Posts
Let's talk about the undertones of jealousy some newspaperfolk direct at Google, because it's getting in the way of real progress.
The thought goes something like this: "We hardworking journalists are going broke to produce all this content, and Google just links to it all and makes billions off the ads next to OUR STUFF! They owe us a cut, they're parasitic aggregators!"
The frustration of newspaperfolk at their lack of a successful online business model is understandable. But those who blame Google are just lashing out blindly. Here's why it doesn't make sense:
Google is not a newspaper. Google does not compete with newspapers. Google is not even a content company.
What does Google do? It organizes the world's information and allows anyone to find the piece of information they want -- whether it's news, websites, images, video, or other stuff. It is the dynamic table of contents for the Internet -- showing the way to content.
Point #1) Google is not stealing your money.
Google makes money by sending traffic to your content. No one goes to Google to "read Google," they go to follow links. You get more traffic because of Google. Whether you can monetize it through ads or another business model is your own problem.
(Sidebar: Another common complaint is that Google News results don't necessarily list the original source of a story at the top. Frequently cited is the example of SI.com breaking the Alex Rodriguez steroids story, but Huffington Post's AP rewrite getting top search results. Some say this is unfair. But in truth HuffPo just focuses more on optimizing its content for search engines. They play by the same rules, they just play better. A professional news site better accept that SEO is part of the game now. Also, killing the AP would help)
Point #2) Google earns its money.
Detractors talk about Google as if it were a needless middleman stealing value from the market. It is not.
Google provides an immensely valuable service of connecting a user to the right web resource among billions of options. That service is more valuable than any single piece of content on the web.
As it provides excellent free search, Google has invented a way to make billions by selling keyword-targeted ads at auction. This extracts maximum value from almost countless niches and actually serves its advertisers and users very well.
News websites will likely need to reinvent new revenue streams online by solving new problems for users and connecting users and sellers in ways that BOTH win, like Google does.
Don't hate Google. Be Google.
7/29/09
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
1 comments:
Correct, there's no reason to hate Google. And it's a total waste of energy to try to kill linking as a worldwide web phenomenom, even deep linking.
Instead: Listen to Jeff Jarvis' "What would Google do?". Join Google, use their free tools, their fantastic search.
But even Googles systems aren't perfect. I believe they can be improved by adding man power, journalistic methods, into the filtering system. This will create a whole new web service which will save time for the user in the effort of keeping up to date. And the saved time might be worth paying for. I think it's easier to get paid for a service that saves time and delivers better quality, then getting paid for the news in itself.
If we split the revenue in the service with those who created the stories, I think we're getting close to a business model that can be accepted even by AP.
This is what I'm trying to do in my project http://as.long.as, which i launched yesterday. Free linking is really worth fighting for. If linking should be forbidden we might as well forbid maps and road signs.
Post a Comment