- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 14,984
- Reaction score
- 1,302
Read what you want into this.
To me this is a clear indication that googles business will thrive without domainers, redirects, typos, and TM issues.
This is NOT about dot mobee but it is about mobile and it is about domains.
Pay particular attention to the last paragraph and especially the last sentence:
Google to News: Go Mobile or Piss Off Your Readers
At the closing keynote for the Newspaper Association of America annual conference, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt attempted to inspire journalists and editors to make a leap of faith into their interactive, non-print-based futures.
Google wants the print industry to buy into his advice, as news editors join together âmad as hellâ against the search giant for stealing revenue that they say is rightfully theirs.
âI would encourage everybody: think in terms of what your reader wants,â said Schmidt at the keynote. âThese are ultimately consumer businesses and if you piss off enough of them, you will not have any more.â
In order to move themselves forward, he said, newspapers will have to get used to the idea that they are not just generators of trusted, professional content, but also aggregators of the new kinds of information the Web has enabled â Wikipedia, blogs, images and online video.
Among his recommendations: take advantage of mobile technology as a distribution mechanism, beginning to think of stories not as happening on a given day, but as continuous and âliving.â
Google has been criticized by some newspaper publishers in recent weeks, who worry that Google benefits more from traffic to news stories than the newspapers themselves. Robert Thompson, editor of the Wall Street Journal, called Google a âparasiteâ, branding such websites as âtech tapeworms in the intestines of the internetâ. The Associated Press has also said that it will crack down on copyright violators who do not legitimately license its news content but still benefit from internet traffic.
-------------------------------------------
This is disturbing on two fronts-
The media is calling google a parasite which is hard to argue with.
But also, the Associated Press may start cracking down on those who scrap or steal or post content that are not licensed by AP.
The rational way to quell all this discourse is to modify its algorithm to redirect all requests to legitimate sites.
Remember the piece about duck duck?
What if Google adopted such a feature that blocked all parked pages [yes, all 42 million] to pacify the advertisers?
Would google loose anything? My guess is no.
If google were to redirect those blocked sites to what it interprets as the legitimate site then it loses nothing in terms of viewership or revenue.
Its revenue may actually pick up.
Consider this - if only legitimate players are competing for the same attention, then there is less risk of losing a viewer. Therefor, what may cost a buck for keyword suddenly jumps to 1.05, 1.25, 1.50 etc.
It is so much clearer who number one is when there are 53,000 search returns vs 53,000,000
To me this is a clear indication that googles business will thrive without domainers, redirects, typos, and TM issues.
This is NOT about dot mobee but it is about mobile and it is about domains.
Pay particular attention to the last paragraph and especially the last sentence:
Google to News: Go Mobile or Piss Off Your Readers
At the closing keynote for the Newspaper Association of America annual conference, Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt attempted to inspire journalists and editors to make a leap of faith into their interactive, non-print-based futures.
Google wants the print industry to buy into his advice, as news editors join together âmad as hellâ against the search giant for stealing revenue that they say is rightfully theirs.
âI would encourage everybody: think in terms of what your reader wants,â said Schmidt at the keynote. âThese are ultimately consumer businesses and if you piss off enough of them, you will not have any more.â
In order to move themselves forward, he said, newspapers will have to get used to the idea that they are not just generators of trusted, professional content, but also aggregators of the new kinds of information the Web has enabled â Wikipedia, blogs, images and online video.
Among his recommendations: take advantage of mobile technology as a distribution mechanism, beginning to think of stories not as happening on a given day, but as continuous and âliving.â
Google has been criticized by some newspaper publishers in recent weeks, who worry that Google benefits more from traffic to news stories than the newspapers themselves. Robert Thompson, editor of the Wall Street Journal, called Google a âparasiteâ, branding such websites as âtech tapeworms in the intestines of the internetâ. The Associated Press has also said that it will crack down on copyright violators who do not legitimately license its news content but still benefit from internet traffic.
-------------------------------------------
This is disturbing on two fronts-
The media is calling google a parasite which is hard to argue with.
But also, the Associated Press may start cracking down on those who scrap or steal or post content that are not licensed by AP.
The rational way to quell all this discourse is to modify its algorithm to redirect all requests to legitimate sites.
Remember the piece about duck duck?
What if Google adopted such a feature that blocked all parked pages [yes, all 42 million] to pacify the advertisers?
Would google loose anything? My guess is no.
If google were to redirect those blocked sites to what it interprets as the legitimate site then it loses nothing in terms of viewership or revenue.
Its revenue may actually pick up.
Consider this - if only legitimate players are competing for the same attention, then there is less risk of losing a viewer. Therefor, what may cost a buck for keyword suddenly jumps to 1.05, 1.25, 1.50 etc.
It is so much clearer who number one is when there are 53,000 search returns vs 53,000,000
