Slashdot Mirror
Google to Transform Television Advertising?
Brad Zink writes "According to Robert X. Cringely, Google is poised to enter into the world of television advertising. This would usher in a new era for the venerable medium, creating a tidal wave of revenue for the networks, while solidifying Google's position in the advertising industry. Cringely develops this prediction based on his belief that Google is developing a network of data centers to be placed around the globe, which would be used to serve television commercials in addition to its current online content."
I was working on some scotch theory with a very good friend about 6 months ago -- we were both in a very short lived video production business ages ago. I had recently considered adapting Google to television in a very unique way and wanted his input.
My thought was to take television's closed captioning text and IMDB show data and run it through Google's "I'm feeling lucky" API in real time. Eventually you could have really cool "pop up" information program running that can give you pop up information correlated to what is happening on screen. Software running on a Media Center PC (or a Tivo?) could give you real time information on actors and what they're talking about. Imagine watching ER, wondering about a disease or illness they're talking about, and instantly having that information pop up without anything but a button click (if even that). Remember VH1's Pop Up Video?
As the conversation moved forward, we realized the real power of bringing Google to TV is advertising -- bringing ads to the web (more than just a GIF or SWF) and bringing web ads to the television -- contextual of course. Hours passed and the ideas that moved through the conversation seemed revolutionary (until we realized that Brin is a billionaire and we, well, aren't). Google certainly has the most powerful contextual algorithms in the market (although Yahoo is quickly catching up). Google's use of gmail and possibly AOL e-mails and IMs to aggregate even MORE user data (not just contextually but also within a physical region) will definitely give them more specific insight into a user's needs based on more than just what they browse.
The number one complaint I hear on why people use Tivo (or ThePirateBay as it seems to be lately) is that advertising sucks -- it is unimportant, too generalized and the same thing over and over. During our conversation half a year ago I made mention of how I'd love to see old commercials for current products -- the old Coke commercials are priceless (and comical) and there is NO reason why Google couldn't offer to bring back this and more. Instead of the same 40 ads in rotation, they have over 60 years or so of advertising they could bring back (some pre-TV movie theatre advertising) and stick in rotation, especially if the company is more logo-centric than actual product-minded.
I just signed on to Akimbo (need to set it up on my MCE box) and wonder how long it will be before these guys connect with Google. Tivo, Akimbo and MCE are programmable set top boxes just waiting to be utilized by Google. As even video game systems become more of a set-top programming station rather than a specific use peripheral, Google has an opportunity to really jump on everyone's hardware rather than design and sell their own. "Designed for Google!" could be the new sticker on every consumer device.
The conversation finished up (as far as I remember, I wish I recorded these nights of single malt drinking!) with us discussing things that Google might not even have put much weight in at the time -- SMS, VoIP, WAP searches and other data to be aggregated and utilized. If Google offers free VoIP, what prevents them from anonymously and generically aggregating your phone call keywords? If you're using Google SMS searches from your GPS-enabled phone, what prevents them from offering advertising to a local business (other than the one you're searching for). Taking all that information into their data centers and using their complex heuristic analysis gives them an awesome amount of information that advertisers could only have dreamed of 10 years ago. Being able to match price to need is also a big deal -- imagine what car dealers would offer Google for a local car buyer searching for a deal or how Google could knock around the realty market? Not exactly topical in terms of television advertising, maybe, but Google + Advertising can change how we define "on demand programming" nonetheless. Tomorrow's TV could just be today's BitTorrent with the Go
When it comes to google I find that advertising isn't a problem. Google aren't weren't "in your face intrusive" and I feel fine having them there, it's the ones that pop up, make loud noises or drain my CPU which are the ones I hate.
I think when it comes to advertising, Google can somehow pull it off.
I can. They are about to release a new product: "Gorn" which is pornography based on Star Trek monsters. It's gonna be huge!
Google really is Big Brother! They're even moving onto the telescreens!
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
".... knowing that Google will still be the only game in town for the crux of the whole thing: the ability to show every viewer the specific ads that companies will pay the most to show him at that specific moment. What Google wants to do with these trailers is SERVE EVERY TV COMMERCIAL ON THE PLANET because only they will be able to do it efficiently. Only they will have the database that converts those IP addresses into sales leads, only they will have the servers and disk space close enough to the viewers to feed the ads. Only Google will have the chops to run a constant, real-time auction for the next ad every consumer is about to see, and then serve that ad at the moment the program goes to commercial."
