Once in a while I hear the dreaded question no small business owner would want to hear asked about their own business: Is Google getting greedy? Though a few individuals may adopt Gordon Gekko’s oft-misquoted creed “Greed is good” (which I have again misquoted here), most enterprises would prefer to be perceived as less greedy and more needy. Companies just starting out are in need of customers (or users), and are often viewed in a more favorable light than successful existing companies perhaps because of a natural tendency for people to root for the underdog. Google was once a fledgling startup, back in the late ’90s, and when it first challenged the existing search engine services, it was cheered on much like the character Rocky Balboa in Sylvester Stallone’s films about the struggling boxer from the Bronx.
Companies tend to grow, and if they’re as successful as Google has been, they begin to grow far outside the outlines of their initial business proposal. Would anyone in the ’90s have guessed that Google in 2012 would be challenging Microsoft’s domination of the portable operating system market? Cloud computing was just a speck in entrepreneurs’ eyes back then. Do you think Google’s founders, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, would have really expected to be in a position to challenge Apple’s hardware market in 2012? As visionary as Brin and Page may have been, would even they have fantasized that Google’s offerings would be so widespread in a not-so-distant future? The only place Google doesn’t seem to be these days is in our kitchen sink. (And don’t count that out! Can you say smart sinks? Imagine asking your drain about the most effective way to brush your teeth.)
Google has introduced its answer to just about every popular Internet technology it can, providing us with alternative operating systems, alternative social networking platforms, and alternative productivity applications. Now Google intends to alter the bread and butter of its operation: its search. Has Google gone too far? Is Google greedy?
Today’s Wall Street Journal reported that Google would be introducing some major changes to its search results, changes that “could give Google more ways to serve up advertisements.” At first glance that seems like a perfectly reasonable business move; it is the company’s prerogative to alter its product in any way that it wishes — particularly as long as the manner in which it does so doesn’t significantly harm others. Though some may disagree about what “harm” encompasses, many have agreed that Google is in no small measure profiting on the labor of others, since the bulk of its revenue comes from advertisements surrounding or attached to content produced by others. Each and every search performed using a Google search product (Google Search, YouTube, Google Books) turns up very little content that Google itself produces on its own (so little that the content really doesn’t need to be mentioned); the overwhelming majority of the content was produced by Internet users like you and me.
One reason we content producers generally allow Google to make a buck off our work is because we ourselves benefit from the fact that our content is discovered through the use of Google’s search products. But is there a point where Google overstretches the invisible boundaries of its reach? When Google begins not only providing lists of links to our content but begins providing much of the content itself within its products — to the point that Internet users need not leave whatever Google application they’re using to access said content — should we expect to be able to withdraw our content from Google’s listings so that it does not profit from our work? This is a question that many content producers have been asking, and now that Google intends to broaden the amount of information presented on a search results page, people are beginning to fear that Google may be taking more than it offers.
Search Engine Land’s Danny Sullivan makes the case that the changes the Wall Street Journal reports as significant enough to bill a “makeover” aren’t all that major: “Honestly, it sounds like Google is just going to ramp up showing results that come from its Google Squared technology, as well as what’s been built since its Freebase / Metaweb acquisition.” Mr. Sullivan also insinuates that Google’s PR department may be over-amplifying the changes to its search product in order to offset some of the criticism it has received due to another addition the company recently made to Google Search, the personalization feature Search Plus Your World. Many people have been concerned about their privacy being disregarded due to such additions. I don’t entirely disagree with Mr. Sullivan’s view that Google may be simply trying to polish up its image — but has Google gotten so big that it’s now fully engaging in press mechanisms that we’re more likely to see employed by companies such as British Petroleum than by a company that has been credited with sporting the motto “Don’t be evil?” Has Google joined the ranks of Big Oil and banks, suppressing public criticism by tossing out shiny coins to distract us from the parts of its enterprise that we don’t like?
Some of you will tell me, Dude, where have you been? Google has been greedy for years. That may be true — but this greedy? Is it time to begin revolting? Is it time to — dare I say it — begin using Bing?
