MarketerBlog

Yahoo! We’re Back In The Internet Business!

Today’s New York Times (registration required) offers an analysis of Yahoo’s shift in strategy from creating original content to leveraging branded and consumer generated content.  There was much consternation among Yahoo-watchers last year when the company hired Lloyd Braun, a TV guy, to run Yahoo’s Media Group.  Given Terry Semel’s Hollywood background, it was a natural concern.  Braun has a number of interesting quotes in the article, but perhaps the most telling is: 

"Embracing things like blogs and sharing of content between individuals" is at least as important as "coming up with the next mega-online event," he said. "The Internet is such a niche content environment that the broadcast model does not really work."

It would appear that Yahoo recognized the golden egg they’re sitting on (400m + Internet users) and decided to “stay in the lane their in” – as opposed to building an original content company.  The usual suspects have commented on this (Jeff Jarvis, Steve Rubel, Fred Wilson, Henry Blodgett, GMSV, etc.) and there’s not a lot to add.  Except, perhaps, to question the long-term role of advertising in the business model.  In a world where users are creating their own media and mechanisms for engaging with each other, what is the tolerance for advertising?  Are there other ways of monetizing these interactions and activities?  Or do these businesses need to figure out other ways to make money?
 
Remembering where Jerry Yang and crew started over a decade ago, you have to say that Yahoo has come a long way baby.  The interesting question is: where is it going?

 
Technorati Tags:

 

New Media, Search, Web2.0, Yahoo!

Google Analytics for the Bush Administration

Google’s conflict with the Department of Justice sparked tremendous debate this week. There are any number of great articles and posts on the topic including an editorial in today’s New York Times, which rightly characterized it as a fishing expedition, and yesterday’s astute analysis by John Battelle. ABC News broadcast from Google’s headquarters last night, and included an interview with Mr. Battelle.

Like many others, I applaud Google for refusing to comply with the subpoena and raising the issue to national attention. There are critical questions of privacy and this Administration’s predilection to run roughshod over laws and even Constitutional rights in service to its political agenda.

But as someone who’s spent a career in marketing and marketing analytics, I have to ask a more practical question. What were they thinking?  The San Jose Mercury News reports that the original subpoena called for the release of “all URL's that are available to be located through a query on the company's search engine as of July 31 2005" and "all queries that have been entered on the company's search engine between June 1, 2005 and July 31, 2005”. No wonder they can’t find Osama if that’s the best they can do in targeted analytics.

All joking aside, the task of filtering and analyzing large volumes of unstructured data (e.g. web searches, blogs, etc.) is daunting. The tools are limited and require substantial hands-on manipulation in order to yield actionable business intelligence. The industry is nascent and already we’re seeing consolidation in the form of the Nielsen-BuzzMetrics-Intelliseek deal. Yet even so, there are plenty of examples of businesses using these tools to amplify market insights and to improve product design, development and distribution strategies.

Karl Rove got his start doing old-school direct marketing analytics for the Republican Party. Maybe the fellas over at Cymfony or Nielsen BuzzMetrics should take a trip down to Washington and  give him a little demo.

Contextual Search … The Bush Administration Way

In an unbelievable act of hubris, even for this Administration, the Department of Justice has subpoenaed Google for a week’s worth of search records for one million random Web addresses. One million random Web addresses. That would be like Citibank sending credit card offers to everyone in the  Los Angeles white pages. It’s absurd.

And the worst of it is that the Administration isn’t even doing this in service to the War on Terrorism or for some other national security reason. No, according to the San Jose Mercury News, the DOJ is mounting a case to revive a child protection law struck down by the Supreme Court two years ago. In this case “the enemy” means a handful of scholarly lawyers who actually base their decisions on rational consideration of the facts … versus the latest petulant ultimatums of their right-wing donors.

While I have my suspicions about Google and their big black box, kudos to them for refusing to comply with this ridiculous demand. And for the Bush Administration, I might suggest a little course in target marketing.

To quote Danny Sullivan: “Here's a thought. If you want to measure how much porn is showing up in searches, try searching for it yourself rather than issuing privacy alarm sounding subpoenas. It would certainly be more accurate.”

End of an Era: Exit of Internet Visionary from Time Warner Board

Time Warner today reported that Miles Gilburne has decided not to stand for re-election to its Board of Directors. While he may not be as well known as Steve Case and other former members of the AOL executive team, Miles was every bit as influential.

I've never worked at AOL but being in the tech sector in Washington, it's hard to avoid working with them. The company has surely made some egregious mistakes over the past several years. Yet the energy and innovation of AOL in the early days was part of what drove the momentum of the Internet. And it certainly fueled consumer adoption. Miles played a significant role, albeit largely in the background, in many of AOL’s strategic decisions. As Time Warner CEO Dick Parsons said, the company greatly benefited from his “pioneering energy and forward-thinking insights”.

With pressure from shareholder opportunists like Carl Icahn, and dramatic shifts in business models and market demands, it seems that Time Warner could use all the creativity and intelligence it can muster in its executive team. Let’s hope that the company fills this Board vacancy with someone who can help to envision the future … as opposed to squabbling about the past.