Google: Is This Like a Radio Payola Event?
December 5, 2022
In a savvy marketing move, Google worked with iHeartMedia to have social media stars promote the Pixel 4. Just one problem—most of those paid to extoll the phone’s virtues had allegedly never used one. Engadget reports, “Google Sued by FTC and Seven States Over ‘Deceptive’ Pixel 4 Ads.” Writer Jon Fingas elaborates:
“Promos aired between 2019 and 2020 featured influencers that extolled the features of phones they reportedly didn’t own — Google didn’t even supply Pixels before most of the ads were recorded, officials said. iHeartMedia and 11 other radio networks ran the Pixel 4 ads in ten large markets. They aired about 29,000 times. It’s not clear how many people listened to the commercials. The FTC aims to bar Google and iHeartMedia from making any future misleading claims about ownership. It also asks both companies to prove their compliance through reports. The states, including Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York and Texas, have also issued judgments demanding the firms pay $9.4 million in penalties.”
A Google spokesperson hastened to explain the company had settled with only six of the seven states. Oh is that all? Fingas reminds us phone companies have a habit of misrepresentation, from presenting stock DSLR photos as taken with their cameras to, yes, celebrities pretending to use their phones. He writes:
“However, the accusations here are more serious. The FTC and participating states are contending that Google set out to use false testimonials. It had a ‘blatant disrespect’ for truth-in-ads rules, according to FTC consumer protection director Samuel Levine. While the punishment is tiny compared to the antitrust penalties Google has faced so far, it could damage trust in the company’s campaigns for newer Pixels and other hardware.”
Perhaps. But are consumers paying attention?
Cynthia Murrell, December 5, 2022
Google Revises Guest Speakers Rule to Avoid Future Controversy
December 2, 2022
Here’s another example of high school science club management in action. Free thinking and cultural sensitivity seem to be in a constant tug-of-war. Finding itself caught in the middle, “Google Fixes Rules for Inviting Guest Speakers to Its Offices After Recent Row Over Indian Speaker,” Gadgets 360 shares. Reuters explains:
“Alphabet’s Google this week introduced rules for inviting guest speakers to its offices, days after it canceled a talk by an Indian historian who has disparaged marginalised groups and their concerns, according to company emails seen by Reuters. The policy released Thursday is Google’s latest effort to preserve an open culture while addressing divisions that have emerged as its workforce has grown.
Workers at Google and other big tech companies in recent years have clashed and protested over politics and racial and gender equity. Also, Alphabet, Apple, and Amazon all face union organising drives whose demands include that the companies adopt progressive policies. The Google speaker rules, seen by Reuters, cite risk to the brand from certain talks and asks workers to ‘consider whether there’s a business reason for hosting the speaker and if the event directly supports our company goals.’ It calls for avoiding topics that could be ‘disruptive or undermine Google’s culture of belonging’ and reiterates that speakers are barred from advocacy of political candidates and ballot measures.”
This clarification follows months of complaints from workers about scheduled appearances by diametrically opposed authors Thenmozhi Soundararajan and Rajiv Malhotra. See the write-up for details on that dustup. Now potential speakers must be approved by a review team, meaning any request must be submitted at least 12 weeks ahead. So much for Googley spontaneity.
Cynthia Murrell, December 2, 2022
France and US Businesses: Semi Permanent Immiscibility?
November 30, 2022
Unlike a pendulum, the French government and two US high-technology poster kids don’t see eye to eye. However, governments, particularly those in France, are not impressed with the business practices of some US firms. The tried and true “Senator, thank you for the question” and assurances that the companies in questions are following the ethical precepts of respected French philosophers don’t work. “France Directs Schools to Stop Using Microsoft Office & Google Workspace” reports:
In a recent response to an interrogation by a Member of the Parliament, the French Minister of Education clarified that French schools should not use Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. The reasons behind the Ministry’s position are twofold. First, the Ministry is concerned about the confidentiality and lawfulness of data transfers. Second, reliance on European providers is coherent with the government’s “cloud at the center” policy.
The write up explains that France’s view of privacy and the practices of Apple and Google are not in sync. Then there is the issue of the cloud and where data and information “are.” Given modern network and data center technology, the “there” is often quite tricky to pin down. Tricky is not a word the current French government feels comfortable using when talking about schools, teachers, students, and research conducted by French universities.
How will this play out? France will get its way. That’s why some chickens have labels which mean conformance. No label on that chicken, no deal.