I’m not about to begin switching to another search engine, but I’m willing to use Bing more often than I have in the past. Google, at this point in time, still provides the best search results for me. That said, if Google begins serving up more content than I perceive it should be serving up — that is, if it continues the trend of usurping the content of others without providing more value to the content producers than simply a link to their respective properties — then I will make an effort to begin looking toward other search tools. Though we may not have heard more than a weak grumbling from content producers up to this point, we may find the grumbling turn into a menacing roar by the time Google’s new “features” roll out to the public… and I’m just hoping there’s an underdog out there working on a new way to discover what the world has to offer. We can’t expect Google to always provide us with answers.
Considering I use bing frequently for almost everything it’s not that crazy to use it. It’s actually really good.
I personally DO think google is greedy. They can’t stand to see another website or service out do them (i.e. Paypal, iTunes, Facebook….etc.) I wish they would mostly stick to search, but they keep getting bigger and bigger. I have been trying lately to use different search engines more, and part of that is I want something different. If Google completely takes over search, I’ll get so tired of seeing their products.
Just my opinion though
I believe it’s good to diversify a bit — not only with search but all kinds of tools. That helps us stay abreast of developments in technology. After all, Google kind of snuck up on everyone else in introducing its search engine.
Have you tried Yippy? Sounds cute, but it was originally called Clusty and came from a university experiment.
It was named Clusty because it returns your results organized in clusters of related information. Initially you will see all of your results, but by clicking on any of the cluster descriptions, you can narrow down the list to just those items. You still have the option of showing everything again if your choice didn’t show what you wanted.
Like a lot of projects or company ideas, this is very good, but they decided to expand and create a family-friendly browser. It’s more kid-oriented and less likely to appeal to anyone past kindergarten. Somewhat like Vizio, who now produce a pretty good TV, but their media streaming gadget hasn’t gotten much in the way of positive reviews.
I think that google is getting greedy and bigger than they should.
I remember Clusty. So that’s now Yippy, huh? Not a bad name. I don’t believe a cute name is a bad thing — maybe someday it will be, but not now.
Did Vizio begin as a Roku-like company?
No, I believe they started strictly as a TV outfit, selling via warehouse outlets like Sam’s and BJ’s. They have since added a tablet that I haven’t seen any comments on yet and a media player that has gotten bad reviews.
Their line also shows home audio and PCs but I haven’t seem them in any stores yet, nor seen any comments on them.
[...] How to Set Parental Controls in Windows 7Is Google Greedy?Keeping Your Online Accounts Secure: The PasswordMaker MethodDLC (Downloadable Content): a Blessing [...]
Google is a great company, and I would have to disagree. Though that their advertisement is really mostly their income at about 97%, they want to better target the consumers for better advertising. Honestly, the advertisement is good right now, and they are making it better because what I search for, Google will link that up with what I search, so, when I look for something else, I will see things that I might be interested in. Or so Google thinks I am interested in.
Their search for me has been great throughout the years. Just about anything I can think of, I can look on Google and find it. As time goes on, I become better at searching with Google, because search is a skill, not something that just comes to me.
I don’t believe that they are greedy.
Thanks for commenting, Curtis. I agree that Google has been a great company and has provided some much-needed services. Without their search engine where would the web be today? Still reliant on portals like Yahoo!? No, thank you.
I’m just watching the company’s moves a bit more closely. It’s too easy to accept everything their doing as righteous just because they made an awesome product from the get-go. I won’t put my blinders on just because I’ve benefited from their search tools, no matter how much they’ve changed my life.
harold thanks for putting this in my opinion one of the most crucial topics regarding search engine companies, again i wrote my experiences here hope people read n learn, very useful article thanks for taking time to observe and write it.
here is what my experience with google has been lately, i live in india, i searched “top web hosting india” comes up this X company i bought the service, “top page results”(manipulated) were largely positive reviews of that company, i suffered immensely using that service this is just one out of 17 examples from my google search result, now i m a lot more careful and dig in deep like 10+ pages reading every possible reviews n user thoughts before buying into anything, is this the way google ranks up stuff? this company paid great deal of money to appear top in the search result, and no i did not clicked on the advertisement section of the search page. Google needs to deliver better organic results when it comes to offer services in other countries
Hopefully Google’s search results will continue to improve rather than degrade. Over the past day or so it’s been reported that Google will be penalizing websites that are shamelessly optimized for Googlebot. (Googlebot is the technology that “crawls” the Web discovering websites to include in Google’s results.) This is fantastic news for websites that focus more on content rather than SEO. On the other hand, SEO experts are probably going to be upset about this — but oh well!
