Television has been a major part of people’s lives for years. With the Internet and other instant access to TV shows, the time when everyone gathered in the living room to watch a show is gone. Now, anyone can get access to their favorite shows anytime they want and anywhere they want.Portability With The iPad

Since the spring of 2010, the iPad has been one of the hottest technology devices in the world. The iPad has had a major influence on how people can now watch TV. According to reports published in 2011, the 13-54 demographic is now watching an average of two TV episodes and one movie per week via the streaming service of Netflix. Netflix streaming, along with the iPad, makes TV and movies extremely portable.

Within two years, it is estimated that more than 75 percent of cable programming will be available through mobile devices.Expanding On-Demand Options

Image via CrunchBase

Netflix started out as a company that provided DVD rentals through mail service. While successful, the company always looked for new ways to provide content to its customers. In 2007, some of the video content library Netflix had was put into an instant viewing streaming content option. It started out as a very limited selection, but today Netflix offers much more streaming content. This led to Netflix investing in more TV shows than movies to keep customers happy.

Hulu: The Netflix Competitor

Image via CrunchBase

Hulu is an online option for streaming video. Most of its content started off as free, but in the summer of 2010, Hulu launched a preview of a premium subscription video service they call Hulu Plus. This service was meant to complement the online service already provided. Hulu Plus expanded what users could get with the original service by offering complete current TV seasons and some past seasons for select shows. The monthly subscription rate cost $7.99, and Hulu reached a million subscribers ahead of schedule.

Like Netflix, Hulu wants to provide its services on all devices possible, including gaming consoles and smartphones. While the competition is heating up, Netflix still has more than 25 times the subscribers of Hulu Plus. Availability and access are becoming the major factors of competition.

HBO And Streaming Content

Getting shows and movies out quickly is a major part of streaming competition. The HBO Go iPad app launched in May of 2011 received millions of downloads in the first six weeks after launch. The caveat? The app required users to prove they were HBO subscribers to access content. Once they are proven to be customers, they could unlock more than 1400 special, movies and shows. However, users also have the convenience of accessing shows directly after their fire-run broadcast, immediately adding it to their library.

The app provides a lot of extra features to its users, including tweet prompts, Facebook ‘like’ buttons and a watch list that let’s users mark content to save for later and automatically adding shows to their queue.

HBO Go Is Also Looking To Expand Into More Devices Such As Game Consoles And Connected TVs.

Other cable networks, such as CNN  and ESPN have also allowed pay subscribers to access features such as live streaming TV, as long as they provide proof they are subscribers through their cable company.

Which Comes First?

Most TV episodes are available on these content libraries once they have aired on television. Some networks, such as PBS, are looking into releasing episodes through streaming content first, before it airs. Fox also experimented with this, providing the premiere of New Girl on iTunes a month before it aired. It seemed to work for both networks, generating enough buzz to make people tune in.

Blending Content and Utility

Pay TV providers are also getting into the game. Comcast, DISH and FiOS are just some of the groups that are rolling out streaming mobile apps for TV content. Comcast Xfinity, for example, has an iPad app that lets users browse TV listings, access streaming content and even change the channel from the iPad screen. This makes it much easier for users to set up records wherever they are and get access to on demand content.

In February 2011, Comcast introduced the second phase of the app by including a ‘Play Now’ features that lets users get instant access to more than 3000 hours of television and movie content.

New Technology And Old Business Models

The problem with accessing TV with new technology is that the same business models do not apply when it comes to earning revenue. Networks are looking for ways to continue generating revenue from their shows, but have to consider more paid subscriber programs to maintain a presence on new technology.

TV On Facebook?

Facebook is currently looking into a major platform upgrade that will help Facebook users access Hulu and Netflix shows without having to leave Facebook. They will also be able to share with all of their friends information on what they are watching. This will facilitate real-time discussions on shows and may create the chance of new people to discover a particular program. In terms of advertising, advertisers will be able to better target consumers with this change.

New Opportunities For Advertisers

On demand streaming of shows typically do not have advertising. Live streaming apps, since they mirror the broadcast, still maintain their advertising options. In the middle, consumers have the choice of Hulu and network episode players that have more customized advertising. The middle seems to be where advertisers want to be—they can have traditional advertising during the broadcast and additional reach to those who watch it online.

The online players allow advertisers to create built-in HTML5 ads for more interaction. This moves beyond the typical video commercial by letting the consumer have a total brand experience. Brands have the option to buy both broadcast and online advertising in the single package.

Hulu has also provided advertisers with options such as in-stream video ads, clickable banners and a full branding of the Hulu player during a specific program. Ad Selector is also a popular choice because it puts consumers in the driver’s seat by letting them choose which ad they want to see. Advertisers can easily make a first, good impression on consumers with these ad options.

