The Beginning

What is best in life?

In my previous post, I discussed how Google wants to organize all the world's data and make it searchable. That idea was revolutionary. The next step would be to make that data interactive.

Steven Levy of Wired magazine recently interviewed Stephen Wolfram about what he's doing to reach this next step. This man is working up an answer engine called Wolfram Alpha. No, I didn't stutter; I said 'answer' engine and not 'search' engine.

An answer engine goes to the vast databases of knowledge that exist and solves a question. It doesn't find websites with matching keywords and high quality scores like Ask.com; instead, it looks into databases which include, as explained by Wolfram, about nine-tenths of a reference library.

So you want to know the answers to life? Conan and other philosophical greats will return an answer. Want to know how many Presidents of the United States came from the great state of Missouri? Harry S. Truman's name would immediately pop-up. Want to find the integral of e raised to the x-cubed power? I've been wanting to know that answer since my Calculus 2 final exam.

This tool has great potential. Wolfram states that the next step to this tool is using it to invent things on the fly. I can imagine the search for that: Computer, give me something that flies at Mach 1 at a temperature of 100 degrees Celsius while baking me a dozen donuts. Maybe not that simple a search criteria, but you get my drift.

This tool also has great liability. When school kids and college students get it loaded onto their mobile devices, exams will be no problem. Regulating cell phones at school will be even more important.

However, for someone on the go who needs a practical answer quick, this answer engine will do just fine, in theory. Imagine the advert campaigns that will jump to this webpage. Online marketers will be looking for ways to perform AEO for their adverts.

What's your Source?

When you read about the Church of Scientology in the news, hear people talking about their VPN connection not working, or have been up all night trying to solve Fermat's Last Theorem, where do you turn? You don't go to those huge, heavy encyclopedias your parents bought (unlike this guy). Now, more often than not, you turn to Wikipedia.org for a quick brush-up on what you don't know.

I once read, and I can't quote the source, that the purpose of Wikipedia was to make all the world's knowledge available for free to all the world. In other words, who needs college? This is different from Google, who simply wants to organize the World Wide Web and make it searchable. Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, almost, and is meant to be an ongoing and up-to-date encyclopedia whose knowledge can never disappear.

So, what does Wikipedia have to do with internet marketing? Plenty, in my opinion. Just like in the examples I started with, you quickly turn to your internet browser and search for this unknown entity. More times than not, the first page of organic search results will include the Wikipedia entry for that something (Eventually, over time, the smarter dummie will make Wikipedia.org a Favorite and cut out the search engine completely. What this does to eliminate search engine marketing is a different blog entry.).

If you have a new product coming out, or your product is based on some obscure technology, or you just want people to read what your product is without outright advertising it, you can get it listed on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is against advertising, and if that's your intent with the entry, they'll probably cut it. So, if someone hears about your product and then searches for it, hopefully that Wikipedia entry will show up (along with your website, of course).

What's the downside? Anyone can edit your entry. Which means you can edit the anyone who edited your entry. If you're not careful and don't play nicely, you'll get banned like the Church of Scientology recently did. If a consumer is unsatisfied with your product, they can dig up statistics and stories and post them on the Wikipedia entry, which means that curious dummie will hear both sides of the story.

I have no clue how much businesses rely on Wikipedia to connect them with potential consumers, but it's a tool worth investigating.

So what's this guy staring at? Apparently, just a blank brick wall in San Francisco. However, it's the potential of what he could be looking at that's intriguing. As I said, it's a blank wall, but it appears to have been tagged with graffiti art; appears is the keyword. You are witnessing the beginnings of earthmine, an idea which cross-breeds Google Street View with Second Life.

Earthmine drove around San Francisco with a camera mounted on a car, similar to Street View, and recorded the city. It then used it's specialized technology to create 3D images of the city. An application created by one of its developers allows users to walk around San Francisco or use public transportation (such as the train, complete with the trademarked electric whine), and tag whatever part of the city they'd like.

Not only does this allow taggers to find prime places to tag, practice their art, and then preview its result before actually carrying through with the project, but it has an advertising application as well. My question is, for what companies would this tool be most effective?

Right offhand, spray paint brands, posterboards, precision-cut blades, industrial exterior paint brands, high pressure washers, and paint stripper chemicals. Probably more realistic (and ethical), local food hangouts and clubs patronized by the youthful tagger segment wouldn't be bad ideas. Or, maybe a user would like to proclaim their love for a significant other legally and at a price.

Will this technology replace Street View? I'm guessing that earthmine will have similar problems to community coooperation as Google has encountered. However, there is probably a market segment out there looking for ways to map geographic areas in 3 dimensions.

We'll Start the Bidding at $10000/Click

I guess since 2004, Google has allowed businesses in the United States and Canada to use their competitors' names in their Google online campaign keyword lists. So, for example, if you're BMW and you want to capture some of Audi's current or potential luxury vehicle market share, simply make "Audi" one of your keywords and then start your bidding. Your BMW Adcopy will show up alongside the organic search results for Audi!