So you really want that Viagra/Valtrex/Cialis/Levitra ad to always be showing up when your new girlfriend is watching TV with you?
I would think not.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
I only hope Google ads on TV won't be billed by cost per click
You just got troll'd!
Google is going to announce a cure for cancer and a perpetual motion machine at today's CES.
This could be an interesting idea, but Google's advertising model doesn't translate so well to television. How would you go about compartmentalising viewers into groups, and serving the relevant ad? Sure, you could go on household viewing stats, but that might require extra hardware to get to; and I'm sure some people would object.
Also, it can't be as simple as the article suggests - when you have someone going to Google.com, you can be fairly sure there is one person (usually) behind the monitor. Many many more in front of the TV. How do you weight your targeting?
I just can't see how this would practically work.
...are they going to be text-only adverts, or do we have to put up with some animated Flash-style nonsense on our screens?
Sure, it's just a "what if," but if Google hasn't thought of this already, they should. It's a nearly perfect extrapolation from AdSense: contextual advertising for television.
If they could also get in bed with the media metrics folks, like Nielsen, they'll be able to tie in the demographic information and, like Cringely supposes, only show Alzheimers drug ads to seniors and their children, and only show beer ads to people over 21.
If Google does go in this direction, I can only hope that ads will be rotated in the manner of AdWords ads. I.E: Only the ads that interest people will be shown, or shown more often. I love to watch well-done commercials, and most of them are so poorly scripted that they A) don't convince me to buy and B) are just plain boring.
I don't know that this is going to happen, or if it's even feasible, but it sure is fun to think about.
I, for one, welcome our new Monostad 7 ad-serving overlords.
Hot in the heels of Google's entrances into the markets of TV advertising, PC production, and other 'secret' markets, Minor news agencies are announcing Google's intention to begin international fruit sales. One excited googler said "This is complete rubbish, I wish people would stop all this wild speculation.", his denail further confirming our suspicions.
Windows in 6 Bytes (IA-32) : 90 90 90 90 CD 19
Will proberly find the google adverts will be better quality that the actual tv programs.
But only if google employs Vulcans do the the probes.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
The Big Thing for 2006 is TV on demand, downloaded via some p2p technology.
Take a look at the top downloads on a site like Piratebay and you'll see that they are all TV episodes.
What Google is probably lining up to do is to compete against Apple, who are moving into the same market.
Google are betting that they can deliver TV episodes for free, with advertising. Apple are betting they can sell TV episodes with no advertising. Microsoft are trying to make it all happen through the XBox.
This is why Google's been buying dark fibre. This is why Google is buying into AOL, for access to TW shows. This is what will drive the next generation of portable gadgets.
Yes, the Internet and P2P is finally going to transform TV into something that actually produces good entertainment, and will one day turn around and redefine the movie industry as well.
My blog
This could be bad news for married people who are secretly searching the web for a "special friend". Opps!
This just in! 3 out of 4 people make up 75% of the population.
Damn /. won't let me post AC today. Bicches.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
When he's right, it's only because he makes so many stupid, hacky positions and predictions that by the law of averages he has to hit one once in awhile.
Not to say he's a bad source of information, mind you, just that he's a source of information no better than, say, a magic 8 ball.
I though those bases that they were putting all over the planet where for the GoogleNet second Internet thing? Or was that just speculation?
Ryan - http://www.thecosmotron.com/
Over the last few years I've been struck by Google's ability to compete in a very effective way. Generally they seem to eschew a fight with the main competitor and rather simply rewite the rules and assert their dominance in that field (think online ads). Advertising is one of those ivory tower industutries where small firms must 'play ball' in order to get any decent contracts (my brother was in advertising for a number of years). Google, it is speculated, will simply rewrite the notion of broadcast advertising and assert a stranglehold on the new style. An interesting gamebit, to be sure.
The big New York ad firms will be scrambling to figure out how to beat Google at this new game. No if Google opened Google Studios, where they could produce the content of the ads, they would be richer than God
It seems as though they are transforming slashvertising, at least.
I guess I will have to get ready for those hard core porn commercials during
... not sure how my wife will react it....
"The Apprentice"
If they could also get in bed with the media metrics folks, like Nielsen, they'll be able to tie in the demographic information
If Google went into this space, they would almost instantly put Neilsen out of business.