The Living Room Still An Option

While many consumers may like the convenience of watching shows whenever and wherever, typically they still want to watch shows and movies on the best screen possible. If they are home, that is still the TV in the living room. Advertisers can still get a piece of the pie as long as the recognize what the consumer wants and deliver it in a way that still maintains a revenue stream in some fashion.

About Serge Kozak 
Serge Kozak is the founder and CEO of True Hero Studio and Edictive. Edictive is an online project management software for film and TV production space.

Bomb The Music Industry colored vinyl (Photo credit: minimoniotaku)

Very few merchants would argue their business remained unchanged by the advent and popularity of the Internet. Whether they’re selling used books, Mustang stripes or music, online consumer activity altered how businesses market and sell their product. Consumer access to free, second-hand and pirated products also affects how well your industry weathers Internet exposure.

When the Internet’s negative effect on industry comes up for discussion, the music industry is almost always at the forefront of the conversation. File-sharing sites and piracy have been blamed for a precipitous drop in music sales, dropping from approximately $15 billion in 1999 to between $7 to 8 billion by 2009. In response, the record industry has lobbied Congress for tighter copyright laws that target peer-to-peer websites and increased litigation against real and suspected acts of piracy.

Few people are going to argue piracy is illegal, but is the music industry really in as bad shape as these figures suggest? Probably not: while music sales dropped, the same time period saw an increase in overall music industry sales. Once you add concert tickets, merchandise, music player sales, instrument sales, music lessons and small independent recording labels into the mix, overall revenues increased from $132 billion to $168 billion even as music sales went into free-fall.

Big Fish, Little Fish

Why such a discrepancy? It helps to remember four major record labels account for the vast bulk of music sales. These big players have plenty of influence both within the record industry and on Capitol Hill, and they are, understandably, terrified by their plummeting revenues.

Add to this the fact most famous musicians sign on with these big labels or their affiliates, and it’s easy to see why people assume the future of the music industry rises and falls on the basis of music sales.

In actuality, the music industry thrives, in part because the Internet exposes so many people to small recording labels and musicians who, prior to online life, would never have reached large audiences.

You can see the same transformation happening in journalism. Newspapers, television and radio once dominated the news industry, and to some extent, still do. However the advent of journalistic blogging and online news services gave people more options. Even YouTube has, in the past, proven a faster method of spreading breaking news footage than traditional journalism. The jobs — and profits — are still out there. It’s the players who have changed.

What This Means for You

If there’s a lesson to be learned here, it’s that the Internet transforms industry and tends to spread revenues over a disparate group of business models. That’s often bad news for big industry players, but increases opportunities for smaller businesses. A small company selling carpet for Mustangs in Missouri can now compete for business on a national or even international scale, something that would simply not have been possible before online marketing.

Carl is a guest blogger who likes to write about his passions, including online business practices and car accessories, like Mustang stripes.

Sometimes I’m really amazed what gets through in ads these days.  Jack In The Box has made some amazing ads since they brought Jack back, and this is still a good ad… they may have just wanted to check into what it means when you have a tear tattooed under your eye.

I have a buddy of mine who swears he could make a living just by consulting with ad agencies and providing them with the insights of a full grown man who still thinks like a 13 year-old boy.  Without even checking with him, I’m pretty sure this wouldn’t have passed the test…

J.

UPDATE:

I just had some jaggoff write to complain that I didn’t provide a source for this article… um, really? It was a fucking nationally broadcast commercial for Jack In the Box… I’m pretty sure you can find it on YouTube.  I didn’t bother embedding the embedding the video because, “fuck you” that’s why… good grief.  I know this isn’t top shelf comedy writing here, but I would think you’d figure it out anyway.

If you don’t know the story by now, US Presidential wannabe, Rich Santorum, famously pissed off Nerve reporter Dan Savage by comparing homosexuals to just about every type of sexual degenerate.  In turn, Dan Savage made Santorum’s name the definition for something really gross.

Dan Savage isn’t a search engine optimization (SEO) expert by any means, in fact, it could be said that this unfortunate search result is proof that Google’s search algorithm works just fine.

Because Dan Savage’s site, SpreadingSantorum.com, provided Google with the three things that Google loves:

• Content – the splash page for SpreadingSantorum.com features just the definition that everybody is getting grossed out about and little more.
• Search Friendly Site Architecture – Basically, this means the site is well built and doesn’t use any weird tricks, etc.
• Inbound Links – Once Dan Savage wrote about this new site, people started linking to it, then when people found out about it, even more people started linking to it, and now everybody is linking to it… and Google really loves that.

Getting to the top of the search results for “santorum” was a snap.