Stephen E Arnold, November 30, 2022
Pixel and Emergency Number Dialing: Is Google Leaving Money on the Table?
November 25, 2022
I read “Very Scary Issue Dialing 911 on Google Pixel 6 Cell Phones.” The write up may not be representative because it relates data from an undefined sample. The assertion in the write up is:
Some cell phone users say they had an issue dialing 911 from their Google Pixel 6 models.
HackerNews presented a discussion thread. I found some interesting comments in the document which is located at this link. Here are several I found suggestive:
- Crooked-v offered this observation and opinion: An update is not arriving for the Pixel 6 yet. Google’s newest flagship is going though a bit of an update crisis at the moment. The December 2021 update was pulled due to unrelated “mobile connectivity issues” (phone calls don’t work). While Google scrambles to fix everything, the next Pixel 6 update with this 911 fix is due in “late January.” Until then, it’s normal to be on the November patch. Both of Google’s “early January” and “late January” patch timelines seem incredibly slow for a bug that could cause users to literally die.
- DoingIsLearning posted: Not sure why they don’t say it by name but the bug was originally found with MS Teams. “The issue is the result of an “unintended interaction” between Teams and Android, specifically when the users have the app installed but are not logged in to any account.”
- Simfree asserts: I don’t think this is newsworthy at this point. My Pixel 6 and Pixel 7 both are unreliable when trying to call 911, calling with an over the top app or dialing the PSAP’s number directly are the only workarounds. Google doesn’t give a f*%k about this issue. I have filed repeated support cases over the past year with Google about this when using T-Mobile or Verizon.
- yreg added: “It’s the users who are wrong” ideology applies when you tell the customers they are holding the iPhone 4 wrong. Or when you ask them whether they don’t have phones when you reveal the next Diablo as mobile-only. No company would argue that users are wrong and that they are not supposed to dial emergency services.
I recall a comment possibly by Google wizard Eric Schmidt along the lines that when a person has nothing to hide, there is no need to worry about surveillance” or something similar.
This can be applied to non functional emergency call features; for example, Avoid risk and you won’t have to call an emergency number.”
My view is that ad-centric companies should facilitate, intercept, and ad match emergency calls. The revenue from ad sales to emergency medical services, insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, among others is money left on the table.
Google may be slipping.
Stephen E Arnold, November 25, 2022
Google and the News Industry: Now That We Have Won, Do You Our Want Help?
November 16, 2022
I read a remarkable essay cum PR piece called “Google Collaborates with News Industry to Combat Misinformation.” I am not a very good reader, maybe third or fourth grade level on good days. I think the essay in the Connecting with Google Blog means, “Now that we have decimated real news, we at Googzilla want to help you.” I immediately thought about the Marshall Plan. Google’s approach seems to be a somewhat GenX approach to what strikes me as an old-fashioned problem.
The write up says:
Our work at the Google News Initiative supports both journalists and fact-checking organizations doing the work to fight misinformation.
Hmmmm. I can search YouTube and find information which strikes me as hitting all the boxes: Propaganda. Check. Misinformation. Check. Disinformation. Check. Reformation of factual material. Check. Content violating one or more laws. Check.
The essay continues:
Our goal is to strengthen digital skills and provide new ways for journalists to verify sources, fact check, and explore different forms of storytelling.
I would humbly suggest that the “goal” is to generate advertising revenue, minimize the impact of numerous anti-trust and related legal actions, and retain a firm grip on the digital dog leash that publishers are allowed to wear; for example: Site traffic. Check. Location information about individuals. Check. Email scanning. Check. Opportunities to receive Google outputs. Check.
The essay adds:
Misinformation is a critical issue, and it cannot be solved by one organization alone. We are constantly seeking new ways to partner with the leading fact-checking organizations globally and are incorporating best practices into our products. There’s more to do, and more to come. Our third Fighting Misinformation Online event will take place in Brussels on November 29, 2022, a forum for those working across sectors to come together to tackle misinformation.
Yep, humble words. Plus it includes an advertisement for itself.
Pure Google. Check.
