacy: neither the FTC nor DoJ can be trusted to address these concerns. There are also human right issues, given Microsoft’s own work in China. We will be following this deal closely, including examining the implications of a Yahoo!-Microsoft digital combine.

The news media and behavioral targeting connection

It’s long been a concern that so many news organizations–or their parent entities–have embraced behavioral targeting (and so many other types of online marketing techniques) without clear disclosure to users, readers and viewers. There should be stories explaining what’s going on, exposing the techniques used that threaten privacy, analysis on the implications to journalism, editorials supporting reform, etc. We have covered some of these issues in our book and on this blog. But as a reminder, we run an excerpt from a Tacoda want ad for online sales manager: “TACODA®, Inc. (www.tacoda.com) is the world’s largest and most advanced behavioral targeting advertising network… Major US media partners include Dow Jones, The New York Times Company, NBC Universal, … [and] USAToday.com.”

All the news that fit to click, indeed.

The evolution of targeting users online (or, "Oh where oh where has our privacy gone")

An excerpt from a recent trade piece that should encourage reflection and concern (our emphasis):

“Today, we can not only target by the sites we think our customers frequent, we can follow them around the Web and target them based upon the other sites they actually visit. We can also target them based upon the words typed into a box, and from where those words are typed through search geo-targeting. We can also retarget searchers elsewhere on the Web. Facebook’s recent announcements take targeting to a whole new level, based upon age, location, interests, and other online activity.”

Source: “Search And Online Advertising: A Continual Evolution.” Ellen Siminoff. Search Insider. November 16, 2007

ringtone 7100i blackberryringtone uesers 100 mtn free tonokia ringtone 6061acdc ringtone mp3free polyphonic 3560 nokia ringtones 100a perfect lie ringtone2006 index mmf ringtoneringtone nextel 24 for i730 Map

ringtone 1260 nokiaringtones 3390 nokiaringtones nokia free 3595free polyphonic ringtone 6600 nokiaverizon absolutely free ringtonesmusic free ringtones no 100 chargeget ringtone know 50 wanna centnokia 3595 ringtone downloadable Map

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.

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

Knight Foundation and a Grant for Viacom’s MTV: Funding a giant on its Journalism advisory committee

We have long had concerns about foundations funding media conglomerates to provide public service content. So, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation’s recent award of $700,000 to MTV was troubling for us. The grant, part of Knight’s News Challenge awards, was so MTV can create “a Knight Mobile Youth Journalist (Knight “MyJos”) in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia to report weekly – on cell phones, and other media – on key issues including the environment, 2008 presidential election and sexual health.” Viacom’s 2006 revenues were $11.5 billion. Don’t you think there’s enough left over to pay for the mobile journalism program! The idea that MTV should be subsidized for contributing to public service is wrong-headed. Besides, MTV is engaged in such mobile activities to help build up its brand so it can earn more online advertising dollars.

Journalism foundations such as Knight–and J-Schools–should be holding the media industry’s editorial feet to the fire, shaming them to spend more money on serious journalism. Knight should not be funding media conglomerates whose owner resides comfortably in Beverly Hills. Meanwhile, it what raises some interesting questions about “insider funding,” we note that Viacom’s MTV VP Ian Rowe serves on the Knight Foundation advisory committe for journalism. Rowe is quoted in the Knight Foundation press release announcing its News Challenge grants as a grantee spokesperson.

PS: What timing. Broadcasting & Cable just reported that Knight is again teaming with Viacom’s MTV to give away $500,000 to support “young people who have ideas for pushing journalism into the digital age.” It’s called the “Young Creators Award.” We hope all the money has come from Viacom. By the way, Knight and media beat reporters should be asking what MTV is doing with the data it can collect from mobile users. Will it engage in targeting for its other products? In what ways are the Knight supported work designed to build up the commercial role of MTV? How much is such pro-social ad campaigns worth to Viacom’s bottom-line?