Plus, it doesn’t hurt that Rick Santorum‘s web team sucks as their job.  I mean, the dude is actually Rick Santorum, and Santorum isn’t really that common of a name, so he should be near the top by accident most of the time.  I mean, I have to share my full name with a bunch of people, plus, outside of my professional career, nobody really knows who I am, which is why I come in second to a crazy, radio preacher when you search for my name.  However, Rick… you’re in the public eye here! All you need to do is the basics and you can ditch the gross definition in no time.

Frankly, I’m not sure why I’m actually trying to help here… I mean, the guy is a homophobic jackass and even if I was on that side of the political fence, I still wouldn’t root for this guy.  However, I do hate hearing the press and a bunch of other nut jobs claim that this is all part of some left wing conspiracy to hold this guy down.

It isn’t, and here’s why: He actually did everything that is causing this bad search result to happen in the first place.

When my kids screw up and get pissed at me or cry or whatever, I always remind that that they’re not being picked on here… they actually screwed up.  You can’t hit your brother, say something gross in front of your sister, or skip your homework and then be angry when I send you to your room.  In this case, you can’t call gay people animals without getting some heat from the free press.

So, what’s this poor asshole to do? Give people something else to talk about. Change the conversation. Fight fire, with fire. I mean, it’s too much to ask for him to stop being an asshole, so let’s not get crazy, but at the very least, play the game when it comes to search engine marketing, social media, and so forth.

For starters, get some damn content on your site.  Right now, if you go to the official Rick Santorum site, you end up with a big ass donation page that is mostly made up of an image of your mug, crowing about how close you came to winning in Iowa.  There’s no content here at all… no description of your platform, no mention of your economic policy, no nothing.

Second, sort your damn site architecture out… that’s the stuff that makes up a web page (HTML, etc.).  Right away, you can see that your site’s title (generated with what is called a TITLE tag) reads “Iowa Was Just The Beginning | Rick Santorum for President”, which is only helpful if people are searching for “Iowa was just the beginning.”  You’re lucky you included your name in there, which helps a little, but not as much as you were hoping.  On top of that, you’ve got a big image and a donation form as the majority of your page, which is bad because it doesn’t give Google much to latch on to when it crawls your site to figure out where to rank you in their index.

Third, get yourself some more inbound links for your own name.  This is only part of the equation, mind you, so you still need to do the rest, but right now, one thing I can see is that more people are linking to SpreadingSantorum.com with your name than people are linking to your own site with your name.  While you have more inbound links than the other site in total, clearly a lot of them are for other things (that I can’t see, by the way, so I’m not sure what they are at all).

Basically, you want people to stop seeing a dirty word when they search for your name, get your shit together (pardon the pun) and fix it yourself.  Don’t run to Google and ask for them to fix it… Google isn’t the broken one here, your site is effed up.  I would say stop being an asshole, but I doubt you’re going to do that… so, at least don’t suck at SEO.

Related articles

• Dear Rick Santorum: 6 Ways to Fix Your Google Problem (mashable.com)
• Rick Santorum’s Search Engine Problem Hits The Big Time (paidcontent.org)
• How Rick Santorum Is Making His “Google Problem” Worse (searchengineland.com)

To say that Aaron Wall of SEO Book has a personal vendetta against the behemoth search engine company, Google, is an understatement. Over the years, he has blogged and spoken with the passion of a man that is trying to get children out of coalmines about how Google doesn’t follow its own rules, favors big corporations, and is just basically not following its own mantra of, “Do no harm.”

So, when Aaron discovered a bunch of paid links for Google’s browser, Chrome, with the ad copy of ”This post is sponsored by Google” on more than 400 pages, he must have thought he had found the golden fleece.  Aaron blogged about it, so Danny Sullivan over at Search Engine Land and a bunch of other search news sites picked it up as news.

However, just like a bunch of stories from last year, they didn’t have all the facts just yet.  Turns out, Essence Digital, the company that actually placed the paid links, had this to say to the BBC:

Google told the BBC that it had never commissioned Essence Digital to approach bloggers and place sponsored links.

In its own statement, Essence Digital said: “Google never approved a sponsored-post campaign. They only agreed to buy online video ads. Google have consistently avoided paid postings to promote their products, because in their view these kind of promotions are not transparent or in the best interests of users.

“We apologise to Google who clearly didn’t authorise this.”

I don’t blame Danny Sullivan or Search Engine Land for the story and I can’t be too angry about the SEO Book posting for this kind of thing; both publications did actually catch Google doing something that they shouldn’t have been doing, and it’s pretty damn juicy to catch somebody doing something that they tell other people not to do (hell, it’s a stalwart of any political reporting these days) .

I think where I get a bit perturbed is how quickly everybody went to press without a statement from Google.

Back in the old days of the press, if you didn’t have a source in place for something like this,  you didn’t run the story.  I’m pretty sure everybody has seen “All The President’s Men” at this point in your life if you’re going to get into the writing game, but clearly some of the finer points are lost on the bloggers of the world.

