Healthy Blog Reviews

Google must be pretty excited that Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook have been under intense scrutiny as of late regarding privacy. Why would they celebrate that other than it being a stumbling block to a “frienemy”? The more that Facebook gets the privacy stink eye from the world the less attention can be paid to Google’s own battles over their alleged breaches of privacy. Google has been under scrutiny by Germany regarding their collection of wireless network data that occurred while their little Google Maps mobiles went around taking pictures of the world. Now Canada can be added to the list of countries that are looking into this practice. We know from past experience that Canada fights hard when it comes to privacy concerns ( just ask Facebook ). Reuters reports : Canadian Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart said on Tuesday that she was concerned about the privacy implications stemming from the collection of data from wireless networks in Canada, the United States and other countries. “We have a number of questions about how this collection could have happened,” she said in a statement. “We’ve determined that an investigation is the best way to find the answers.” The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has already begun an informal inquiry into the matter. Google said in a statement that it would cooperate with authorities to answer their questions and address their concerns. It has previously denied any wrongdoing. Google has been on the fringes of the “too much information” argument with its Street View product since its inception so this is familiar territory to a degree. Lately, though, the additional revelation that data from wireless networks has been collected along with the ‘accidental’ collection of data run on those networks has raised new red flags about Google’s policies. Canada is not alone in its concern. Suits have been filed in Washington D.C., California, Massachusetts and Oregon by people who accuse Google of violating their privacy by collecting data from open Wi-Fi networks. U.S. lawmakers have asked the U.S. Federal Trade Commission to look into the matter, and a district court in Portland, Oregon, has ordered Google to make two copies of a hard drive containing data from the United States and turn them over to the court. So where should we as marketers stand on all of this? I notice that most of our readers stay mum on these discussions and my suspicion is that everyone is dying to get their hands on more data but doesn’t want to be known for having it. It’s the Internet marketers’ ultimate Catch-22. You need the data but having the data puts you and your company at risk of being labeled a privacy violator in the name of a few more sales. Ask Mark Zuckerberg and the Facebook crew how that is working out for them these days. So where is the line? Is there really a line yet or are we just going to be continually pushing the current privacy boundaries to loosen people’s tolerance for these ‘breaches’ to the point where everyone just rolls over, plays dead and goes along with the Google party line? That comes from their CEO who has said “”If you have something that you don’t want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn’t be doing it in the first place”? Oooops, sorry, that was from December of 2009. As of May 2010 in response to this current flap his take as reported by the Guardian is: Google chief executive, Eric Schmidt, has defended his company’s record on privacy in the wake of the discovery that its Street View camera cars had accidentally recorded data from unsecured domestic Wi-Fi networks, insisting that Google has the “most consumer-centric privacy policy of any service online”. Gee, it’s so hard to keep up with what needs to be said at any given moment to do the corporate CYA dance, isn’t it?

Tags: answers, California, collection, commissioner, countries, data, facebook, internet, Massachusetts, Oregon, street, united, United States
Posted June 3, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

Google reported it’s results from Q1 of 2010 yesterday and the news was good for Google. Many feel that what is good for Google is good for the rest of us. Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t but at least Google is showing some of the signs of upward movement that we grew accustomed to (and were really spoiled by) in the days before the current economic doldrums we are experiencing. Before we get to the number,s there was the noticeable absence of CEO Eric Schmidt from the call. The call was handled by CFO Patrick Pichette and this is apparently going to be the protocol moving forward. A report of the “news” of Schmidt’s absence comes from the AP reporting on the question asked of Pichette during the call: QUESTION: Any other particular comments you could make around Eric not being on the call and anything else that we should read into that? ANSWER: Eric is everywhere. Eric is in every public … I mean I have seen him in Abu Dhabi and then fly across to (Washington) D.C. the next day. He is everywhere. So the fact that we just decided to streamline our process just for earnings does not mean that Eric is not available, and he is clearly leading as spokesperson for the strategy of the company. So he’s very transparent and everywhere. So on that point it was just simply an issue of kind of streamlining and making more focus on financial results for this call. We can all “read into that” anything we want I suppose. Now lets take a look at the real reason for the call: the company results from Q1. These come from Google investor relations . Revenues – Google reported revenues of $6.77 billion in the first quarter of 2010, representing a 23% increase over first quarter 2009 revenues of $5.51 billion. Google reports its revenues, consistent with GAAP, on a gross basis without deducting TAC. Google Sites Revenues – Google-owned sites generated revenues of $4.44 billion, or 66% of total revenues, in the first quarter of 2010. This represents a 20% increase over first quarter 2009 revenues of $3.69 billion. Google Network Revenues – Google’s partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $2.04 billion, or 30% of total revenues, in the first quarter of 2010. This represents a 24% increase from first quarter 2009 network revenues of $1.64 billion. International Revenues – Revenues from outside of the United States totaled $3.58 billion, representing 53% of total revenues in the first quarter of 2010, compared to 53% in the fourth quarter of 2009 and 52% in the first quarter of 2009. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the fourth quarter of 2009 through the first quarter of 2010, our revenues in the first quarter of 2010 would have been $112 million higher. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the first quarter of 2009 through the first quarter of 2010, our revenues in the first quarter of 2010 would have been $242 million lower. • Revenues from the United Kingdom totaled $842 million, representing 13% of revenues in the first quarter of 2010, compared to 13% in the first quarter of 2009. • In the first quarter of 2010, we recognized a benefit of $10 million to revenues through our foreign exchange risk management program, compared to $154 million in the first quarter of 2009. Paid Clicks – Aggregate paid clicks, which include clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 15% over the first quarter of 2009 and increased approximately 5% over the fourth quarter of 2009. Cost-Per-Click – Average cost-per-click, which includes clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 7% over the first quarter of 2009 and decreased approximately 4% over the fourth quarter of 2009. And of course, the envy of everyone who is in any business is the net income number which was $1.96 B as compared to $1.42 B in the first quarter of 2009. Not too shabby. Google also added 786 full time employees worldwide in Q1. Now that’s the kind of number we haven’t seen from anyone in quite some time. So Google is doing fine. That’s not a surprise. What will really be interesting is what we look back on at the end of this year. With expected investments and the recent attention being given to all things mobile, 2010 may end up being one of the most interesting years in Google’s short but illustrious history. Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Tags: adsense, foreign, marketing, network, news, over-the-first, represents, revenues, Search, the-first, united, United Kingdom
Posted April 16, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

