Marketing Pilgrim Published: “South Korea Targets Google’s Admob Over Data Concerns” plus 4 more

Link to Marketing Pilgrim - Internet News & Opinion

South Korea Targets Google’s Admob Over Data Concerns
Twitter’s Play for TweetDeck Looks Complete
Can You Guess Which Company Has the Best Public Reputation?
Facebook Feed Change Hurts Marketers Most
Google Says Efforts in China Running Like ‘Normal’

South Korea Targets Google’s Admob Over Data Concerns

Posted: 03 May 2011 07:06 AM PDT

At the rate that reports keep flying in about Google ruffling the feathers of governments regarding data collection and privacy you would think the United Nations might set up a subcommittee on Google 'concerns'.

Now we can add South Korea to the list of governments that feel the need to dig into Google's efforts in their country as they relate to data and their citizens.

Reuters reports

Google Inc’s Seoul office was raided on Tuesday on suspicion its mobile advertising unit AdMob had illegally collected location data without consent, South Korean police said, the latest setback to the Internet search firm’s Korean operations.

The probe into suspected collection of data on where a user is located without consent highlights growing concerns about possible misuse of private information as the use of mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets increases.

In the past I have been rather harsh on Google's competitor, Facebook, and their ask for forgiveness rather than permission approach to data and privacy. It looks like Google might have a little bit of that same attitude since they continue to find themselves in trouble in different places but for the same reasons.

Now with Admob being put into the crosshairs of the South Korean government there are even more options to see if Google goes too far regarding data, privacy and more. The South Koreans have already joined the Street View crew with regard to seeing if Google overstepped their boundaries in collection of personal data from their Street View cars and tricycles and unicycles and whatever else they use to record every last inch of the earth.

But Street View and privacy are so yesterday! The Koreans are moving forward with their look into the search giant.

“We suspect AdMob collected personal location information without consent or approval from the Korean Communication Commission,” a South Korean police official said.

A Google spokesman confirmed that the police had visited its Seoul office and told Reuters the company was cooperating with their investigation.

Well, you gotta give Google credit for trying I suppose since it appears that the company with the most data will win the day in the new location based, local online world tat is developing right before our very eyes.

How do you feel about giving information about your whereabouts or activities without your knowledge? Are you just interested in having more targeted information pushed your way or would you rather not have someone tracking your every move?

What's your take on today's data and how it should be used?

Twitter’s Play for TweetDeck Looks Complete

Posted: 03 May 2011 06:32 AM PDT

We reported a few weeks ago that there were rumblings about Twitter purchasing third party Twitter platform provider TweetDeck. Well those rumblings are now ‘confirmed’ as a deal and it could mean some changes for other third party Twitter platforms out there like Seesmic, HootSuite and Ubermedia.

TechCrunch reports

Twitter has acquired TweetDeck, we've heard from a source with knowledge of the deal, and the transaction will be announced in the next few days. The $40 million – $50 million purchase price includes both cash and Twitter stock, says our source.

In February we reported that an acquisition of TweetDeck by Bill Gross' UberMedia was all but done, in the $25 – $30 million range. And that deal was in fact all but done. But Twitter quickly provided an unsolicited counter offer, and TweetDeck was in play again. TechCrunch EU has the full story on how that played out.

Couple this move with the general announcement by Twitter that told developers to consider other options for making money via Twitter other than these platforms and you can see that Twitter is starting to bring everything 'in-house'. It may be necessary for them to do that in order to fully capitalize on the business opportunity they have. Also, investors are likely getting anxious to see if Twitter can generate the kind of revenue they thought it could.

Of course, having to watch Facebook fire up its money printing operation every day makes it even more difficult to sit and watch Twitter play the long slow road to revenue. One has to suspect that the heat is being turned up for Twitter to go from a great way to learn about news to a great way to make a ton of cash.