When it turns out that Google never authorized the purchase of paid links (which if you use your head, why would they want or need to in the first place?), the first thing out of all the search engine blogs should be, “we’re sorry for blaming you directly,” but I doubt that will ever happen.

Look, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I’m not naive, I know that big corporations do a lot of evil in this world.  In fact, I’m usually the first one to say it because people usually love to blame the government or some other organization for a lot of the bad stuff that goes down in America.  However, let’s try and not just blame Google for all the evil in the search engine marketing game. This was sloppy work on both Google and Essence’s part, but why does everybody always have to go for the evil conclusion?

Sure, they’re a big company now, but despite what you may think, they are not run by robots or super humans. Google is made up of good old fashioned regular humans, who eff things up on a regular basis.  In this case, Google outsourced some work to another company of humans, who clearly have even lower standards for workmanship, and are most likely done as a company now because they just screwed up with the wrong client.

I know it won’t happen, but the bloggers and online news organizations of the world need to learn to take a breath before jumping on stuff like this.  Just like when it turned out that CarrierIQ wasn’t really keystroke tracking your every move, Google wasn’t really buying links… a company it hired was.

I know it’s a subtle detail and it’s not as much fun to report on, but trust me, I’m sure Google is doing plenty of other evil stuff you can call them on this year, so pace  yourself.

Related articles

• Google Caught Buying Paid Links Again (seroundtable.com)
• Uh oh, Google may be in trouble for fishy Chrome sponsored post campaign (venturebeat.com)
• OOPS! GOOGLE runs afoul of own rules on searches… (guardian.co.uk)
• Google Violated Its Own Evil-Free Policies While Promoting Chrome (gizmodo.com.au)

Internet folk thrive on controversy, they just can’t help themselves. Even in a medium that is based on the easier access to facts imaginable, a good controversy will trump any and all facts and logic, leaving a trail of destruction and carnage in their wake. Oddly enough, the geekiest and most fact based group of people, the tech folk, seem to have about as much love of controversy as the Weekly World News set does with celebrities.

This year, we here at Dead Tree Media saw so much carnage on the tech front, that we decided to write our first ever “yearend list” that highlights not only the biggest controversies, but those that actually turned out to be nothing once the facts came to the surface (yet, are still constantly used in jokes on Nerve… sorry Netflix).

#5. The Apple iPhone 5… Sorry, 4S

The folks over at Mashable and TechCrunch love a good Apple rumor. Even if they have absolutely no factual backup, they will let fly a collection of Apple myths and pose it as a full-fledged, fact-checked story that came right from the cold, dead lips of Steve Jobs himself. This year, it was all about the launch of the latest incarnation of the iPhone, which turned out to be called the iPhone 4S, much to the chagrin of those that swore it was going to be the iPhone 5.

The only problem… nobody actually knew what the difference between and iPhone 4S and an iPhone 5 would actually be in the first place.

You see, all the Apple lovers out there (admission, I actually own an iPhone 4S) had been carefully watching all the rumors about the feature set of the next iPhone, wondering which features would make the cut and which would not, and all the while, calling it an iPhone 5, because, well hell, it was up to them to name another company’s product. Then, like a kid that gets dumped just before the prom, Apple decides that the feature set included in this update isn’t worthy of a full incremental update and ended up calling it the iPhone 4S, with the S standing for “speed” just like last time they did this with the iPhone 3GS.

The crazy thing… some people actually decided that they weren’t going to get the latest model because it wasn’t an iPhone 5. Wait… what? These idiots didn’t even know what an iPhone 5 is, yet they swore that this piece of vapor hardware is bound to be better than the model that actually exists. Ben Parr of Mashable and a bunch of other reporters actually said out loud during the press conference, “Wow, I was hoping it was the iPhone 5,” after the name was announced… before the list of features was even revealed.

I know you guys are all about the next big shiny thing, but could you at least wait for it to exist? No wonder the people over at Samsung made fun of you in their commercials.

#4. iPhone’s Siri is Pro-Life

Some tech controversies are so hot that they actually creep over into the non-tech world and get picked up by the regular media. Such was the case when it was discovered that if you tell the virtual assistant built into the iPhone 4S, Siri, that you want to get an abortion in the New York area, she suddenly can’t find any abortion clinics near your location. Not only did the media lose their shit over this one, but the ultra-religious, pro-life groups claimed it as a victory, and the pro-choice groups claimed that it was right wing plot.

The only problem: Siri’s a fucking computer program, and computer programs are only as smart as the people who create them. While Siri can do some amazing stuff (seriously, it’s a mind bending piece of technology… after I picked up my iPhone 4S, I lost a week of my life talking to her, so much so, my wife thought I was having an affair), it can’t go beyond its programming. So, when you ask her for an abortion, and there are no businesses that actually use the word “abortion” in their name, she won’t make the leap and show you abortion clinics. However, if you asked her for a Planned Parenthood location, she can whip up a list in seconds flat.