Neilsen familys need to volenterr, and be paid. Google can give *actual real* dmeographic infromatio, because they already know where you live (from the cable company), and what you are interested in (from Google searches), and who you talk to (from GTalk/GMail).
Neilsen can only dream of the kind of demographics Google could extrapolate. Google would mak ethe Neilsen ratings obsolete, because after all, it doesn't necessarily matter if a TV show is being viewed by a lot of people, what matters is if the ads being shown in it key into the demographic enough that the show is profitable. Google can *ensure* that, all Neilsen can do is make educated guesses based on the surveys it sends it families.
Most people know how overrated google has become. Why then do we keep writting about only the good things? I don't read Cringely very often, but I've never seen even him have anything really negative to say about google. What's up with this? Is it just because they put out some nifty tools that raise large amounts of privacy concerns? Is it because it was ONCE a killer search engine?
Why aren't poor search results being reported? For example, in the city of Vallejo, CA we are the only facilities based DSL provider and we even own vallejodsl.com, but up until today (which is the first time I've done this search in 2 months) we weren't even on the first 5 pages. We don't participate in the shadey SEO practices so we were shoved so far back we weren't visible even when actualy looking specifically for a vallejo based DSL provider. I've been given huge amounts of excuses for why that could be, but when 80% of the results were blackhat SEO tactics that shoved us back I could care less about them. We are a well established company (15 years in business) and there should be no reason why we should have been so low on the results. We have plenty of backlinks but google only lists like 36 while others list as many 3000. We stood in that "state" for well over 2 years regardless of what we did on our end.
I still have a hard time understanding why people are considering google the greatest thing to happen to the internet since TCP/IP. Google's core business is search, that's where it got it's start. If it can't maintain it's core, then why should we be thanking them for giving us other tools? And to be perfectly honest, google is a noun not a verb and it drives me insane when langauge gets twisted for marketing purposes and it should bother everyone else too. Being mindless is what these people count on, so why are we caving to it. Blog anyone? IT'S A WEB LOG! Calling it a blog puts a buzzword to something that's been around for a decade but someone just wanted to make money off the idea so they had to create a word that people liked saying.
How bout Google Monkey? no seriously, I think Google are going to start a really cool combination of Google Wallet and Google Video, not only giving access to DRM'ed David Letterman shows from CBS and other thousands of established content, but just like the mp3.com of 5 years ago, it will enable artists to broadcast, sell, distribute their video. Surely Google must be gearing for peer-to-peer solutions also. Imagine an eMule and BitTorrent plug-in by Google, that can providing On-Demand seeding for files that it is hosting. So if you pay with Google Wallet, you can accelerate your p2p transfer. And Google Storage is when Google will take over http://mediamax.com/ to provide unlimited amounts of Gygabytes storage for everyone, while users will have to pay with Google Wallet for used bandwidth. A way for users to share multimedia files with friends and distribute and earn money.
Google would not be interested in the studios concept. It puts them into competition instead of controlling the interest. It also makes them have to engage in risk in an area for which they are not experts. They know how to analyse ads and determine relevance, etc. They do not create media, though, and the cost to compete is very high.
Were they to engage in that, the stock price would take a serious hit.
Linux - because it doesn't leave that Steve Ballmer aftertaste.
I have a friend who is developing a technology that would mix seamlessly with this Google idea, and I believe he is currently in talks with cable companies about it. The device he's engineered will actually map the picture coming accross the broadband cable to your television set, and with a joystick-like remote control you can navagate around the screen and click on products that you are interested in. Information, or links to information, about each product or person in a show would be served along the broadband stream making virtually everything you see in a show "clickable." It would allow you to say, get information about the gadget that is being used in CSI, or stats on your favorite sports player/team.
It seems that integration with Google would be invaluable for something like this, and it would really change the landscape of advertising content. We would begin to choose what ads we want to see based on our personal interest in a certain item. Since DVRs are striking a blow to the standard 30 second spot, and product placement is growing in leaps and bounds this really seems like the new stage for advertisement in general, but best of all it might allow us to finally have seamless programming.
Sorry I don't have a link to info about this device, he doesn't have a product site built up yet since it's still in development.
It's technically impossible, or very very hard and limited, without extra hardware/IPTV.
So much for "Do no evil".
http://mutednoise.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=1879
Will proberly find the google adverts will be better quality that the actual tv programs.
...and Vogons to 'craft' the English...