This Google policy apparently doesn't violate any U.S. or Canadien trademark policies, as long as your competitor's trademarked name doesn't show up in your resulting Adcopy. Google recently announced that they will be expanding this policy to more than 200 countries worldwide, with the exception of those countries in the European Union, for example, who are currently ruling on if trademark infringements occur with policies such as this. Google is appealing a loss in France, but is celebrating victories in Germany. As a side note, this policy was put into place in the United Kingdom and Ireland last year.

This may seem somewhat evil on Google's part, but what do they have to lose? As long as there's a Google Search Engine, and it remains popular among the population, people will use it to find information about a particular brand. Unless companies become so upset with Google's policy that they withdraw from their Google campaigns en masse, Google doesn't stand to lose anything with this.

Indeed, they stand to make big $$$ as brands and competitors alike up their max bids for that brand's name. This drives up the first page or first position's price, making Google a lot of money. Eventually, a company on either side of the story may decide it's not worth the money to keep bidding up, and it will be at that point where the bid price will stick.

As this goes worldwide, expect to see Google bring in even more revenues from its Adwords campaigns.

Internet 1, Newspapers 0

The title of that Stephen King novel ties in well here. The CEO of News Corporation, Rupert Murdoch, announced today that within the next year News Corp-owned newspaper websites, e.g., the Wall Street Journal's wsj.com, will begin charging for online content. As justification for making such a move, Murdoch stated that the current model of free content was malfunctioning, and that, "The current days of the Internet will soon be over."

At the the tender age of 17, I went to a student seminar in Washington, D.C., for a week. The seminar hosted a luncheon with all the familiar White House press corp reporters as guests, including those from big-name newspapers. Even then, 13 years ago, my sister's university's newspaper could be found online, so I would often read the articles she wrote for it on the Net.

So I got the courage to stand up during the Q&A session, gave the example of my sister's online newspaper, and asked our guests how the Internet's free content was going to affect their respective newspapers? The sole response: The Internet is a powerful thing. Next question.

I think people will move away from online newspapers such as those owned by News Corp, to other online news sources which offer free content. These pay-to-read services will eventually move back to free content. In the meantime, because there will be fewer ad spaces available on free content websites, these newspapers will be able to charge a higher premium to their advertisers. If these guys get really savvy, they will work out a mutually beneficial relationship with electronic devices such as the Kindle, and find a revenue stream there which works with their business model.

Hey, White House press corp, I tried to warn you.

A Bridge Too Far?

Sure, this guy looks like he's having a great time on his computer. But he's also sitting in business class. Little does he know that business class just got busier...and so did First...and Coach.

American Airlines and Delta Air Lines have completed trial services on some of their jets which allow passengers to connect to the internet. That's right, you can now surf from 10,000 feet and above. American will expand the service to at least half of their jets (300) while Delta will expand to 500 jets over the next 1.5 years. Both airlines will use the Gogo service provided by Aircell. I've read elsewhere that Southwest and US Airways have also been trialing an in-flight wireless connection service, and have either announced their decisions to expand the service or will shortly.

What this entails are about three overlapping Wi-Fi hotspots in the plane, allowing anyone with a wireless modem, including mobile devices, to connect to the internet (for a fee, of course). This is just one more option airlines are offering with their in-flight entertainment packages, and one more way for them to make money. One pleasant surprise is American's choice to block Voice Over Internet Protocol (VOIP). In other words, annoying phone calls by neighbors are still not allowed.

However, with this connectivity comes responsibility, or a choice of it. If you're traveling on business, without the in-flight connectivity you were scot-free from annoying e-mails, doing online work, or feeling guilty for not keeping up with collecting work. Now, your company may provide the option or even force the payment for the connectivity, making you be more productive in-flight. No longer can you say to yourself, well, I got my homework done; now I can relax and watch a movie or listen to music. Instead, you might have to report in to the boss and say, "Thank you, sir. May I have another?"

What's one internet marketing application for this new option? How about a cashless cabin? Paying for that snack or duty-free item might be available through the airline's website (or even the flight's website!). Simply type in your credit card info, and that diamond bracelet is yours! New ways of marketing in-flight items for purchase, like through Flash advertising or available coupons, through websites might be a better option than that magazine sitting in the seat pocket in front of you.

Not having a cellphone might just continue working in my favor...

Adverts and Blindness

During our class discussion on internet advertising, we looked at research results of where people's eyes focus on a computer monitor over the long-term. The infrared image of a webpage showed that people ignore banners and margins, such as those found on this local newspaper website.

This webpage is a great example of filling all its margins and banners with adverts. You would think that with this research, it would be proven that Adverts don't work. But this website takes it a step further, even beyond what we talked about in class.

There you are, reading about brave Captain Richard Phillips of the Maersk Alabama attempting a daring escape from modern-day pirates, and now the US Navy has positioned the USS Boxer...

Free 7 day trial of WeightWatchers!

Man, I suddenly feel like going on a diet! Actually, I'm more annoyed than anything. This type of Advert must be a direct result of the infrared research. People's eyes focus on the text on the webpage, which is obviously the reason why they are visiting it. As a result, they must see anything that's part of the webpage's text, including an Advert imbedded in the text.

' claps slowly '

Well-played, sirs, well played.