The real nutty thing here… everybody should have figured this out a lot faster than they actually did. Some of the best minds in the search engine marketing business wrote articles explaining the issue to people, yet the idiots over at Fox News and even some of the smarter members of the press, kept getting it wrong, over and over again.

Folks, they are just machines… they can’t be pro or con anything, they can’t be racist, they can’t love or hate or anything else that we do. So, the next time you think your phone is out to get you, do me a favor and just turn it back in to the store, you’re clearly not intelligent enough to own such a sophisticated piece of technology.

#3. Carrier IQ is Tracking Your Every Move

Back in November of 2011, an Android developer named Trevor Eckhart, released a video on YouTube and a blog posting on his site that claimed that he had been tinkering around inside of his phone’s software and discovered that a piece of software by a company called Carrier IQ actually logs keystrokes and tracks users’ locations. Once both the tech and regular news media got a hold of this, they lost their fucking minds like they had just discovered that someone had put a chip in their head… all without asking either the mobile carriers or Carrier IQ if it was actually true.

To make matters even worse, the mobile carriers, device manufacturers, and Carrier IQ said next to nothing after the story broke and ended up looking like they had actually been caught doing something. Eventually, when sites like Mashable wouldn’t shut up about it, they started to come forward to finally clear the whole mess up. Some of them plainly said that, no that’s not what that software does; while they do use it to improve the quality of their service, they aren’t tracking your keystrokes or location. A few came out and flat out denied that they used Carrier IQ at all, while others, went a bit extreme and said that they would stop using Carrier IQ immediately. Poor Carrier IQ came out and made it as clear as possible, over and over again, that they weren’t up to anything, but people still kept losing their shit like, to the point where Congress was asking for them to drop by for a chat.

Here’s the thing folks… tech companies like Carrier IQ or any other company that collects data on usage habits, purchasing habits, or whatever, doesn’t give a rats ass about you. In fact, they don’t even know who you are. And that’s on purpose, because of crazy shit like these trumped up charges against them. The usage patterns of one user are worthless; however, when you put them all together in one big pile, they are a goldmine of information that allows engineers and other analytics geeks to figure out how to improve things beyond your wildest dreams. Before they could do this, they would just base your satisfaction on surveys that only the feeble minded had time to answer, so the shit that was really bugging the paying customers, would never get solved. Now things get fixed so fast, people actually complain about how often their software updates instead of thanking the developers for handling bugs so rapidly.

Sorry people, Carrier IQ and all the other tech companies don’t know who you are and they prefer it that way.

#2. Netflix Raises Its Prices and Tries to Start a New Company, Quickster

I have to tell you right up front, I friggin’ love Netflix. Even back when it was all about DVDs, I thought the idea was the best thing since sliced bread. As someone who never had time to hang out in the video store on a Friday night, I loved the fact that freshly baked DVDs would arrive in my mailbox each week. Then, when they introduced streaming over the computer or Xbox or PS3 or a crapload of other devices, I about lost my mind. This was science fiction come to life… the ability to watch movies instantly over a dozen different devices was the stuff of legend and frankly, the world should all bow down and kiss Netflix’s bright red ass for figuring out how to do this.

One of the most amazing things about the streaming service was that it was included with your regular DVD subscription service, which was nice. Occasionally, when you were in the gap between the physical discs arriving at your door, you could go back and catch up on some old TV or some of the less popular titles. However, over the summer of 2011, now that everybody was comfortable with using streaming and completely addicted to its charms, Netflix decided to actually start charging people for something it had been giving away for free.

Let’s look at that again… Netflix, a company who is in the business of making money, had been giving their customers something for free, and then started charging for it when they decided the time was right. Notice I didn’t say they raised their prices, because they didn’t. Streaming video actually costs Netflix a lot of money to provide to its customers… a lot, a lot. If you somehow thought that they were getting the use of servers, internet lines, engineers, and a boat load of other things necessary to make streaming work for free, then I’ll just say it… you’re a fucking moron.

Netflix deciding to charge for something that they were losing money on isn’t a crime… it’s just a good business decision. I know, we all love to get shit for free, but if everybody did that, then we wouldn’t have anything left. Plus, it’s not like they forced you to take shit you didn’t want. If you wanted to just use the streaming service, you could do that. If you just wanted to do DVDs, you could do that, too. If you wanted both, then you were going to have to pay for both. Crazy, I know.