Who is going to film the ads? Who is going to edit the ads? Who is going to appear in the ads and do voice-overs?
With text ads, just about anybody can make one quickly and easily. With picture ads, you don't even really need to be an artist as long as you can paste a picture of your product next to some text in Photoshop. Flash ads are a bit more work, but even then, it's little more than animating and scripting a bunch of pictures and text.
But with narrowcast video ads, how are they going to look when they are filmed by amateurs? Think about stereotypical used car dealer ads from movies and go down from there. Way down. It's a brave new world, and we're going to run out of pancake makeup pretty quick.
--
"Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
The proposed, targeted advertising could work for cable, but what about broadcast mediums such as over-the-air or satellite?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I can see them possibly having a database matching the IP of my television to the IP of my home computer...so in theory, if I Google a product, they'll be able to match those IP numbers. But let's say I don't Google the price of a new radio or whatever. Let's say I go straight to the manufacturer's website, or I go to Amazon or Best Buy. Google won't know what I'm looking for...unless they somehow cut a deal with those other companies, perhaps offering cheaper advertisements in exchange for information about which IP numbers were browsing which products. On a happier note...does this mean that if I write myself a little script to Google Jennifer Garner every half hour or so, that I will only get commercials featuring Jennifer Garner? Cuz that would totally kick ass.
it was even close to the truth.
Yes, the Internet and P2P is finally going to transform TV into something that actually produces good entertainment, and will one day turn around and redefine the movie industry as well.
I can distinctly remember this arguement being made when cable TV was coming to my neighborhood and I'm POSITIVE it was said when OTA TV started.
What do we have on what's generically described as TV now that's so special and good? We all have a couple of things we like, but the rest is trash.
With P2P I can now make money on my "skid row drug addicts fight club" video series among other fantastic titles I have yet to dream up.
How is sending it onto a little mobile device or available "on demand" (which only makes you pay more for it) going to make it any better?
It's not going to change anything.
Note to self: Kill your television
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
That is what I would say. If they do the things well, and so far they did, they could truly become a huge company. They are profitable, have very smart ideas, investing into a lot of research, hiring pretty smart people it seems... Future seems to be bright.
Now, will all the ads and all the things Google do remain discret and small? I doubt it.
As it will become a bigger company, and go more and more into the traditional advertising business, it will probably behave like others in part. Depending on the media we will see more and more ads, and more and more obstrusive. Sure some will not be too obstrusive, but as they grow and install themselves even more what will prevent them from doing like the others? big flashy ads, etc? The way they started and gained market share was by doing things differently than others, and 'better?'. Sure, when you are a new company growing, it is pretty much required. You have to be different and better than the competition. Upon growing and having this domination, it WILL give them more freedom to do like others if they wish so.
Now the question is. Do they want it? What will they do in 10years? I say. Market will tell.
Cringely really has a thing for Goggle, but his thing seems to always be going in the wrong way. He's still hook on his Data Center trailers which don't exist (the one in the Goggle parking garage is for the Internet archive) and he really wants them to be used. To this end he keeps on coming up with more far fetched and crazy ideas about how they will be used, because otherwise he will have to face reality and admit they don't exist.
He's wrong, his whole concept as presented just won't work. Never mind the privacy implications or the fact that everything you do online and watch on TV will be tracked and logged, but the bandwidth just doesn't exist. For this to work every house that get's the Goggle adds would need a set top box to insert the adds, and a broadband pipe thick enough to download them on the fly. It just won't work with today's level of technology.
Even if you limited to people who want to be a part of it (and honestly, how many people say "I want to see more commercials!"... that would be zero). The fact is, the only way I can see Goggle getting enough people on the system to make it worth while is to PAY them to use it.
In the end, all it will do is lose Goggle money hand over fist, faster then a $200 PC would. It's a game they can not win, and if Goggle can't win, they don't play.
P.S. Hey Cringely, can I get some of whatever you are smoking. It sounds GOOD!
google serves web advertising that fits the viewer and the site they are placed on today. with to rise of iptv that could be expanded easily to the tv screen and our livingrooms. iptv providers just sell commercial time to google and they send the right ads to the right end-user.
NPR is talking about these concepts right now. I guess they have already found a way to match my radio with my web surfing. That's fine with if this means I can avoid hearing boy bands and global warming stories I wonder what I will hear if I surf to thewhitehouse.gov?