Last week, Chinese officials reported that Google was in talks about their threats to leave the country (or only partially ) if they’re forced to continue censoring search results. Also, Chinese officials reported that Google was not in talks with the government. Google CEO Eric Schmidt declined to comment on the state of negotiations a conference in the United Arab Emirates today. However, he did say that “we’re in active negotiations with the Chinese government, and there is no specific timetable,” although he promised “Something will happen soon.” Google announced a hacking attempt targeted at the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists in January. They suspected that the attack may have originated in the Chinese government on some level, and announced they would no longer agree to censor search results. However, nothing has changed—yet. Soon after Google’s statement, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton commented on the matter, urging China to review the breach as well. This prompted suspicion that Google’s withdrawal threats were directed by the US government. Schmidt denied that today: “The Google action was not in any way advanced or coordinated with the U.S. government except post-facto,” he said in response to questions. “Google’s discussions are with the Chinese government, and they do not involve the U.S. government. The U.S. government’s doing its thing unrelated to Google.” Schmidt’s statement is pretty open-ended: “something” and “soon.” What kind of timeline do you think we’re looking at—and what do you think the end result will be?

Tags: China, chinese, clinton, country, government, hacking-attempt, legal, Search, secretary, state, state-hillary, thing-unrelated, think-the-end, united, united-arab
Posted March 10, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

If you can believe it, we are rapidly approaching the 1 ½ year “anniversary” of the election of Barack Obama as the President of the United States. This event was historic and monumental on many different levels and not the least of which is how candidate Obama utilized social media to get into office. Now, before I get started here please relax and understand that this is not a political post. It is more about a lesson about how social media can be a real double-edged sword. Why? Well, I have heard more than one social media “expert” express disappointment in the President’s relative abandonment of the medium after he was elected. I have postulated elsewhere that he may have actually set back the usage of social media for political advantage. Why? It’s a matter of trust and many feel it was violated to some degree. If you feel the urge to argue this please leave me out. I am just parroting what I have heard more than once. So you know where I stand personally, I am not a trusting sort of any politician at any time of any party. Fox News reports on the uptick in social media usage by the White House Blending behind-the-scenes nuggets with a defense of President Barack Obama’s record, White House and administration officials increasingly are communicating through Twitter. Forget press releases. White House press secretary Gibbs and his deputy, Bill Burton, are now sharing news in Twitter messages. So far 33,000 people have signed up to follow Gibbs and more than 6,000 are tracking Burton. Those two officials have a ways to go to catch actor Ashton Kutcher and his 4.6 million followers. Ok, let’s stop here for a second. Maybe the bigger question is why in the world 4.6 million people are following Ashton Kutcher? Anyway, as the White House now becomes more aggressive in its social media efforts how do those who have been left feeling a little jilted after the run up to the election react? I suspect this is more a matter of opinion than a measurable event because there is little hard data on any of this other than number of followers of any political figure. So the question to you is do you feel that Twitter is a political messaging force to be reckoned with or a potential land mine for those in public office? It works both ways in business but is it potentially more dangerous in the political arena? God only knows it doesn’t take a politician from either side of the aisle too long to say something that makes the rest of us scratch our heads. Do you trust 140 character versions of messages from any politician from any party at any time? Go ahead and let’er rip. Let’s face it, whether we want it or not this technique / tactic is likely to increase exponentially as we here in the states approach an important political season this fall. Could its use be as much of a referendum on social media as it is on the potential political impact of social media? Do tell. Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Tags: Ashton Kutcher, barack obama, deputy, election, house, knows-it-doesn, marketing, obama, president, Social, Social Media, united, White, white-house
Posted March 8, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media

With all the talk this week about Facebook valuations and the money that they are making (OK so it’s a guesstimate but what the heck……it’s the Internet!) it makes one think about just how Facebook plans to continue to grow top line revenue. One way was revealed as the ability to target Facebook ads locally increased considerably. Inside Facebook explains further In its latest move to expand its performance advertising program, Facebook is offering what it tells us is “thousands” of new cities in its self-serve advertising tool, meaning advertisers can more narrowly target users across the United States and around the world. From social game developers to the various large and small businesses already using the service, the information could help them boost their returns on investment. Well, it sure looks like local is the new black. It makes sense but the degree to which local online advertising seems to be expanding is still surprising. It’s not like the concept is new but the varied ways to reach the local consumer have emerged, developed and grown so rapidly that the sector is poised to really kick into gear. For the SMB’s of the world there is now a better source to reach very segmented groups who are only in their backyard. Oh and it’s cheaper than other options. For now. What is your experience with running local ads on Facebook? While traffic may be a good thing has the traffic converted? Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

Tags: experience, facebook, facebook-icon, inside-facebook, internet, marketing, money, Online Advertising, reach-the-local, Social, traffic, united, United States, world
Posted March 4, 2010 by cgseo under Social Media