To confuse things further, Netflix decided to split off its physical DVD business into another company, called Quickster. It was a fairly simply concept really, Netflix was for streaming movies, and Quickster was for old school DVDs. While I never saw an article putting it this way, to me, this tacftic seemed like a way for the company to start the process of phasing out its DVD business, which was still making them money, but was more expensive and less profitable than the streaming business, plus, DVDs are bound to die out soon enough anyway (Blu-Rays are the last gasp of a dying industry, trust me). Think about it, Quickster could deal with all of the customers who still wanted DVDs, and when the time came for DVDs to go away, they could just shut the company down, while Netflix, which is now just doing streaming, was still running strong.

Did Netflix actually raise prices for its service? Nope. But, that didn’t matter, because every blog known to man took the idea of the change in pricing and ran with it, making Netflix look like a bunch of evil, money grubbing assholes. Then, with the launch of Quickster, people just thought that the people running the show had lost their minds. As you can imagine, I really felt bad for Netflix because in reality, the only thing they did wrong here was not handle their public relations properly.

Both the press and users claimed that Netflix wasn’t being transparent (which, by the way, they don’t have to be… it’s their company, if they want to make changes, they can) and were demanding the head of the CEO on a platter. In the wake of all the craziness, over 800,000 users left the service; however, if you think about it, these were probably people that were just upset that they were getting charged for something they once got for free, not the truly hardcore customers that loved the service no matter what. As a bonus, near the end of the year, some of the consumer satisfaction surveys came out stating that Netflix had lost some of its customer love, even though nothing about the service had actually changed.

People, get over yourselves; Netflix is in the business to make money and if you don’t want to pay for the service, then you don’t get to keep using the service. It’s just that simple. No great crime has been cast upon you; you’re just a pack of cheap bastards.

#1. Google is Out to Get Me and a Shitload of Other Crimes

Here on the cusp of 2012, you should know that Google is now a full-fledged, behemoth of a company. The goody two shoes, “Do No Harm” company that was born in a computer science lab has grown up into a good, old fashioned American company that employs thousands of people and makes billions of dollars. And, despite what you think, they are far from perfect… they fuck up like any other company out there and, you know what, we all need to stop taking it so personally.

Google was busy in 2011. They released a ton of new features, made a bunch of updates to their search algorithms, rolled out countless new products, bought dozens of startups, and pissed off a ton of people, all while smiling on their way to the bank. Some might think the pissing people off thing should make them feel bad or that someone should do something about that, but the thing is, they really don’t effing care anymore.

And frankly, I don’t blame them. Why, because they’re not in this business to make friends, they’re here to make money… a lot of money. If you don’t like the way Google does business, then please, go use some other product and shut the fuck up about it all… trust me, they won’t miss you in the slightest. For every one of you upright, controversy starved, raving lunatics that things that Google is out to take over the world, there are ten new users from kids in a classroom to your great aunt Matilda who used Google to find something today.

Plus, let’s just say it… you folks that think Google is out to rule the world, or that it favors the rich or big business, or that it’s out to sell your identity to the highest bidder, or whatever street corner lunatic theory you can come up with this week, you all are fucking crazy. Google has become so big, it has the same PR problems of the government; it’s never just the somebody screwed up, it’s that something evil is afoot and we should all fear for our lives.

My theory about life is this: there are two reasons why bad things happen to good people; either it’s because of something evil, or because of something stupid, and 99% of the time, it’s because of something stupid. Are there, in fact, evil corporations running around or even evil workers inside of what is a mostly good company? Absolutely. But, you simply can’t just think that everything Google rolls out each week is part of some Dr. Evil style plot to empty Fort Knox.

Google, in its attempt to continue to grow its business is going to continue to try new things, to update their software, to start or retire their products, and sometimes those things are going to work, and sometimes they are not. Sometimes Google makes some really fantastic decisions that nobody ever sees and sometimes it changing things just enough for a pack of nut jobs to think that they are out to steal your grandmother’s pearls. But folks, we need to get together here and realize that, when Google fucks up, it isn’t because they are evil, but because, they are a collection of humans doing things together and, as we should all know, humans fuck up all the time.

Get over it… it’s just a search engine, not the second coming.

Happy New Year.

Jeff

So, there appears to be a bit of a kerfuffle (damn I love that word) over everything from intellectual property rights to copy rights and internet memes and all kinds of legal crap over whether or not the new Chevy ad below stole its concept from the popular blog, DearPhotograph.

Of course the answer is no, no it didn’t steal it… simply because DearPhotograph didn’t come up with the concept in the first place.  The whiny founder and operator of the site,  Taylor Jones, was quoted in a Mashable article claiming as much, but also adding in the shifty, “I did popularize it by creating a unique site that brings together the physical technique with deeply emotional reflections that are expressed as captions.”

What the fuck is that?  Are you fucking kidding me with this “deeply emotional reflections” crap?