It would be interesting if Google did start supporting MITs $100 laptop. Subsidising the profileration of these devices throughout the world is probablz ultimatelz a good thing for Google. Given that the devices will be built around Linux, it is likely that Google will be the default search engine. Even if Google doesn`t help out financiallz, I`m sure their techncal expertise could be used. I`m still quite sceptical about whether MIT will be able to build a software system that lives up to the requirements.
" I guess I will have to get ready for those hard core porn commercials during "The Apprentice"
... not sure how my wife will react it...."
;)
Hopefully with a trip to the "Boardroom" where you will be "fired."
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
In the last two years the Weather Channel has been making a big push in this direction. They have been a technological innovator in the cable world especially in the way they push the local forecast to every individual head end that carries TWC. Leveraging that technology they have begun regional targeting and weather specific targeting.
An example of this is a tire company. On any other network when they buy national time one commercial for one tire is aired. With regional targeting rain tires can been served to the northeast and good weather tires to the south - in the same :30 seconds two spots run simultaneously in different parts of the country. Take that a step further and you really begin to see the value in the premium price TWC gets for these spots.
TWC links it's ad serving to it's local forecasts at each head end. If it's raining in your county you'll see a rain tire commercial, while your buddy up north on another cable system where it's snowing will see a spot for snow tires. An hour later when the snow turns to rain he's see a spot for rain tires.
While conceptually the idea of Google leveraging these trailers is conceivable Cringely's prediction is flawed. Google will not be able to sell targeting to the networks. National network commercials are still carried over the air. Cable operators simply retransmit them. The minute or two of local time is sold by the local affiliate, also over the air and then retransmitted. Neither the nets nor the affiliates would let a cable operator insert commercials over the ones they've sold and no technology exists to legally insert them over the air interrupting the original signal. There may be some room in the cable only universe for cable MSO's to sell national advertisers more targeted spots in the 2 minutes an hour then get but the idea of Joe's Restaurant down the block spending money on production of a TV ad and then paying extra to target me seems a little far fetched.
I think the prediction in today's NY Times http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/technology/06onl ine.html makes more sense. Downloads an convergence of the TV and PC are where it's going to be at.
Or we could just wait and see what the announcement is. What is the point of specualting anyway besides driving traffic to /. everyday? :)
http://www.worldsoccerbars.com
seems to be building itself on top of the M$oft platform. Most hardware vendors are going w/ media center pre-installed. What's different in this scenario is that the browser isn't going to be as centric as it is on the desktop pc. Apple seems to be heading in this direction as well with front row [http://www.apple.com/imac/frontrow.html%5D. I don't know but I think Google is going to need to pursuade hardware vendors to use their new GoogleOS instead of windows media center (ROFL) before being taken seriously in "interactive TV Land".
It's very simple, actually. They already index closed captioning. The adsense can be based on that content. It may not feature location-based ads, but content-based is really quite easy with what they have today.
Plus consider closed captioning already exists for local commercials. If they were to use that for keywords some ads could certainly be location-based.
Developers: We can use your help.
Obviously he saw the subscriber-only article in red and prepared his post beforehand.
Am I the only one wondering how a subscriber such as yourself could not know this?
Infuriate left and right
Sounds promising. Firefox will develop a TV. We could use the adblock plugin to get rid of commercials forever. Everybody is happy. Advertisers gets to pay for ads. Google gets paid for ads. I get to block ads. Now, we just need a Firefox to get in on bill board displays, and we won't have ads anywhere.
There was an exhibit similar to this idea at Siggrapg 2004. It had a main screen showing a central tv broadcast and then had several smaller screens surrounding it popping up images from google image search based on the broadcast's closed captions. It was pretty weird to watch a bush speech, for example, and have all the web images popping up (a mushroom cloud for "nuclear weapons" etc.)
Kind of like "the architect" scene from the matrix.
If anything, all I want is more of a rotation of commercials during series or specifically, multi-part sports programming. Ie, I HATE having to watch the SAME commercials during the entire NBA playoffs, or March Madness, etc. They bombard you with the the whole game, EVERY GAME.
A targeted ad will have better return per viewing than a broadcast ad. Furthermore, a targeted ad can be more detailed and specific, not the usual brand awareness pablum which can't say much at all useful. Why would anyone voluntarily choose to pay, say, ten times more for an ad which generates harly any more revenue?
Infuriate left and right
How is sending it onto a little mobile device or available "on demand" (which only makes you pay more for it) going to make it any better?
