Marketing Pilgrim Published: “Aol In a Huff Over TechCrunch Snark?” plus 7 more

Link to Marketing Pilgrim - Internet News & Opinion

Aol In a Huff Over TechCrunch Snark?
The Free Google Ride is Over for Lazy SEOs & Keyword Domain Names
Google Improves iPhone Search App, Leaves Android Alone
YouTube Acquires Video Enhancement Company
QR Codes: Bridging the Gap Between Offline and Online
The State of the News Media: It’s Not as Bad as You Might Think
More of “When Google Does Good”
Google’s March Madness

Posted: 16 Mar 2011 06:42 AM PDT

Aol is really a little slow on the uptake aren't they? They purchase TechCrunch who has a history of not keeping anything secret (especially e-mails) and then they send an e-mail to a TechCrunch writer, Alexia Tsotsis, asking her to tone down the snark on a post about an Aol related property. Doesn't look like anyone at Aol will be splitting any atoms any time soon.

The story is really a non-story but it's interesting to see how even with the promise of editorial lines of demarcation, Aol is looking to make sure that nothing too 'out of line' comes from their properties especially when it's about another one of their properties or relationships.

For the backstory read the TechCrunch post. Here's the e-mail that was sent to Tsotsis as a result of her supposedly snarky (that is becoming a dumb word now that Aol is using it, huh?) post about the movie, The Source Code.

Hey Alexia,

Hope you're having a good time at SxSW and that it's not been too crazy busy for you!

First wanted to thank you for covering Source Code/attending the party, etc. But also wanted to raise a concern that Summit had about the piece that ran. They felt it was a little snarky and wondered if any of the snark can be toned down? I wasn't able to view the video interviews but I think their issue is just with some of the text. Let me know if you're able to take another look at it and make any edits. I know of course that TechCrunch has its own voice and editorial standards, so if you have good reasons not to change anything that's fine, I just need to get back to Summit with some sort of information. Let me know.

Thanks!

Yikes. The "We wish you hadn't done that and you really should edit the piece but, hey, because you are your own entity, you can do what you want wink, wink" tone is ridiculous.

Needless to say the response was less than flattering. Tsotsis wrote a series of responses including

We've made a loose promise that if AOL ever asked us if we could change our coverage in any way, that we'd immediately publish it. Moviefone is part of AOL, so here you go.

And

What I didn't understand when writing my candid opinion about the movie and its marketing strategy was that Summit thought that by inviting me to their party they were basically buying a puff piece. The thought never crossed my mind, mainly because I cover startups, and startups, unlike Hollywood stars, want to talk to the press.

We're a little surprised it took this long for things to get a little touchy but now that the HuffPo-ol kingdom is established maybe the true colors of how this content machine will run are being discovered?

Let's hope that the attitude that Alexis has about this continues and the blog is allowed to do what it does best. Here is her parting shot to her 'boss'.

The issue is simply that Summit thinks it can pressure us, through an AOL sister site, into making a balanced report more glowing. And while it's inappropriate, it's not surprising. What is surprising, and sad, is that Moviefone/AOL actually tried to comply with their request and asked us to change our post. It's not just sad, it's wrong.

So no AOL, and Moviefone, and Summit, I will absolutely not tone down my snark. This is Silicon Valley, not Hollywood.

Now that's entertainment!

Join the Marketing Pilgrim Facebook Community

The Free Google Ride is Over for Lazy SEOs & Keyword Domain Names

Posted: 16 Mar 2011 06:17 AM PDT

There’s a lot of discussion surrounding a new video from Matt Cutts.

In it, the prominent Google engineer explains why you should not be swayed into registering a domain name that includes the keywords you are likely to target for your SEO efforts. He provides many examples of successful companies that have a branded domain name–and not a keyworded one.

Then he drops somewhat of a bombshell for all those SEOs that have been relying on the keyword in the domain to do all the heavy-lifting:

Now if you are still on the fence, let me just give you a bit of color. that we have looked at the rankings and the weights that we give to keyword domains, & some people have complained that we are giving a little too much weight for keywords in domains. So we have been thinking about at adjusting that mix a bit and sort of turning the knob down within the algorithm, so that given 2 different domains it wouldn’t necessarily help you as much to have a domain name with a bunch of keywords in it. – Matt Cutts

So, should you panic? Only if you registered something like “ringtones.com” and are sitting at #1 without lifting a finger to optimize it. In other words, the free ride may soon be over for those that managed to secure a keyword-rich domain name and failed to build relevant content or links.

Google Improves iPhone Search App, Leaves Android Alone

Posted: 16 Mar 2011 06:11 AM PDT

Google is doing what it can to make sure that if you don't have Android as your mobile device of choice that you are still using Google search on the iPhone. What they have done is dolled up their old Google Search app and made, well, pretty cool looking. The homepage is a bit different as you can see

But the real fun is in how you can dig deeper into search in the app. As an Android user myself, I echo the comment from the Google blog post regarding why we get the not as cool version when we're are the ones closest to home? Just a right swipe on a search result nets you the following UI.