Let’s start with the first line of bullshit – sites like this one and this one are doing the exact same thing as you have, plus, I can remember, but not find, a whole line of pictures where people were doing this with album covers for awhile.  So, you’re already full of shit on just the idea front, which you try and dodge by saying you didn’t invent it, but you certainly don’t mind that Mashable wrote a whole article about Chevy stealing your idea (Mashable also already wrote a nice puff piece about the blog before the Chevy thing went down).

Second, DearPhotograh didn’t add any deep reflecting anything… it used an idea that was around already and then encouraged other people (yes, other people) to join in on an idea that was around already to create a website where you can put ads and make a little scratch on the side from the traffic.

Oh wait, I see what you mean… are you talking about the sappy captions people add when they submit their own picture in picture shots?  So that’s the difference?  Are you sure?  Then you’re truly full of crap because the Chevy ad doesn’t do that part at all, it just ads a Ray Charles song.

Good grief, get over yourself.  You created a derivative work and you knew you created a derivative work; you don’t get to run around bitching when someone else, big car company or not, creates another derivative work.

Here’s the reprehensible thing… not only did Chevy not steal it, but you’re going to actually try and steal some thunder from their ad campaign, and some additional ad revenue generating traffic to your blog, all in the name of intellectual property rights you don’t actually have in the first place.

Say what you will about Chevrolet and Goodby, Silverstein & Partners, but they actually created a great ad for their product that utilized a popular and existing photography technique and no matter how much you bitch, you’re not going to get any credit.

- JF

Related articles

• Chevy Turns to Pictures to Celebrate a Centennial (mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com)
• Did Chevy Steal This Commercial Idea From a Popular Blog? (mashable.com)
• Did Chevy Steal Creative Concept from Popular Blog? (laist.com)
• Dear creatives, nick Dear Photograph faster next time. (adland.tv)

Let’s get one thing clear right from the start – people are assholes.  Which people you may ask?  All of them, all people are assholes.  Me, you, them. All colors, all races, all creeds, and all religions. When it all comes down to it, we’re all a bunch of assholes.

The biggest assholes of them all are the assholes who think everybody except them is an asshole.  I really hate those assholes because most of the time those assholes are a special kind of asshole, the racist asshole.

You’ve seen this asshole around for sure.  The minor ones just talk shit when things aren’t going their way and usually blame some sort of special treatment on a program to hold their race back while other flourish.  The major ones actually do some damage by blowing shit up or hurting people.

Then there are the kind of racists that are trying to sell you stuff… wait a minute, that kind of asshole doesn’t actually exist. Sorry for the confusion.

Are the folks at DirecTV racists assholes?

You see, if you’re in the business of selling shit, whether is is via an advertisement or the creation of a product, there’s a pretty good chance that you’re not a racist because it’s not in your best interest to piss off the people that are making you money.  Do you see the logic here?

For instance, DirecTV just pulled down one of its ads from YouTube because they were getting a bunch of comments saying that it was racist.  This is pretty amazing because, the whole series of ads are based on the same premise, some overly rich asshole that sees DirecTV as the ultimate luxury entertainment. The difference in each ad is who the asshole is and where he comes from.  There’s a rich Russian asshole, there’s a rich Asian asshole, there’s a rich white banker asshole, and finally, the one that got the complaints, the rich black boxer asshole.

Here it is if you haven’t seen it:

I actually love this whole series of ads and the one with the Russian and his little pet giraffe cracks me up every time.  The white banker one is kind of funny, but not their best work.  The Asian “Whale” one is pretty well done, too.  The boxer one is good, but not as good as the Russian guy…

By the way, that Russian guy is played by an Irish guy faking an accent.  Apparently, recently he got into a brawl in a bar and the news freaked a little because he was “connected” to DirecTV.  DirecTV actually handled it pretty well reminding everybody that he was just an actor in their commercials and their VP of advertising and communication said, Jon Gieselman, ”I’m pretty sure Tim is not the first Irishman to be in a bar when a fight breaks out.”

You catch that last part? That’s actually a little racist, but the cool part is, Irishmen aren’t pissed off by stuff like that anymore.  We (yes we, I’m Scotch-Irish; My last name is Ferguson, did you think I was Dutch?) embraced it a long time ago and got on with our lives.

The thing that kind of pisses me off about the assholes that made all these comments is that they’re the kind of assholes that would probably make the same sort of jokes at their own expense, but get really pissed off when other people do.  Notice I didn’t just say black people, because these kind of assholes know no race or creed.  These are the kind of assholes that can’t take a joke, they can just sling them.  What a bunch of assholes.

Are the folks at Summers Eve racist assholes?

There were a series of ads that came and went so quickly that a lot of people didn’t even get to see them.  In fact, you may never get to see them because when they got pulled, they got pulled hard, which is why I can’t embed one of them here.  All I can show you is a screen shot from the one featuring a black hand impersonating a vagina.