Real choice makes the difference. The top downloaded TV shows are also pretty much the best of the crop IMO.
When people have a real choice, quality always improves.
Yes, the Internet and P2P is finally going to transform TV into something that actually produces good entertainment, and will one day turn around and redefine the movie industry as well.
How, exactly, is a change in delivery method going to improve content? You've said it yourselve, that the top torrent downloads may be TV episodes... today's TV episodes. The content is the same, just the delivery is different. Did cable transform television into drastically better entertainment? Not really. Has satellite improved radio content? No.
All we'll have is more targetted advertising and an easier way to choose what we watch. But it'll still be the same style of content.
Developers: We can use your help.
I quite frankly couldn't give a rats ass for any of the items I see advertised on TV. In fact, I'll go further and say that if I see an advert for something that I might actually be in the market for, I'll make damn sure I don't buy it from the company running the TV ad.
All these companies have bought into the idea that if they don't advertise more than their competitors, then they lose market share. Well I think that's exactly what the ad agencies want them to think. If I want a certain type of product, I research it carefully over a few weeks or even months, using the net, and well informed store visits, to find the exact thing I am looking for. Anybody who basically shouts at me in my own home to buy their brand gets short shrift.
It is quite plain to me that the advertisers are just loud obnoxious assholes, and I don't like people who behave like that in real life, so why should I do them any favours by buying their products ?
Oh, and before you point out that _most_ people don't think the way I do, hence the advertisers are on the right track, are you sure that's the way you want the world to go on ? I'm sure there are plenty of trolls here here would say that there is nothing to be done about it so why worry. Well, I don't worry, but I don't buy into the advertising either, so those companies have lost a potential customer.
BTW, I probably spend £3000 to £4000 per year on pc and AV equipment alone, so it's not an inconsequential loss, especially as I advise anybody who asks for my opinion on pc gear to steer clear of the loud-mouthed idiots who advertise on TV.
Current example in the UK, PC World. Scene starts with a woman looking at a laptop, and she asks a sales assistant if the price is correct. So the assistant starts spouting off all the specs of the machine, with obviously no idea what she's talking about, and the woman could have read the same details from the display stand. The prospective customer then asks about the hard drive, and the assistant says "it's huge, 60 gig !" The customer then says, " I'd better take one now then". Like she had any idea of what she just bought.
And please please don't let me get started on the damn "beauty" products and sanitary accessories !
People go on about society being "dumbed down", well this is where it's happening.
I have to resort to hitting the mute button when the ads come on now, because even the (excessive) noise and prattle winds me up.
Nobody here likes being spammed online, so why is it ok on the tv ? It's exactly the same, unsolicited commercial crap.
Bah !
</rant>
... used for all the latest google posts.
"According to {INSERT BLOGGER}, Google is poised to enter into the world of {INSERT FIELD/INDUSTRY}. This would usher in a new era for the venerable medium, creating a tidal wave of revenue for {INSERT BENEFACTORS}, while solidifying Google's position in {INSERT FIELD/INDUSTRY}. {INSERT BLOGGER} develops this prediction based on his belief that Google is developing a network of data centers to be placed around the globe, which would be used to {INSERT FIELD/INDUSTRY} in addition to its current online content."
Let me give this a shot.
According to Mike Hunt, Google is poised to enter into the world of dog food manufacturing. This would usher in a new era for the venerable medium, creating a tidal wave of revenue for Purina, while solidifying Google's position in dog food manufacturing. Mike Hunt develops this prediction based on his belief that Google is developing a network of data centers to be placed around the globe, which would be used to create dog food in addition to its current online content.
I think google will start giving away free buckets to go with every search query you enter. Everyone who saw the Spongebob movie knows the rest.
Hivemind harvest in progress..
IP-TV needs to have ads delivered over the internet. That much seems clear, but were is this IP-TV?
I happen to be familiar with the servers that were there for the initial dutch Big Brother (Yeah, our contribution to the world, your welcome) and it was a fairly impressive rack. I only drooled over them, we had 1 rack next to them but it seemed like a lot just to service a website for 1 tv program in a very small country.
Imagine the kind of hardware needed to serve all of a 24 hour tv channel to a country like america.
And that is the real problem with this whole internet tv idea. It just doesn't work. Just look at what happens to webcasts when a disaster happens. I had one of the 3G (G3?) phones during the london bombings. Took me ages to get it to connect and even then it was troublesome and that was a new system with very few subscribers.