Stephen E Arnold, November 16, 2022
Google Hangouts Hung Up and Out
November 15, 2022
We have been hearing for years that Google Hangouts was being shuttered. Maybe. Sort of. Now Engadget reports, “Google Hangouts Is Well and Truly Dead.” Writer Mariella Moon tells us:
“Google has laid Hangouts to rest, a couple of years after it first announced that it was going to push people to use Chat, its Slack-like app, instead. After allowing users to move to Chat on their own in 2021, Google phased out the Hangouts Chat app for Android and iOS in July. Users were shown a prompt telling them that ‘Hangouts has been replaced by Google Chat’ and to switch to either the standalone Chat app or the Chat experience within Gmail. As TechCrunch notes, the last version of the messaging service, Hangouts for the web, is now also going away for good. When users access the Hangouts website, they might see a message that says: ‘Starting November 1, 2022, Hangouts on the web will redirect to Chat on Web. We recommend moving to Chat now.’ We can still access the website without being automatically redirected, but there’s a link to Google Chat that we can click to load the new messaging experience. The website might completely disappear in the coming days.”
Google Chat boasts collaboration features that Hangouts lacks, and it was a paid offering when Google first planned the shift. Chat is now a free tool that integrates with Gmail. For any users who have not yet saved their Hangouts data, there may still be time to do so with Google’s Takeout tool.
Cynthia Murrell, November 14, 2022
The Google: Indexing and Discriminating Are Expensive. So Get Bigger Already
November 9, 2022
It’s Wednesday, November 9, 2022, only a few days until I hit 78. Guess what? Amidst the news of crypto currency vaporization, hand wringing over the adult decisions forced on high school science club members at Facebook and Twitter, and the weirdness about voting — there’s a quite important item of information. This particular datum is likely to be washed away in the flood of digital data about other developments.
What is this gem?
An individual has discovered that the Google is not indexing some Mastodon servers. You can read the story in a Mastodon post at this link. Don’t worry. The page will resolve without trying to figure out how to make Mastodon stomp around in the way you want it to. The link to you is Snake.club Stephen Brennan.
The item is that Google does not index every Mastodon server. The Google, according to Mr. Brennan:
has decided that since my Mastodon server is visually similar to other Mastodon servers (hint, it’s supposed to be) that it’s an unsafe forgery? Ugh. Now I get to wait for a what will likely be a long manual review cycle, while all the other people using the site see this deceptive, scary banner.
So what?
Mr. Brennan notes:
Seems like El Goog has no problem flagging me in an instant, but can’t cleanup their mistakes quickly.
A few hours later Mr. Brennan reports:
However, the Search Console still insists I have security problems, and the “transparency report” here agrees, though it classifies my threat level as Yellow (it was Red before).
Is the problem resolved? Sort of. Mr. Brennan has concluded:
… maybe I need to start backing up my Google data. I could see their stellar AI/moderation screwing me over, I’ve heard of it before.
Why do I think this single post and thread is important? Four reasons:
- The incident underscores how an individual perceives Google as “the Internet.” Despite the use of a decentralized, distributed system. The mind set of some Mastodon users is that Google is the be-all and end-all. It’s not, of course. But if people forget that there are other quite useful ways of finding information, the desire to please, think, and depend on Google becomes the one true way. Outfits like Mojeek.com don’t have much of a chance of getting traction with those in the Google datasphere.
- Google operates on a close-enough-for-horseshoes or good-enough approach. The objective is to sell ads. This means that big is good. The Good Principle doesn’t do a great job of indexing Twitter posts, but Twitter is bigger than Mastodon in terms of eye balls. Therefore, it is a consequence of good-enough methods to shove small and low-traffic content output into a area surrounded by Google’s police tape. Maybe Google wants Mastodon users behind its police tape? Maybe Google does not care today but will if and when Mastodon gets bigger? Plus some Google advertisers may want to reach those reading search results citing Mastodon? Maybe? If so, Mastodon servers will become important to the Google for revenue, not content.
- Google does not index “the world’s information.” The system indexes some information, ideally information that will attract users. In my opinion, the once naive company allegedly wanted to achieve the world’s information. Mr. Page and I were on a panel about Web search as I recall. My team and I had sold to CMGI some technology which was incorporated into Lycos. That’s why I was on the panel. Mr. Page rolled out the notion of an “index to the world’s information.” I pointed out that indexing rapidly-expanding content and the capturing of content changes to previously indexed content would be increasingly expensive. The costs would be high and quite hard to control without reducing the scope, frequency, and depth of the crawls. But Mr. Page’s big idea excited people. My mundane financial and technical truths were of zero interest to Mr. Page and most in the audience. And today? Google’s management team has to work overtime to try to contain the costs of indexing near-real time flows of digital information. The expense of maintaining and reindexing backfiles is easier to control. Just reduce the scope of sites indexed, the depth of each crawl, the frequency certain sites are reindexed, and decrease how much content old content is displayed. If no one looks at these data, why spend money on it? Google is not Mother Theresa and certainly not the Andrew Carnegie library initiative. Mr. Brennan brushed against an automated method that appears to say, “The small is irrelevant controls because advertisers want to advertise where the eyeballs are.”
