Weather god Google
Column Google is omnipresent and, in the eyes of CEO Eric Schmidt, serves the good of the whole world. Resistance to this power is tentatively forming.
Column Google is omnipresent and, in the eyes of CEO Eric Schmidt, is good for the whole world. Resistance to this power is tentatively forming. "We want Google to be like the weather: it's always there, you don't really notice it, but it's very important." This is how Google CEO Eric Schmidt recently immodestly described his vision. Perhaps he spends too much time in mild California and forgets that the weather can be brutal elsewhere. But storm clouds are not part of the self-image of the Google community, which only wants what is good for mankind, true to the motto of the founding fathers: "Don't be evil." However, storm clouds are forming on various fronts. Marge Simpson, for example, is astonished when she googles her name and comes up with 629,000 results. She is even horrified when she finds her house on Google Maps and zooms in to discover Homer naked in the hammock. Startled, she calls out to him from the window: "Everyone can see you! Come in!"
I watched this sequence on YouTube with great pleasure after the Economist reported on it in early September under the title "Who's afraid of Google?". However, when I wanted to show it in a course at the Media Institute, it was blocked, by Fox, as they said. It has since been reopened. Good news: apparently censorship is not easy to enforce.
This is an indication of the growing nervousness about the omnipresence of the search engine. YouTube is now one of them. The company does not appreciate it at all when critical comments are made. Schmidt sees his achievement as enabling access to information worldwide and thus creating transparency. However, if you are looking for detailed information, you come up against closed doors.
Personalization is a key word in the strategy. "You are the best judge of what you want to take care of," Schmidt is convinced. The more a person can choose what they want, the better the quality of what they receive. What sounds so nice, however, is only part of the reality. Google controls the search processes in the background with countless programs. These are constantly being changed. Nobody knows exactly what happens where. The algorithm rhythm is secret. In the meantime, careful observation of the results has become a new line of business: Consultants are successfully selling their own interpretations of the hidden mechanisms. Anyone who wants their company, their products or themselves to be well represented in the world of search engines is dependent on professional support from third parties.
In this business logic, however, personalization also means: divide and conquer! When establishing so-called partnerships with win-win situations, the Group negotiates individually. This puts the content providers under competitive pressure: Who can negotiate the better terms faster? However, for the many who haggle over receiving a share of the profits, one thing remains common: the negotiating partner at the other end of the table is always the same.
Go with the flow, let yourself drift, Internet specialists recommend. Resistance is unnecessary, but also impossible, they suggest. Schmidt likes to talk about partnership. In a fair partnership, however, both sides influence the course of events. And not everyone simply lets themselves be driven. A large number of lawsuits are forcing the Group to take the concerns of content suppliers more seriously. The system of advertising financing is already being torpedoed by click robots. Artists are using this opportunity subversively on Uebermorgen.com, while others are trying to swindle a tidy sum of profit through economic crime. Counter-movements are forming, such as "NOLUV4Google", no love for Google.
Thanks to its innovative strength, the company has created many useful tools that we enjoy using in our everyday lives. But those who do so must know that they leave traces behind. Thanks to the numerous features during the search, a detailed picture of individual users and social networks can be drawn. Erich Schmidt promises that the individual data will now be deleted after 18 months following legal proceedings. Laws will set limits here in future.
But nobody knows which data can be accessed and how. Where the servers are located is a trade secret. The individual should remain the "judge" of the information they receive. On the other hand, Schmidt admits that users cannot fully decide on their personalization. Interests have to be balanced, personal interests and those of the criminal authorities, for example, he explains. He is right.
Google will still have to negotiate many different interests and face many debates, as befits the modern global public. Schmidt is wrong on another point: the weather is being closely monitored and carefully commented on!
> Josefa Haas is head of the Media Institute.
I watched this sequence on YouTube with great pleasure after the Economist reported on it in early September under the title "Who's afraid of Google?". However, when I wanted to show it in a course at the Media Institute, it was blocked, by Fox, as they said. It has since been reopened. Good news: apparently censorship is not easy to enforce.
This is an indication of the growing nervousness about the omnipresence of the search engine. YouTube is now one of them. The company does not appreciate it at all when critical comments are made. Schmidt sees his achievement as enabling access to information worldwide and thus creating transparency. However, if you are looking for detailed information, you come up against closed doors.
Personalization is a key word in the strategy. "You are the best judge of what you want to take care of," Schmidt is convinced. The more a person can choose what they want, the better the quality of what they receive. What sounds so nice, however, is only part of the reality. Google controls the search processes in the background with countless programs. These are constantly being changed. Nobody knows exactly what happens where. The algorithm rhythm is secret. In the meantime, careful observation of the results has become a new line of business: Consultants are successfully selling their own interpretations of the hidden mechanisms. Anyone who wants their company, their products or themselves to be well represented in the world of search engines is dependent on professional support from third parties.
In this business logic, however, personalization also means: divide and conquer! When establishing so-called partnerships with win-win situations, the Group negotiates individually. This puts the content providers under competitive pressure: Who can negotiate the better terms faster? However, for the many who haggle over receiving a share of the profits, one thing remains common: the negotiating partner at the other end of the table is always the same.
Go with the flow, let yourself drift, Internet specialists recommend. Resistance is unnecessary, but also impossible, they suggest. Schmidt likes to talk about partnership. In a fair partnership, however, both sides influence the course of events. And not everyone simply lets themselves be driven. A large number of lawsuits are forcing the Group to take the concerns of content suppliers more seriously. The system of advertising financing is already being torpedoed by click robots. Artists are using this opportunity subversively on Uebermorgen.com, while others are trying to swindle a tidy sum of profit through economic crime. Counter-movements are forming, such as "NOLUV4Google", no love for Google.
Thanks to its innovative strength, the company has created many useful tools that we enjoy using in our everyday lives. But those who do so must know that they leave traces behind. Thanks to the numerous features during the search, a detailed picture of individual users and social networks can be drawn. Erich Schmidt promises that the individual data will now be deleted after 18 months following legal proceedings. Laws will set limits here in future.
But nobody knows which data can be accessed and how. Where the servers are located is a trade secret. The individual should remain the "judge" of the information they receive. On the other hand, Schmidt admits that users cannot fully decide on their personalization. Interests have to be balanced, personal interests and those of the criminal authorities, for example, he explains. He is right.
Google will still have to negotiate many different interests and face many debates, as befits the modern global public. Schmidt is wrong on another point: the weather is being closely monitored and carefully commented on!
> Josefa Haas is head of the Media Institute.
