Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Google. Show all posts

Sunday, January 29, 2012

Review: “The Googlization of Everything (And Why We Should Worry)”

Siva Vaidhayanathan - Photo courtesy of Anne Helmond

All who are fascinated by Google should add “The Googlization of Everything (And Why We Should Worry)” to their reading list. This book by media scholar Siva Vaidhayanathan is an essential companion to Ken Auletta’s “Googled” and “What Would Google Do?” by Jeff Jarvis.

As Vaidhayanathan notes at the outset, his examination is not a rehash of Google’s storied history, which is adequately detailed by Auletta and others. Rather, he proposes a series of questions about Google, its mission and its outsized and growing impact not only on individuals but society. He focuses on Google practices and their impact on privacy, copyright and censorship.

While enthusiastically endorsing much of what Google does and the services it provides — “Google has made my life better and richer” — he encourages readers to go beyond the company’s famous “Don’t be evil” motto to consider the broader implications of the company’s business practices. More than anything, we need to remember that Google exists as a profit-making enterprise beholden to its shareholders. Yes, it provides users with information through its industry-leading search services, but it makes its billions by targeting advertising at those same users.

As the author notes, Google’s main business is “consumer profiling.” It takes all those searches by users and turns them into leads for advertising to those same users. And for the most part we are content to just go along with it.

Likewise, we seldom hesitate to give over to Google personal data as we make use of all its various platforms, from Google search to Blogger to YouTube to Google Docs. The company processes that data and combines it with everything else it learns about us to further “enhance” all those same services.

This all seems fine as long as the company purports to “don’t be evil.”

The dilemma becomes “How much do we want to control what we do using Google?” vs. “How much are we willing to allow Google to control us?” For example, my Media & Society class has been debating the “filter bubbles” that gradually begin to erode the diversity of our online searches as Google’s sophisticated algorithms offer results more and more in keeping with our interests and opinions.

As Vaidhayanathan notes early on (p. 9): “If Google is the dominant way we navigate the Internet, and thus the primary lens through which we experience both the local and the global, then it has remarkable power to set agendas and alter perceptions. Its biases (valuing popularity over accuracy, established sites over new, and rough rankings over more fluid or multidimensional models of presentation) are built into its algorithms. And those biases affect how we value things, perceive things, and navigate the worlds of culture and ideas.”

The author also explores questions surrounding the Google Books Library Project, an initiative to scan and make available all the world’s books, including works contained in the libraries of universities. While a noble effort in many ways, it runs smack into copyright concerns as well.

Likewise, Vaidhayanathan examines how Google’s products are “customized” from one country to the next — according to local laws and customs, the company notes. Some call it censorship, noting the business incentives that Google has for remaining on good terms in its host countries. The issues raise a variety of interesting free speech and freedom of information questions, which the author notes are constantly in play depending on the political status of each nation.

“The Googlization of Everything” is a thought-provoking read, providing a solid groundwork for evaluating Google both as a force of business and a force for democracy.

-rp-

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Jeff Jarvis Explains It All!

At long last, here is that Jeff Jarvis lecture in the spirit of TED.

As noted a several weeks ago ... it's an interesting speech on education, media, innovation, Google, collaboration ... and it starts with the "What Would Google Do?" author declaring, "This is bullshit."

Here's a couple excerpts from the rest:
I tell media that they must become collaborative, because the public knows much, because people want to create, not just consume, because collaboration is a way to expand news, because it is a way to save expenses. I argue that news is a process, not a product. Indeed, I say that communities can now share information freely – the marginal cost of their news is zero. We in journalism should ask where we can add value. But note that that in this new ecosystem, the news doesn’t start with us. It starts with the community.
And...
We must stop our culture of standardized testing and standardized teaching. ... In the Google age, what is the point of teaching memorization?

We must stop looking at education as a product – in which we turn out every student giving the same answer – to a process, in which every student looks for new answers. Life is a beta.

Why shouldn’t every university – every school – copy Google’s 20% rule, encouraging and enabling creation and experimentation, every student expected to make a book or an opera or an algorithm or a company. Rather than showing our diplomas, shouldn’t we show our portfolios of work as a far better expression of our thinking and capability? The school becomes not a factory but an incubator.

It's a good speech that picks up on many of the concepts Jarvis continues to tout on BuzzMachine, his various talks and, of course, in "WWGD?"

-rp-

Saturday, January 30, 2010

What Will Google Do in China?

Recently, students in my Media & Society class talked about the challenges Google faces in China: namely, subjecting the Google search function to censors in exchange for access to a huge online market.

Now that it appears Chinese authorities are tracking down activists by monitoring Google searches, the company is re-evaluating its business in China and whether is goes against the company credo: "Don't be evil."

Jeff Jarvis, author of one of our class textbooks ("What Would Google Do?"), updated the company's status in China after an interview with Google CEO Eric Schmidt. Here's an excerpt from Jarvis' latest post on BuzzMachine:
“We made a decision that was consistent with our values,” Schmidt said. “We’re not going to operate differently in China as opposed to the rest of the world,” said (David) Drummond.

When is Gooogle going to do something? “It should happen soon,” Drummond said.

Was Google’s original stance on China — making it an exception to its own rules — a mistake? “We said consistently we would evaluate the position,” said Schmidt, “and people didn’t believe us.”

On the attacks, Schmidt said the company had a moral need to “make sure our systems are safe from attack anywhere.”

Check out the rest of Jarvis' post, which also covers transparency in Google advertising, hassles in Europe, as well as Android and the company's phone strategy.