- Google exists for two reasons: First, to generate advertising revenue. Why? None of its new ventures have been able to deliver advertising-equivalent revenue. But cash must flow and grow or the Google stumbles. Google is still what a Microsoftie called a “one-trick pony” years ago. The one-trick pony is the star of the Google circus. Performing Mastodons are not in the tent. Second, Google wants very much to dominate cloud computing, off-the-shelf machine learning, and cyber security. This means that the performing Mastodons have to do something that gets the GOOG’s attention.
Net net: I find it interesting to find examples of those younger than I discovering the precise nature of Google. Many of these individuals know only Google. I find that sad and somewhat frightening, perhaps more troubling than Mr. Putin’s nuclear bomb talk. Mr. Putin can be seen and heard. Google controls its datasphere. Like goldfish in a bowl, it is tough to understand the world containing that bowl and its inhabitants.
Stephen E Arnold, November 9, 2022
Hi, Mom, I Got a D in Math and Science This Term
November 8, 2022
I have never earned a D grade. In the cow town public high school, the grading system was simple: 93 to 100 = A, 83 to 93 = B, 70 to 82 = C, and 60 to 69 = D. Below 60, say “Hello” to an F, you loser you.
“Almost 30% of People Redo or Refine Google Searches, Study Says” reports:
This 30% number comes from 9.7% of users who engaged in a “Google Click,” meaning they clicked on images or something in a carousel after making a query. For these people, they may have actually found what they were looking for. Another 17.9% of users made modifications to “Google Keyword,” or ways to modify their original query. This totals to 27.6%, which was then rounded up by SEMRush.
Should we “trust” the source and its math? Heck no. But the interesting point is that quite a few Google users find that Google search is in the D category.
With the surge of “close enough for horse shoes” and “good enough” thinking, the result is not particularly surprising. In my own experience, I now have to work harder than ever to obtain accurate, useful, relevant information. I routinely cycle through Mojeek, Swisscows, Yandex, and a number of other systems. For me, Google is in the D Minus or F category. The for fee alternatives are disappointing because the depth of their coverage is similar to a child’s plastic wading pool.
What’s this mean? Finding on point information is taking more time which translates into direct costs. That ad supported model is super, isn’t it? “D” does the job.
Stephen E Arnold, November 8, 2022
When the Non-Googley Display Their Flaws, Miscommunication Results
October 31, 2022
If you are Googley, you understand the value of the Google way. You embrace abandoned products because smart people do not get bonuses working on loser services. You advocate for new ways to generate revenue because losers have to pony up cash to pay for salaries. You ignore the bleats of the lesser creatures because those lower on the Great Chain of Digital Being deserve their mollusk status.
I want to point out that the article “How Google’s Ad Business Funds Disinformation Around the World” illustrates the miscommunication between the Googlers and the Rest of the World. With ignorance on display, little wonder the free services of the online services company are neither appreciated nor understood.
Consider advertising.
Smart software does not make errors. If a non Googley person objects to an advertisement which pitches certain products and services, it is the responsibility of the “user” to discern the issue and ignore the message. Smart software informed by synthetic data and functionality of Oingo identifies interests and displays content. By definition, the non Googley fail to appreciate the sophistication of the Google method. Hence, how can these non Googley mollusks perceive the benefits of the Googlers.
The cited article purports to provide proof (not big data, not psychological profiles based on user history, and not fancy math informed by decades of sophisticated management actions) that something is amiss in the world of Alphabet Google YouTube and DeepMind Land. Here’s an example:
The investigation also revealed that Google routinely places ads on sites pushing falsehoods about COVID-19 and climate change in French-, German- and Spanish-speaking countries.
Where’s the beef? By definition, the non Googley have to decide what’s on the money or not. If one has flawed mental equipment, the failure to understand Google is not Google’s problem. It is the way of the world.
Google has a business model which works. True. Google did have to pay to avoid a legal hassle with Yahoo for the online ad furniture before the Google IPO. But in the Google, good ideas are, by definition, Google’s. Therefore, getting caught in a Web of insinuations is further proof that a gulf separates the Googley from the non Googley. Maggots, remember?