Oh and IP-TV? We are just moving to HD tv. Do you really think the average ADSL or cable con can handle them?
Digital tv (over adsl) is being rolled out here but among all the ads there is one thing they don't mention. The moment a big program comes on like a soccer match they cut some of the lesser channels to make bandwidth available for the soccer match. If they don't? Well think early MPEG lego block vision.
So the entire article is based on google serving the ads for a form of tv that just don't exist.
Currently the only way to serve tv is to get a big transmitter and pump it through everyone at the cost of thousands of kilowats. It ain't pretty but it is the only way that works.
Will it chance any time soon? Doubt it. Just look at how dificult it is proving for digital tv to be accepted. Everywhere goverments are forced to choose between upsetting millions of voters or the gigantic profits promised by selling of spectrum.
But hey if you don't believe me, just do a search on video.google.com You can see exactly the state of streaming video the internet at large. Yeah, crappy low res unfiltered WMV. Woohoo! That is so not going to compete with HD tv.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
DOes this Cringley guy just sit around and think up bullshit? He was totally wrong about the Google Cubes. Now this. Why doesn't he just STFU?
"Well, you very obviously haven't got good advice. Might I suggest you start by updating the site to XHTML 1.0 (ideally Strict, Transitional will do), and make sure the code validates . If you haven't done this you haven't even taken the first steps you should have taken."
Search engines do not give a rats ass if your site is xhtml or not. Its really annoying seeing people constantly giving ridiculous reasons to move to xhtml that are complete nonsense.
"You should also take a lot of that text on the site out of images and put it in lovely plain (but styled) HTML. Google can't index text in images - this is pretty much SEO Baby-Steps lesson #2."
Uh, images get alt tags. Google can index text in alt tags, so replacing images with text for SEO purposes is complete nonsense. This is pretty much SEO Baby-Steps lesson #2.
Vallejo y actually a spanish name.
So you may found lots of stuff not related to this town but to guys in Vallejo name ( literature, filosophy, science, spanish towns, spanish streets... whatever).
Its like behing the owner of a small smithdsl.com and having 5th page searching for "smith".
-Woof woof woof!
According to Robert X. Cringely, Google is poised to construct a 120 km diamater orbital battle platform, with a weapon capabale of destroying entire planets.
/.ers keep giving this guy traffic?
Seriously, this guy must be making a killing in advertising with all these whacked out theories on what google's gonna do next. Two weeks ago, he claimed google was poised to build an independant internet, powered by cargo-container supercomputers with 8,000 AMD processors.
Have any of his ridiculous claims ever been backed up? Why do
Even with hundreds of cable channels we don't get "narrowcast" ads. The technology to do it is all there already. Why do I currently get tampon ads during a midnight episode of Evangelion? Nobody thinks that is the target market. The tampon maker had no idea that their ad would show up there. What they buy are these large horizontal "media buys". They make a "Buy" for a few million $ that includes spots all over the place. For the same $ that it would take to buy targeted time on the Lifetime Network, they can get the same amount of time there and a bunch of other ad spots that are basically "free". A favorite of some friends of mine that worked together in the early 90's is the company's placement of a full back cover ad for a rather arcane pice of sofware in Field and Stream magazine. Yeah, it was a stupid place for the ad and there are million of better things you could spend the $ on. But it was one of those "media buy" packages. For the same $ that it cost to put it on the back cover of Byte and PC World you could do one of these deals and get those two and Field and Stream and Ladies Home Journal and a few others as well - so why not?
"The system" isn't set up to narrowcast its ads to those who are the likelies customers. If they don't use what they could do now, they are unlikely to use this type of thing from Google.
Sure, they could wake up and smell the money. It's a pretty hide bound industry though.
-- your Web browser is Ronald Reagan
I make Ads on TV "non-linear".--that they 'popup' according to your [google] habits (like the google customized home page). For most people, watching Desperate Housewives and seeing a commerical break every 5 mins is very annoying--ad relevance and google adsense would serve no useful purpose here. That's why Tivo works, solve that problem and Tivo becomes yesterday's news. The Ads need to be displayed when it's appropriate to your habits--cause Madison Ave knows: people buy off impulse 90% of the time.
Let me guess here: Blipverts?
I eat bees -- they taste stingy.