The games continue as to who will hold the keys to the mobile throne but one conversation I had yesterday made it clear that if Android doesn't get its tablet act in order and truly compete with the iPad things could get worse. A friend of mine has an Android phone, Windows laptop and an iPad. The strange configuration comes from his work environment. His words, though, were that when it comes time for his contract to renew with Verizon he is going with the iPhone because he loves the iPad so much. Android phone? Not so much. I suspect the Windows machine will be jettisoned as well for a PowerBook or something but the message was clear. His take was that the overall Apple experience is going to be better based on his iPad experience.

Google are you listening?

YouTube Acquires Video Enhancement Company

Posted: 16 Mar 2011 05:27 AM PDT

If there is something that really isn't being challenged in the Google empire these days it's the dominance of YouTube in the online video market. Yesterday, a post on the YouTube blog announced the acquisition of Green Parrot Pictures which has a technology that could make the video site even more powerful.

Today, we're pleased to announce we've acquired Green Parrot Pictures, a digital video technology company founded by Associate Professor Anil Kokaram at the Engineering School of Trinity College in Dublin, Ireland. In the last six years, their small team of engineers has built cutting-edge video quality improvement technology that has been used in major studio productions from Lord of the Rings to X-Men to Spider-Man. Their technology helps make videos look better while at the same time using less bandwidth and improving playback speed. If you're interested in seeing some of the incredible work Green Parrot Pictures has previously done, check out some of the videos on their website.

You've probably heard the statistics that YouTube has 35 hours of video uploaded to it every hour (no typo there) and the amount of video uploaded in a week's time is the equivalent of 170,000 full length movies. That's hard to imagine but it’s true.

When Green Parrot is integrated into the site the idea is that some of the jumpy homemade vids like those that have come from areas of revolution and conflict will be 'cleaner' after going through the 'refining' process.

While I understand what is trying to be accomplished here I wonder if its necessary. Using less bandwidth is helpful regardless of the video quality. With video that is shot in a time of conflict and chaos part of the power of it is the imperfection. Removing some of that could 'Hollywoodize' an otherwise raw and very real account of something. Of course, it could just make things better as well.

I think of it this way because I am old enough to remember when music moved from vinyl and cassette formats to CD's. While the tech side of the ledger celebrated the clarity' of the new recordings many artists said that the digitizing of the music actually sanitized it and took away much of the nuance and charm. One and zeros were too clean.

I get that it may not be a perfect analogy but when something is seen as it was really done, based on the technology held in the hand of the person shooting the video at the time that's part of the story. Putting it through a filter may make it look better but will it change the story even just a bit?

Anyway, this is just thinking out loud because YouTube is doing this and in the world of online video, what YouTube says goes.

Your take?

QR Codes: Bridging the Gap Between Offline and Online

Posted: 15 Mar 2011 06:54 PM PDT

In a recent article called “Why QR Codes Will Go Mainstream,” Mashable referred to these quizzical little boxes as “the shortest distance between curiosity and information retrieval.” Very poetic.

The author of the piece suggests that QR codes are likely to become the commonplace connector between all things offline and online. He points out the fact that the code is open-source and freely available for use, that adding it to a magazine page doesn’t cost extra and that the rise in smartphone usage makes them accessible to more people every day.

All of this is true, but there’s one big downside to QR codes that I think will keep them from becoming mainstream; they don’t mean anything when you look at them. They’re cool and for folks who love puzzles, they’re enticing, but for the average person flipping through a magazine, they’re an out of focus eye chart.

We do need a way to make offline links clickable but why does it have to be done with a graphic that holds no information for the human eye? Why can’t we have a code that looks like an image or has text but is still readable by a smartphone?

I’m sure that if enough advertisers invest enough time and money in QR codes, they could catch on. As Mashable says, the payoff is the key. Right now, many codes return information that could have printed on the magazine ad and that’s bad use of technology. What we need is to find a reward that is worth the effort, like exclusive content, a deep discount or a free sample. Even still, without an image pulling you in, it’s going to take time before consumers feel the need to crack a QR code when they see one.

What do you think? Do you use QR codes as a consumer or marketer? We’d like to hear about your experience.

The State of the News Media: It’s Not as Bad as You Might Think

Posted: 15 Mar 2011 01:08 PM PDT

As this past week has shown us, news is still an integral part of life on this planet. As the drama in Japan unfolded, CNN’s viewership jumped up 172% and Fox news saw a 47% increase in viewers. At the same time, Twitter and Facebook exploded with information from both traditional news sources and the man on the street. We may toss out the Wednesday LA Times unread but when a major event happens, we all turn to the news for information and answers.

The Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism has an extensive report called State of the Media 2011. Going in to it, you may think it will be all gloom and doom, but there are bright spots and hope for the future, if the media will simply learn to embrace change.

The report has this to say:

Traditional newsrooms, meanwhile, are different places than they were before the recession. They are smaller, their aspirations have narrowed and their journalists are stretched thinner. But their leaders also say they are more adaptive, younger and more engaged in multimedia presentation, aggregation, blogging and user content. In some ways, new media and old, slowly and sometimes grudgingly, are coming to resemble each other.

Print circulation is still dropping and this week notwithstanding, cable news viewership has slipped 13.7%. But then there’s online, which rose 17% last year and that number will continue to climb. The report also shows a rise in advertising dollars everywhere except in print newspapers.

The future for news is online, but despite the fact that 23% of people said they’d be willing to pay a small amount for a digital newspaper even less people actually do. The problem may not be with the consumer, though. Very few newspapers have even attempted using a paywall and even fewer are offering exclusive news for the price. To make matters worse, one of the “major trends” from the State of the Media report is the fact that online metrics have become more confusing, not less.

For the marketer, there’s one trend in this report that really stands out: Local news remains the vast untapped territory.

The authors of the report felt that local and hyperlocal news have the potential to be profitable if someone can figure out how to properly leverage the concept.

Already 40% of all online ad spending is local, up from 30% just a year earlier. . . Unlike national, at the local level, display advertising — the kind that news organizations rely on — is bigger than search, market researchers estimate. And the greatest local growth area last year was in highly targeted display ads that many innovators see as key to the future. Even Google, the king of search, sees display as "our next big business," as Eric Schmidt, its CEO, told the New York Times in September.

Overall, the State of the Media 2011 isn’t as dark as it may seem. People need news. They want to know about rescue efforts in Japan and if traffic is backed up on the 405. People may have given up watching two hours of Fox news programming at night, but they’re still accessing Fox news on their phones while they watch Celebrity Apprentice.

For news to survive, real news written and produced by real journalist, they’re going to have to face the fact that people want it faster, shorter and on demand. The days of spending Sunday morning reading the New York Times from front to back are rapidly fading, but millions will read the front page story as long as they can do it on their phone while they wait in line for coffee.

What do you think about the state of the media in 2011?

More of “When Google Does Good”

Posted: 15 Mar 2011 11:01 AM PDT

Google can't seem to get out of its own way recently with tools and offerings that help people live life or deal with what it throws at you. Their efforts to aid the folks impacted by the natural disasters in Japan was the right thing to do and they did it.

Now Google has expanded a program introduced late last year, which ties emergency phone numbers to searches. For instance, if someone was searching for information about a poison the number for poison control would show up at the top of the search. Very useful indeed.

Now they are going the next step and have introduced a click to call option for mobile searchers. Below is a picture of the feature from a search in Spain from the Google Mobile Blog. I use this only because it's ridiculously hard to get a screenshot from Android. Oh well.

It's things like this that make Google more important than even they will talk about. These are things that will be a welcome surprise to someone who is in the middle of a crisis, didn't know this option existed, but is grateful it did since doing something like dialing a number can be hard in a time of incredible stress.

My question is why doesn't Google work to tell the GENERAL PUBLIC about what it is doing? The tech community knows but does that mean that people who are plumbers, insurance adjusters or (insert non-tech job title here) don't have emergencies?

Google can be so frustrating because in the one breath it can aggravate the heck out of you but in the very next one it can make you say thanks.

Hey, Google, why don't you publicize this stuff to the commoners? Anyone from the Googleplex want to answer? Why don’t you have Google evangelists giving clinics about what Google does beside search to help people. Give us a number and we'll 'click-to-call' for information.

Google’s March Madness

Posted: 15 Mar 2011 08:56 AM PDT

Google is getting into the spirit of the NCAA College Basketball Tournament’s March Madness with some neat stuff. First they have created a 3D tour of the facilities that will be home to the games that will make many people ignore their jobs, will increase sports related searches on Google and will generate millions of dollars in illegal gambling. Sweet! Errr, Sweet Sixteen!

Here’s the video from the Google Lat Long blog

There is also a pretty nifty map with a rather difficult Hotpot Challenge game (at least it was difficult for me).

Considering the sheer scope of the tournament and the different places it is held at (hmmmmm, places and Google, I think I am getting something here) this is the fun stuff that Google should do more of. Now, as a Boston College alum I can’t enjoy tracking BC through the tournament so where is the NIT map? Or better yet what about the same map for the NCAA College Hockey Tournament and the road to the Frozen Four?

Enjoy the tournament and tell us if you think Google adds to your experience.