The cited article presents examples from countries which provide a small percentage of Google experts. It makes sense that those who are non Googley would apply their limited intelligence and analytic skills to countries with certain flaws. Google’s smart software makes smart decisions, and the failure to recognize the excellence of Google’s methods are, by definition, a problem but not for Google. Come on. Serbia? Turkey? France? Where are these entities on the Great Chain of Digital Being? At the top? France has more types of cheese than Googlers I think.
Net net: Criticize Meta. Take a look at the Apple tax. Examine the dead squirrels crushed by the Bezos bulldozer. Those are lesser firms which are well suited to scrutiny by the non Googley. So if you don’t work at Google, how can you understand the excellence of Googlers? Answer: You cannot.
Stephen E Arnold, October 31, 2022
Google: Beavering Away on Trust, Privacy, and Security
October 27, 2022
Google and trust: What an interesting pair of words. I wonder if anyone remembers the Google Search Appliance and its “phone home” function. I sure do because I was paid to go to a government meeting at one of the Executive Branch agencies so I could intermediate with my contacts in the search appliance mini-unit. I want to point out that customer support, technical support, and access to specific details of the operation of the Google Search Appliance were not easy for licensees to access. Hence, a dinobaby like myself was enlisted for the job. What was the reason for the concern? The GSA worked but the government technology folks were interested in the “phone home” function; specifically, what was available to the GOOG, what was transmitted, and who had access to those data from the government agency?
What do you think the Googler on the call with me in a conference room stuffed with government professionals said? As I recall, the Googler called me on my mobile and I stepped out of the room. The Googler said, “Ask them if the shipping crate was available?” I said, “Okay?” and returned to the room. The Googler popped back into the conference line and said, “Steve, do you have a question?” I turned to the group in the room and asked, “Is the shipping crate in the store room?”
The team leader’s answer was, “Yes.”
The Googler then said, “Steve, would you ask the client to ship the GSA back to us to check?”
The Googler disconnected. I organized the return. The senior government executive later asked me, “Do you trust that outfit?”
My answer was, “I do.”
The government executive said, “I don’t.”
Ah, a different opinion. As a result of the “phone home” feature of the cheerful yellow GSAs Google made a business decision and abandoned what it delightfully called “enterprise search.”
I thought about this meeting from years ago when I read “Court Documents Allege Google cultivated Privacy Misconceptions of Chrome’s Incognito Mode.” Was I surprised? Nope. Google is loved by people who like free services. Critical thinking about the data gathered by the online ad agency has not been a widespread practice for decades.
Why now?
My hunch is that partial understanding of what the Google datasphere has become is now coming into focus. The response of Silicon Valley “real” news outfits is amusing. From cheerleaders to aggrieved info-addicts is interesting.
The cited article states:
Google faces a potential privacy case as a class of millions of users filed to sue it for billions of dollars over Chrome’s Incognito mode lack of genuine privacy protections. While user ignorance is never a great argument in front of a judge, court documents first filed in March of 2021 paint a picture that Google has been complicit in cultivating user misconceptions on privacy. According to the filings, Google Marketing Chief Lorraine Twohill emailed CEO Sundar Pichai last year, warning that they need to consider making Incognito “truly private.” Even more concerning is her indirect admission that they have had to use misleading language when marketing the feature.
That’s the Google game plan.
Like many game plans, other teams figure out how to thwart what once was quite effective. Heck. In the case of the GOOG, the game plan won the equivalent of 20 or more World Cups. Now, however, the play book and its simple methods of saying one thing and doing another, apologizing and moving forward anyway, and paying trivial fines and taking advantage of advertisers and users has to be fluffed up.
Are the broad outlines of the new playbook discernable? I keep track of some of the changes:
- Distraction
- Shuffling product and service offerings
- Acquisitions which are not technology but consulting
- Continuous interactions with lobbyists and other contacts in Washington, DC, London, France, and Paris, France, among other locations
- Low profile but significant efforts to keep the online ad company’s India activities out of the news spotlights
- Hand waving about new policies in order to put some moats around certain skyrocketing operational costs because…. plumbing is expensive even for the GOOG.
What’s the outcome in my opinion? (Don’t want it. Just stop reading.) My view is that Google’s management methods will continue to show signs of fragility. Maybe some big cracks will emerge? Lawyering and marketing will kick “real” engineers off the fast track to bonuses. Yikes. The Google is a changin’… and fast. Example: Incognito which isn’t incog or neat-o.
Stephen E Arnold, October 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