As for the UberMedia threat that many feel are the beginnings of a Twitter competitor, this may have stopped one part of their strategy but it's not likely that they will go away. The longer that Twitter drags its feet on a revenue generating path the greater the chance of someone else coming in and offering another option.

Just think back as to how it seemed like MySpace was the king of the social media hill until Facebook built a better mousetrap. Could the same happen to Twitter as they make the mistakes that another could turn into the next generation of microblogging?

What do you think?

Can You Guess Which Company Has the Best Public Reputation?

Posted: 02 May 2011 02:18 PM PDT

It’s time for the results of the 12th Annual Harris Interactive U.S. Reputation Quotient (RQ) Survey and the winner is (insert drum roll) . . . . Google!

Google got an 84.05, just squeaking past Johnson & Johnson and 3M.

Technology in general did very well on the reputation charts with an overall 75% positive rating. Apple, Intel, Amazon and Sony all made the top half of the chart. Facebook landed 31st on the list with an RQ score of 74.12.

Who got the bottom spots?

51.) Delta Airlines; 52) JP Morgan Chase; 53) Exxon Mobil; 54) General Motors; 55) Bank of America; 56) Chrysler; 57) Citigroup; 58) Goldman Sachs; 59) BP; 60) AIG.

“These four lowest rated companies were also rated lowest on the reputation characteristics of "being trusted to do the right thing" and "having high ethical standards".

No big surprises on that list, but ouch. Can’t be trusted? Poor ethics? But is it that clear cut? I wonder if people react more strongly to banks and car makers. How much you trust someone with your life and money versus how much you trust an online provider to protect your data. Then again, Johnson & Johnson does make products for your baby and they made the top of the list, so they must really be doing something right.

Speaking of which. . . in addition to overall reputation, the index also scores the best known brands in six individual areas. One is called “Emotional Appeal” and look who is at the top.

1) Johnson & Johnson; 2) amazon.com; 3) UPS; 4) General Mills; 5) Kraft Foods

I understand three of those, but Amazon and UPS? Not companies that evoke a strong sense of love or hate from me, but to each his own.

Another interesting category is”Social Responsibility.” We’ve seen more and more companies going very public with their charitable efforts, but check out Whole Foods taking it away from the big boys.

As a marketer, you can’t underestimate the impact of reputation. Last week, I wrote a sentence down on my idea pad. It came from a presentation I was watching, though sadly, I didn’t make a note of which one. I do know that the presenter was talking about engaging with the public on Facebook and how to counter bad comments. What I wrote down was,

“It’s what people believe is true, not what is true.”

You might have the most reliable, ethical, charitable company on the planet, but if people believe that you cheat and then lie about it — that’s what counts. That’s what reputation is all about. Remember high school?

You must protect your reputation. It doesn’t matter if you’re a one-man operation or a corporate giant. Where would your customers slot your company on the reputation scale? Don’t guess. Find out.

Facebook Feed Change Hurts Marketers Most

Posted: 02 May 2011 12:49 PM PDT

Have you noticed a change in your Facebook news feed? It’s actually been happening for several months now but most people are just beginning to notice. The first sign is when you suddenly realize that you haven’t seen an update from a favorite brand in a while. Then you notice another missing person and another after that.

Those people haven’t stopped posting, but Facebook has decided you’re not interested enough in them, so they’ve been removed from your feed. The culprit is a drop down that branches off the “Most Recent” link which is now set to "Friends and Pages you interact with most." In order to override this, you must go to Edit Options and choose “All of your friends and pages.”

Trouble is, as a marketer, you can’t flip the switch for everyone who follows your page, so now many of them aren’t seeing your updates. Using only myself as a test case, I’d say that a large portion of people are interested in reading the updates from a brand but have no interest in actually interacting with them. No interaction, means no updates and that might be great for the user who wants a faster Facebook experience but it’s bad news for marketers.