FCC Commissioner Copps is Right. U.S. Needs Broad Debate on Media Policy: Past, Present & Future

Last Friday, FCC Commissioner Michael Copps was a guest on the Bill Moyers Journal public television program. Copps urged the country to have a serious discussion about the future of the U.S. communications system during this crucial period of transition from old to digital media. He is correct that we deserve to make what’s going on–and will likely occur–as conscious and participatory as possible. It’s not a mystery that the corrupt politics of media policy-making and greed have left our journalistic and entertainment institutions largely bereft of public service, deprived us of vibrant journalism, and has prevented diversity of ownership control by both people of color and women. It’s not a secret to see the broadband world we are headed towards, unless we create a national movement focused on creating democratic structures for broadband communications (both policy and market-based).

That’s why the plea by Commissioner Copps should serve as a call-to-action for advocates and others concerned about the future of our media system (hello, J-School Deans and foundations, for example). It’s time to discuss the very rapildy emerging future, as we close the door on the 20th Century struggles that have exemplified broadcast and media ownership policy. Let’s tackle how the “public interest, convenience, and necessity” should be defined in this part of the 21st Century. Before it is entirely decided by the same powerful forces which determined the fate of radio, broadcast T.V. and cable.

New York Times Co. & Behavioral Targeting: When will the paper really cover the privacy and related threats?

The New York Times Co. has long been a leader in the online advertising field. But it has consistently failed to cover/meaningfully report on the implications of what it has been doing and intends to now do. The emergence of online advertising is one of the most important stories affecting our society, in my opinion. More than privacy is at stake, although that issue should be at the forefront of our concerns. We have spoken to reporters and others at the Times about the lack of coverage. We believe that there is a major problem at the paper seriously examining this issue (which, frankly, the paper shares with other major news organizations that also use behavioral targeting technologies, including USA Today and the Wall Street Journal). As we have stated before, the Times Co. is also on the executive committee of the board running the key online advertising issue trade lobbying group working to protect the industry from criticism and policy safeguards.

Yesterday, the New York Times Co. announced a partnership with behavioral targeting firm Revenue Science. The release from Revenue Science explained that: “Revenue Science, Inc., offering the most widely adopted, powerful, and flexible targeting platform for digital media, today announced that The New York Times Company (NYSE: NYT) has selected the company to provide its best-in-class behavioral targeting capabilities for NYTimes.com, About.com and IHT.com.

The addition of The New York Times Company increases Revenue Science’s roster of leading media brands, which includes the Wall Street Journal Online, FT.com, Nikkei Net and Reuters. Revenue Science’s ability to reach high-value audiences makes it the industry’s premier targeting provider.”

Here’s what Revenue Science says it provides its clients. Tell me, after reading it and other information on its website. Don’t you think it cries out for a very serious story, with continued follow-up? There also must be consistent disclosure from the Times and its news outlets as it covers the online ad industry that they are both politically and financially involved with the issue.
From Behavorial Science (excerpt): As a Revenue Science advertiser, you can take advantage of our Revenue Science Targeting Marketplaceâ„¢ with our Audience Connectâ„¢ solution. Audience Connect enables you to find key audiences for your message across thousands of sites in the Revenue Science Targeting Marketplace, using any of these proprietary targeting techniques:

  • Search Re-Targeting™—You spend a large part of your budget driving search traffic to your site. Once they get there, are they staying? How valuable would it be to reach them again? Now you can find out.
  • Re-Targeting™—Use sophisticated re-targeting technology to move your prospects through the buying cycle.
  • Reach—Segment and qualify people based on interests, behaviors, workplace attributes, geography, and results.
  • Behavioral Segments—
    • Revenue Science Behavioral Segments
      Revenue Science Segments enable advertisers to reach high-quality audiences across the Revenue Science network. Revenue Science provides marketers with access to hundreds of distinct behaviors within each segment. Our industry-leading targeting platform identifies the specific behaviors that best achieve your campaign goals and optimizes your campaigns to use only the strongest-performing behaviors. We offer segments in automotive, travel, technology and finance to name a few.”