The boring alternative is that they are putting up data centers to increase rundundancy and reduce lag(network hops). The fact that it, combined with owning a bunch of dark fiber, also helps them hedge against brain dead network operators attempting to charge for access, probably doesn't hurt.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Other things I'm guessing you wouldn't buy - condoms, flowers, jewelry, perfume, and definitely not suntan lotion. ;-)
No company EVER wants to lower their margins. They ONLY reason they do it is because competition in a free market forces them to. All hail free markets!
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
I watched a CSI last night that had very prominent gmail addresses mentioned a few times. I wondered at the time if it was a product placement. Would deep and intrinsic product placement be something G would be good at?
Mod Parent : Interesting
*an infinite number of monkeys wrote this sig
Advertising, like murder among predators or rape among fish, is mostly amoral.** It's just propagating based on its own internal programming. We as humans provide it with a moral dimension. I'd argue that advertising is more about presenting a person of higher-status-than-you with Product X, and then letting your "I wanna wear HER shoes" psychology go to work.
You say "it makes me feel bad, therefore it is evil." - that's not exactly a frivolous claim, of course, but it's hardly in the hands of the advertiser to control your own feelings. (If it is, though, what does that say about whether violence and sex on TV affects what kids think and how they act?) Tough questions for my liberal brothers, I know.
So start blaming yourself for not being evolved enough to not be affected by it, I guess - there, there's your inadequacy. :)
*blah blah blah, check Steven Pinker for more honed, eloquent arguments on any of this
**(Bonus Troll section) WAAAH HOW CAN YOU SAY RAPE IS AMORAL !1!1 Right, I'm a Nazi. Listen ya Jainist hippie, you want to start prosecuting rape charges against invertebrates, and I fully expect to also see you bringing a class action lawsuit against major advertisers for being EVIL.
Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
So your wife's brother comes to visit for a few days... he uses your computer, drinks your beer, etc. Then for some reason you notice an increase of gay sex hotline commercials on the tele.
Before their whole PPC empire comes crashing down in a massive class action lawsuit - I've been reading about more and more of these: http://www.iambanned.com/index.php/topic,56.0.html . Their current PPC advertising is doomed - it was from the moment they allowed any joe with a parked domain to list their advertisers.
The more and more I read these articles about all of these peripheral businesses Google is getting into, the more and more I wonder if there is any cohesive strategy to the whole thing. Are Google's executives just going bonkers with all the money they have to spend? Are they just trying to grab headlines to prop up their stock price? What's next, Google brings back the Pets.com sock puppet to serve as the mascot for their new service which lets you store up to 1 Gigabyte of email on your dog's flea-collar which is connected 24/7 to their global Wifi network and enables you to zoom in on your dog via satellite photography?
they're both tossers. And both have stupid names.
lol cringely.
What makes men want to look?
Will google employ 'that' to hook men to TV?
Can google make women want to look?
Lets say they cloak pornalacious content so well that men (and women) just cant wait to see what google has to offer...
Thats all it will take google to PENETRATE the TV market.... now to RTF
Well I've got to say it.
If Google's motto is "do no evil" then how come they seem to spend most of their efforts on advertising ?
If there's one thing that really is evil is marketing & advertising etc. Bill Hicks says it best "these people are Satana's little helpers".
I think they need to change their slogan to "do more evil"
First of all, the site is shit. None of the suggestions will change that, try mentioning DSL if you want google to link you to DSL, its not psychic. The suggestions are worthless and stupid, and the entire conversation they spawned is equally worthless and stupid.
Second, google does not ignore meta tags, what crack are you smoking? They even have a name=googlebot meta attribute, dumbass. It just doesn't put weight on meta keyword tags, and doesn't use the description tag. That's a far fucking cry from ignoring meta tags.
Third, of course invisible text works to trick search engines. Tell me, how the fuck do you think google is going to tell wether or not people can see the text? Which part of:
<p class="footer">this is invisible text, it should really be all the variations of my keywords repeated in different sentances</p>
tells googlebot to ignore it? Sure, they might delist you if somebody notices and tells them about it, but googlebot has no clue and treats it like any other text in a paragraph.
Fourth, no alt tags are not good enough. You need to put the real text under the image, as well as in the alt tag. There is no reason to get rid of the images though.
And last is for beetle only. GD is at least a decade old. There is nothing poorly supported or bleeding edge about it. What kind of drugs do you have to be on to advocate switching to xhtml, while suggesting that 10 year old code used by thousands of sites isn't mature enough to be used?