thanks for sharing this info Harold yes i hope a better user experience for all users out there and better for Google, hope this proves effective in nailing down not so good websites.
they simply follow & add Facebook business plan to use personal info for advertising
Maybe Google’s greed questions occur because they are a publicly traded company on Wall Street and they have responsibilities to investors to generate more growth and profit. While Google’s mission may still be to innovate and improve the web they also need to consider profit so they may not be able to take risks when considering new products and services to create and opt for products that would have the highest overall chance of increasing their revenue- most of which comes from advertising .I think they shouldn’t update search in this answer sort of fashion, but instead offer an alternative called ‘Google Answers’ that would act as this update while keeping search relatively unchanged. It would allow them to test the option without changing their best product- and if it works and Google users like it, Google could just integrate it into search.
Google is not being greedy; they are being opportunistic. If Google stopped, “trying to polish up its image,” they would be in the same predicament Yahoo is in.
yes personally i came across products, services n websites thru google that were not at all according to my expectation and bec of this advertising focus business model i suffered using those services that came up thru google bec those comp might hav played their cards right when appearing “top” in search index, thanks for letting me know this, i thought i was the only one suffering
I think that google is doing a great job with it’s search changes. When I want a quick answer to something, I don’t want to read an entire article to find the answer, I just want the answer there. When I do want to read a full review on something, I don’t mind visiting another website, but viewing the article on a Google service is just as good.
I don’t see why people are against these changes. Google is just doing the “searching” for us. It can confirm facts against billions of public websites. If you are going to charge money for your content, then Google won’t be able to index it for search purposes. But this is the future. I should get back an answer without having to go very far to look for it.
And here’s another way to look at it. Take Chris for example. He’s trying to push out new content (features for Google) and he is always advertising his website. Every company out there wants to improve it’s services, and get more customers to use them. Google’s just trying to make it’s search engine more attractive for new users, or make the service even better for existing users.
Great question about Google being greedy, and gutsy at the same
time. I believe that there is a far more important and disturbing issue
concerning Google, which is Google’s increasing lack of “Integrity.” Lack of
TRUST! Google was caught breaking US law advertising for Canadian drug
companies and Larry Page was caught lying when he claimed he knew nothing of
the illegal advertisements. A copy of an e-mail exposed Larry’s lie. Now Google
got caught again recently bypassing the privacy settings of millions of users
of Apple Inc.’s Safari Web browser. Google’s response “It wasn’t intentional.”
Sure!
These two known trust busting issues by Google, the concerns
over the new proposed changes to the search results, and their overpowering control of secrecy, beg
the question, what else is Google deceiving us about where they have not yet been
caught?
I suscribed to your blog since I learnt about Yacy from you people… how is it it isn’t mentioned here? I share your initial enthusiasm and believe, as in many other areas of informatics, but specially in search, P2P is the way not only to defend our data from commercial interests but to ensure results’ quality in the sense that the kind of information retrieved will be intended to answer my question and not to sell me anything. I won’t post a link not to spam, but I think you should link to Yacy here. Greetings.
This article is a view of Google rather than an overview of other search tools. I appreciate your pointing me to Yacy, which I’m unaware of. (See how it all comes back around? Thanks, numerico.)
Greed IS good. It motivates competition, innovation, and self-improvement. It motivates us to do better, and it trains us to watch out for greedy companies like Google.
If you aren’t paying for a service, then you ARE what’s being sold.
In that context, I agree. If it keeps us motivated to watch, with a critical eye, the movements of large companies — no matter how much we’ve respected them. I could say I love Apple Inc. but they’re not exactly a model of respectabability, either.
That’s the power of competition. If Google is making a misstep – and perhaps it is – then Bing (or another competitor) gets the cheese. It really is as simple as that.
Think google is going overboard, now they are ‘monetizing’ videos people put on youtube. Really? Youtube used to be fun, could find everything from obscure music/musicians to how to replace a fuse in ones car. Will have to find another music station…..like Pandora
i’ve got off google they’re turning into the soulless big companies that destroy for the sake of profit and it is my duty as a moral human being to use Yandex