Yep, you read that right… it’s a talking hand that represents a talking vagina.  They had a black one, a Latina one, and a white one.  All three of the ads were horrible, poorly written, and just plain goofy.  However, none of them were racist.

Again, if we follow the line of logic that states it’s not a good idea to be racist if you’re trying to sell something to someone, then Summers Eve was in fact just ignorant and bad at its job, but I seriously doubt they are racist in the slightest.  Sure, Jezebel and a bunch of other blogs can say they are racists to get the headline grab and start a fire in their comment areas, but in reality, there was nothing racist about these ads… they were just stupid.

Sure, you could just say that I’m just a blogger as well, and that’s true, but I’m also one that can’t stand the current state of hyperbolic, yellow writing that passes for journalism these days.  I may cuss a bunch in my posts, but that’s mostly because I don’t get to write like this anywhere else and I think it’s funny as hell.

We need to get out of this racist habit

This isn’t the first time this has come up; people claim all kinds of ads are racist all the time.  I’ve pointed a few of them out here on this blog (“Australia KFC ad not racist, just goofy. Get the hell over it.”) and I can remember this lame ass controversy around HPs facial recognition software where in both cases it was a knee jerk reaction to label it “racist.”

Just like with a lot of other words out there today, like “literally” or “inconceivable,” it’s like we’ve forgotten the real meaning of the term and use it for anything that is close. Lately, I’ve been trying to break my six year old of using the term “literally” for the word “actually,” but that’s about the age you’re supposed to be doing that because he’s still getting the full grasp of the language.  The rest of the grown ups of the world shouldn’t have that problem and so they shouldn’t use the word “literally” when they mean “actually” and they shouldn’t use the word “racist” when things really aren’t racist.

Take it from a guy that grew up in Paramount, CA – when you do and say things that are racist, it doesn’t result in a blog comment; you get your ass handed to you.

- J

Let me break your heart with something: Google doesn’t care what you do.  Google isn’t interested in anything about you.  Google doesn’t actually know who you are.  At all.

So, when you see video’s like this from Microsoft, remember that it was made by one of Google’s competitors who trying to spook you out of using a Google product and use theirs instead.

I know, “but wait, they have to read my mail so they can serve me ads!” Yeah, they’re not actually reading your mail. The GMail Man isn’t real and there aren’t real people sitting around the Google offices in Mountain View sifting through your messages. They don’t have time and they simply don’t care.

A computer does it for them; in fact, a lot of computers do it for them. Then that computer, which is a machine and doesn’t give a lick about burning sensations or what you did with your significant other the night before, uses a bunch of fancy math to look at the words in the email to figure out an ad to serve you. Three are people in the internet marketing business that actually don’t understand this, so don’t feel bad if it’s news to you.

Why do they serve you ads? Well, because you’re getting a service for free. This is the same business model that radio and TV have been using for most of their existence. Now Google is doing it, quite well, actually. They make billions of dollars doing it really well, just like radio and TV made a ton of money from you using their product.  So no, the ads aren’t unsolicited… you actually signed up for them by using the product.

Why does everybody have this paranoia that any company that is over a few dozen people is out to get them? These companies don’t care about you… they’re here to make money and you’re here to use their products. Get over yourself, you’re not that interesting. Don’t give me this “privacy” crap… you’re willing to give up your precious privacy for a dollar off a bag of chips at the supermarket, so give me a break about your email.

You know who is reading your email? The head of IT at your office… he’s got the time and actually does know who you are and is doing dirty, dirty things with that picture you just sent to your friend in accounting.

– JF

When I’m not writing high prose for this site, I’m an internet marketing consultant, so for me to make a “What the hell’s a ‘beezid?” style joke would make me just completely out of touch with the current state of internet scams auction sites.

That said, this site is about bad commercials and brother, let me tell you, beezid.com just upped the ante. Clearly all the money for the ad went to the “talent” because the thing looks like someone shot it on their iPhone.

Word has it that Lohan passed on the offer to do this commercial for $25,000, so the fact that she’s in it now means that they either gave her more money or she needed to pay her dealer taxes rent liquor store bill agent.

It’s not that they paid over $25,000 for a commercial; commercials are fucking expensive to start with, so it’s no shock that they would have laid down some coin for all of this. Hell, while I was working at Kimberly-Clark, they actually flew a whole crew of people to Italy to shoot a paper towel commercial that involved a guy getting splattered with mud as a car drove by him on a country road. Sure, they could could have shot that in Burbank, CA for about half as much even with union dues, but the director wanted Italian mud.

Anyway, it’s not that they paid money for that, it’s that they gave money to Lohan as a reward for being nothing else besides a fuck up. I know that’s a thing now, but this shit has really got to stop. It was hard enough convincing kids to go to college when guys like Gates and Zuckerberg become billionaire drop outs, but now we’re just giving people money for not being able to hold their liquor.

- JF