-rp-

See also:
Google reconsiders China policy

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Google Reconsiders China Policy

Kudos to Google for taking a second look at the censored search service it offers in China.

After hackers, possibly Chinese government types, used the search engine to track down dissidents and activists, Google announced that it was reconsidering its service in China, which provides a stripped-down version that excludes items deemed inappropriate by the Chinese government.

For years, Google has said some search was better than no search in China and it was hopeful its service would help liberalize the flow of information in the communist nation.

So much for that...

Other stuff to see:
Photo credit: "Google_China" by googlisti, courtesy of Flickr.com/Creative Commons

Saturday, December 12, 2009

"Googled" -- A Good Read on an Icy Day

Now that Fall term is officially completed at LBCC, I'm doing some "research" over the break, beginning with reading Ken Auletta's new book, "Googled: The End of the World as We Know It." (I already have my students read Jeff Jarvis' book, "What Would Google Do?" for Media & Society.)

Twenty-four pages into "Googled" and I can see I might blast through it in a few days (especially if the ice outside continues to hold the family hostage...). As other reviewers have noted, it's a fast read that covers a lot of ground that's already appeared in a lot of stories about the fabled company.

While many readers already know the story behind the company's beginnings and its geeky founders, the strength of the book so far is Auletta's insider access to Google as well as key media and advertising industry players. So he can observe: "Google engineers don't make gut decisions. They have no way to quantify relationships or judgment. They value efficiency more than experience. They require facts, beta testing, mathematical logic. Google fervently believes it is shaping a new and better media world..."

Auletta discusses some of the issues highlighted in his book and more up-to-date information (e.g. Chrome and the Google Phone) in Friday's online Q&A in the Washington Post. Asked about his access to Google execs, including the founders, while writing the book, he says: "(Larry) Page and (Sergey) Brin are not garrulous executives, like many corporate types. They are not consumed by their wealth, which now hovers around $15 billion each. But they each have a jet airplane, and new families, and at 36 are spending a bit more time smelling the roses."

Other links:
-rp-

Friday, September 25, 2009

New Online: Did You Know 4.0



Fans of the Karl Fisch video "Did You Know" get treated to a new-and-improved, media-centric upgrade in the just released "Did You Know 4.0." This is terrific. I plan to show it Tuesday when my Fall term Media & Society class meets for the first time.

The "Did You Know" videos have been a great way to start the term, mostly because students are surprised, no, shocked, by some of the rapid changes happening in our world and the clever way they are presented: Can you name the country that will soon have the most English speakers?

That would be China. Or how many Google searches are conducted each month? (See Version 3.0 below).

The new version focuses more on media, but it's eye-opening nonetheless. I can hardly wait to see students' reaction.

Commenting on Version 4.0, Fisch, a Colorado educator, wrote:
The various versions have been viewed well over 20 millions times. ... It’s been shown to audiences large and small, educational and corporate and everything in between. It's been shown to the leaders of our national defense and to incoming congressmen. It’s been shown by university presidents and kindergarten teachers, televangelists and politicians, folks just trying to make a buck and those trying to save the world. ...

What does it all mean? (Well, besides the self-referential and now self-serving answer of “Shift Happens.”) I think the fact that a simple little PowerPoint (some folks would say simplistic and they would be right – it was meant to be the start of a conversation, not the entire conversation) can be viewed by so many folks and start so many conversations means that we live in a fundamentally different world than the one I (and most of you reading this) grew up in.




-rp-

Thursday, July 16, 2009

When You've Only Got Time to Scan...

This week the Media & Society class is examining newspapers, their storied history and their uncertain future. One of the students' assignments is to discuss ideas for transforming newspapers so they can survive and grow.

Obviously, this is going to take some innovation. So speaking of innovation, 10,000 Words alerted followers to a unique headline service that USA Today is trying out.

Called "NewsDeck," it features scrolling headlines in eight categories that correspond to the newspaper's regular sections: News, Sports, Money, Life... When you find a headline that interests you, click and it takes you to the story on USA Today's Web site.

It's kind of funky. Who knows whether it will catch on, or if other newspapers can do something similar.

NewsDeck is one of several headline-service innovations highlighted by 10,000 Words. The others are from the New York Times, Google and DoodleBuzz.

-rp-

Friday, May 1, 2009

Who Needs Google When You Can Twitter?


So what's the big deal about Twitter? Mashable contributor Soren Gordhamer has some answers in "How Twitter Is Dethroning the Old Guard."

Gordhamer
notes how the "next great social media site" may soon replace some of our most-used online actions, including searching for information, e-mail and even MySpace. He writes:

To the extent that Twitter will begin to truly rule these areas is unknown, but I think it’s hard to argue that it is not already having an impact.... Twitter is clearly riding the waves of our time, and could have an even more significant impact on social networks, search, and communication than it does today.

Noting the power of the Twitterverse, Gordhamer poses the question: Why look something up on Google when it's faster to get the answer from your Twitter followers? "As information becomes more social, Twitter provides both a community and a much more effective means of finding emerging news and content than Google does," he notes.

As for e-mail, its faster to send a tweet; and MySpace contains too many graphics and other information for a generation increasingly using mobile devices to connect.

Each day more of my students are signing up for and finding new uses for Twitter. It's time to devise a fun classroom experiment.

BONUS COVERAGE: Don't miss this list of Twitter "don'ts" by Sean Ludwig.
Link
MORE BONUS COVERAGE: "Twitter's Hot, Sure, But What Does It All Mean?" by Peter Ames Carlin in The Oregonian.

-rp-