I read a good piece over at Sacrilicious Marketing about how over the past few months there’s been a lot of pushback from news organizations (particularly those owned by NewsCorp) against search engines like Google who are linking and indexing their content, making it easier for regular folks like us to find information that is current and relevant to our search queries - and it got me thinking.
NewsCorp threatened to de-index all of its content from Google and Bing unless they were paid for it. Old Rupert (amongst others) is trying to usher out the era of the free web…. and it looks like it worked. Both Google and Bing paid up (how much, I don’t know).
Major labels like EMI have also removed the music videos of their artists and restricted embedding, moving them to their own site Vevo (with the help of Google) instead of having them just run on YouTube. They want to be paid for the views or move to a platform that has a business model in place that works more in their favor, much like the major TV networks did with HULU. There’s a brilliant piece on this from the band OK Go.
Now the New York Times will be putting up a pay-wall in 2011. The details are sketchy as of yet, but it looks like it will be some kind of metered system.
I don’t know how this is going to play out. It does seem like the era of completely free content may be coming to an end, and that sucks because what makes the web so amazing is that free sharing of content and the speed at which FREE can travel. On the other hand, it IS their content and these companies can do whatever they want with it.
But should larger sites be able to demand payment from search engines to index their content? How does that cost then get passed on to users? Will they also demand payments from ISPs next, since that content gets pushed through their data pipes? Isn’t that just cable with text? I get worried that content will become too restricted and that the byproduct of that is a world where MY internet is different from YOUR internet (I know this does already exist to some degree - just ask China).
What do YOU think? Are you willing to pay for content from some of the major news organizations if you consume it online or will you just go somewhere else? What about the implications for net neutrality? Hit me in the comments, if you please.
Piggybacking on the post about Google’s real-time search that includes Twitter and Facebook - they’re also taking mobile search very seriously. Soon, when you search ‘pizza’ from a smartphone, Google will give you the most relevant results based on your search terms and location. Again, how will this affect the way websites are optimized?
Obviously this benefits the user because I’m getting better results (in theory). But it also benefits Google. The more relevant they can make searches, the more precisely they can target ads to those users. The more relevant the ad, the more likely the user will click. The more they click, the more $$$$$ Google takes in. And so on and so forth….
Google is definitely betting that the next big play will be mobile and I agree. The first big wakeup calls for the mobile web didn’t really happen until this year with the Iran election and the death of Michael Jackson almost breaking the internet. And that is just the start. As more and more devices and apps become location aware, it will change the way we search and the results that we expect.
If you haven’t heard about Google’s SideWiki - you’re not alone. While it’s gotten a lot of ink type from SM bloggers and some traction on Twitter, lots of people still don’t know what it is, what it does, and what its implications are for your website and your brand.
Basically, Google SideWiki is a huge way to annotate the web. Think of it as seeing comments, additional links, and wikipedia style annotations alongside every webpage you visit. According to Google’s Video, you can link up additional text on the page to point to your annotation, or leave a comment on the page as a whole. Dont want to leave your mark? You can still view everyone else’s comments and rate whether they’re useful or not, or share a comment via Twitter or Facebook.
Is it useful? I think it’s too early to tell, but if it gains momentum and hits a critical mass of users (which could be likely since its now part of Google Toolbar) than I think it could be a massive game changer. What I’ve seen so far when I’ve checked out major brand sites such as Wal-Mart and Apple (screengrab)- and found some interesting things. On the first few entries you’ve got some informative information - how the company wars formed, a link to a past version of the site, etc. But under that (comment 3) you’ve got someone who’s highlighting some of the not so great things that Apple does. Keep in mind that this is all on Apple’s official webpage via the SideWiki.
First, I should note that you need Google Toolbar to use, view, and contribute to the Wiki. So just by going to Apple.com you wont’ see the entries. But I think this has huge implications for brands in particular.
One of the first things I always hear when I talk to businesses about social is that they are hesitant to get into the conversation because in many cases they’re afraid of things that users, competitors, and detractors will say about them on Social Channels. But the see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil doesn’t cut it anymore. Peeps are already talking out there, you might as well engage. But here’s where the game changes. With Sidewiki, there really is no longer an option to stay out of the social sphere. It’s gone off the reservation and right into your front yard. That’s the difference. The conversation has been moved from taking place exclusively on Twitter and FB, to your webpage.
I’m torn on this to be honest. I do think it’s cool that users can add info about a page that may not be obvious and share content that people would find really useful. But Jeff Jarvis brought up a good point:
Google is trying to take interactivity away from the source and centralize it. This isn’t like Disqus, which enables me to add comment functionality on my blog. It takes comments away from my blog and puts them on Google. That sets up Google in channel conflict vs me.
And even though I’m a firm believer that you engage your users on their platforms as much as possible, I think could be seen as a power grab to encourage people to comment using Google’s tools instead of on my site or other tools that we’re already having to monitor such as Twitter, FB, etc. It fragments the community into those who choose to comment with Sidewiki and those who choose to comment through a site’s internal comment system (or Disqus). On the other hand it gives everyone the option to comment on any site and any story, whether there is an existing comment system or not. Censorship be damned!
But at the end of the day, when / if this hits critical mass, companies, bloggers and news sites are going to have a new set of forces to contend with. You’re now by default participating in social media, albeit on Google’s terms.
What do you think about all of this? Will it spawn a new gold rush of online ‘curators’ who post tons of comments on sites they frequent to position themselves as experts? Will it encourage brandjacking, flame wars, or just be a dumpster for comment spam? Or does it give power to the people through the use of comments throughout the web? I think it remains to be seen. But in the meantime… I’d highly suggest you check out the SideWiki, play around, and most importantly, Claim your Sidewiki space. As an website owner, you’ll be the first commenter on your OWN site. Offering a brief welcome message . Use the space to talk about your business or what people can expect on your site. There’s a great post from Bill Hartzer with a step by step for claiming your space.
Oh and if you feel so obliged, leave a message on my page using the comment section OR the SideWiki.
I saw this courtesy of Tim O’Reilly on Twitter today (follow me on Twitter…I won’t steer your wrong).
A Google Engineer has built an open source app that lets you surf across google earth using a Wii Board. Looks like tons of fun and I can’t wait to try it out.
Check out the video below and much more info can be found HERE
I read a good piece over at Sacrilicious Marketing about how over the past few months there’s been a lot of pushback from news organizations (particularly those owned by NewsCorp) against search engines like Google who are linking and indexing their content, making it easier for regular folks like us to find information that is current and relevant to our search queries - and it got me thinking.
If you haven’t heard about 