Last month, TravelRepublic.co,uk posted saying that their Facebook fan engagement was down 50% because of this change. Posts that used to get 100,000 impressions are now barely hitting the 50,000 mark and that’s gotta hurt.

To counter this, people have been spreading a viral message hoping to get everyone to notice the switch and switch it back. They’re spreading the word via an Event to get around the fact that if you post it as a status update, the people who can’t see you now, won’t see the fix.

As I said, this isn’t new news. It began in February, but many folks are just now feeling the pinch. If your engagement numbers have inexplicably taken a dive, this could be the reason. That won’t bring back your fans, but at least you’ll know why.

The larger issue here is the fact that Facebook likes to make changes on the sly and you gotta wonder why. Is it simply because they’re convinced they’re working toward the greater good so no notifications are necessary? Or could there be a hidden agenda?

I love a good conspiracy, so here goes. AdAge has a new article up called “Is Facebook Charging for the Wrong Thing.” It’s all about how “free” Facebook updates can be more effective than paid Facebook ads.

Mr. Widman said a brand’s wall posts are seen typically by about 20% of fans, even without efforts to optimize viewership under Facebook’s EdgeRank algorithm. Brands can improve chances their wall posts are seen, he said, essentially by creating posts that provoke engagement (e.g. clicks or “likes”), which in turn moves wall posts higher in the “top news” rankings of news feeds, the default mode for web viewing.

Even that pre-optimized 20% is similar to what Epsilon has found to be the average 22% open rate for email marketing messages in recent years. For Coca-Cola, with nearly 26 million fans, that 20% would yield more than 5 million views per message. Even at a relatively modest cost per thousand of $7, that’s $35,000 worth of online advertising with each message. If Coke were to put out two wall posts a week, or a 100 a year, that would be $3.5 million worth of impressions.

Which means Coke would be getting $3.5 million worth of impression for free. Given that, it’s not at all surprising, that Facebook would want to limit brand exposure in order to encourage an ad buy over free ad space. What do you think? Intentional move to block brand spamming or just a coincidence?

Have you noticed a change in brand engagement on your Facebook page? If so, what are you doing to combat the problem?

Google Says Efforts in China Running Like ‘Normal’

Posted: 02 May 2011 09:13 AM PDT

While the words normal and Google are rarely used together considering the vast number of areas and projects the search engine monster is involved in it appears as if they are trying to promote the 'normalcy' of their Chinese operations.

For the past year nothing has been normal as it relates to Google and China. Google continues to lose market share to the Chinese search leader Baidu and has tried to give the impression that they are fighting the good fight in the face of Chinese government censorship.

Meanwhile, Facebook is taking the exact opposite approach and appears to be ready to whatever is needed to cash in on some Chinese social media traffic but that's another story.

The Seattle Times reports

Google may appear to be under siege in China, but a sense of normalcy — Google style — pervades the company’s headquarters here.

Googlers, when they are aren’t writing codes or working on new advertising strategies, line up for five-star meals, attend in-house yoga classes and pedal mini bicycles down hallways at the 10-floor outpost.

There have been some changes,” said Xi Cheng, an Oxford-educated Googler working on the translate team and one of scores of brainiacs that still populate the company’s ranks in Beijing and Shanghai. “But we are still here. And it’s still business as usual.

The entire article looks like Google's attempt to show people that they are still working in China and working to remain relevant. It's likely that with Facebook moving forward with their efforts to build a social network in China (possibly through a partner) is forcing Google's hand to give the appearance of "me too!".

“We never left China,” Boon-Lock Yeo, head of Google’s engineering and research teams in China, said in reference to the widely held assumption in the United States that the company had raised the white flag. “At the end of the day, engineers are excited about what they do and to what extent they are working on cool technology. That is what got us through last year. There were periods of uncertainty.”

That uncertainty still exists today but don't let it be known that Google thinks it's anything other than unicorns and rainbows for the company in the land of a ton of potential revenue.

Do you believe them?