This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Find out more here.

About this blog

M&M’s Blog goes behind the headlines to offer a running commentary on the business dynamics within the international media and marketing industry. The M&M editorial team joins forces with industry experts and local market heroes to balance a bird’s eye view of global trends with the importance of local insight.

RSS feed Subscribe to blog feed

Go Back

Google

  • The challenges we face working in digital

    29 January 2013

    Working in digital is fast-paced, exciting and very fulfilling. But like all industries there are annoyances we deal with on a day-to-day basis that slow us down and downright frustrate us.

    The below highlights a few examples I could think of and some advice on how to get past these issues and start getting results for your client/business.


    Getting access to client technology platforms (eg. web analytics)

    Despite access to data being essential when running a media campaign, many clients will claim they are not allowed to give an agency access to a web analytics platform or similar due to a policy a bureaucrat at HQ came up with years ago.

    Thankfully this problem is becoming less and less of an issue – clients are becoming increasingly savvy and understand that they need to share data with their agencies. I generally only have problems with international and finance clients who are particularly paranoid about sharing data.

    You also need to watch out for businesses using Adobe Omniture. Sometimes getting access to data (eg. Adobe Discover) is challenging due to licensing issues.

    The Solution

    The benefit of an agency having direct access to analytics is far greater than any downside the client might invent. Agencies need to make it clear that being able to access data quickly is important for optimisation. It might be useful to remind a client that having simple “user access” to a web analytics account means no settings can be changed / damage can be done.

    If the client can’t share logins due to licensing issues (particularly annoying with Adobe solutions) I propose using the same login as the client but ensure you aren’t using it at the same time. There’s no sense in paying twice to get another login.


    The EU Cookie Law

    When I first heard about the EU Cookie law I went a bit mad. It sounded like a total waste of everybody’s time. Not only would it involve our clients investing more money in building mechanisms to inform visitors about cookies, but also it would require legal teams to look over the law and provide bespoke advice for different markets (and nobody likes getting legal teams involved!). A poor implementation could also ruin a client’s data quality and conversion rate.

    From what I can tell, people still don’t care about the Cookie Law. You only have to browse the web for a few minutes to discover many large companies that have not implemented any form of cookie information mechanism. We’ve also looked into data from a client that has implemented a cookie mechanism that showed that only 0.03% of people decided to opt out. I’m willing to bet most of those opt outs were just our team testing if it works…

    The Solution

    [Full disclaimer – I can’t provide legal advice so this is just my opinion]

    By all means provide transparent information about which cookies you use on your website, but do not make a big fuss of it on the homepage. I’d try and be as subtle as possible with the messaging as most people will ignore it anyway.

    Definitely go for an “implied opt in” approach. This means that cookies will be dropped without the user having to press an opt in button and your data doesn’t become invalid.

     
    Google’s Monopoly makes measuring SEO performance difficult

    Google can do whatever they want and we have to like it – that’s the downside of their huge monopoly on the search market. I used to work in our SEO team and am glad I don’t anymore as recent changes to Google have made it difficult to measure success and make accurate forecasts as to what ROI can be delivered.

    I’m talking about “Not Provided” keywords appearing in web analytics reports. If you’re logged into a Google account when you run a search query on Google you will be using Google’s secure search (https://). What this will do is hide the search query used to arrive at a website so the client (or agency) is unable to know which keywords have been performing well.

    We’ve already started to see the industry devolve to the stage where search engine ranking for “vanity keywords” is becoming the main KPI with many clients. It’s embarrassing; I thought we left this method behind last decade?

    The Solution

    I have seen many solutions on other blogs on how to overcome the “not provided” challenge – but I think it’s sad – SEOs are fighting a losing fight. We’ve created models to understand what keywords “not provided” might actually be but it’s only a matter of time before there will be no data at all to work with.

    Using Google Webmastertools to better understand visibility is an OK alternative. I personally think the tool is pretty basic but we have to work with what we have. This tool will show you average search engine ranking (accounting for personalised results) as well as click-through-rate on your top keywords.

    A dashboard is generally not the solution

    What I’ve realised over the past year is that 99% of clients that ask for dashboards, don’t actually need a dashboard. It frustrates me that we have to show off a dashboard solution in every pitch – because we know every other agency is doing the same thing and we can’t risk ignoring the question.

    The sad truth is that a dashboard is not always going to help optimise a campaign and I feel as an industry we need to move away from this “dashboard is the solution” mentality.

    Let’s go back to the drawing board.

    A dashboard is something that sits behind the wheel of your car telling you how fast you are going and if you need more fuel. The dashboards our clients request today are essentially fully blown web analytics tools, not dashboards!

    The Solution

    We will always need to provide dashboards to show off performance – it helps us win business. I do think we need to start promoting a model where clients buy into people as well as dashboards.

    A client will get far more insight from a person performing analysis on their data, than a mega dashboard that ends up being used by nobody in their business.

    We have a team of web analysts that work across our client accounts and it seems to work well. Client’s are benefiting from rich insight and actually have somebody telling them what action to take with their data.

    By Carl Fernandes, head of analytics and conversion, iProspect

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Online, Digital, Search, Google

  • Infographic: Top 10 websites in MENA

    07 January 2013

    I recently stumbled across this infographic from Egyptian online magazine Digibuzz, which pulls together internet data from Comscore regarding internet users across the Middle East and Africa.

    During October 2012, nearly 135 million people used the internet in the region, with Google scooping the top spot, reaching 90% of the region’s digital population with 122 million unique visitors. Facebook was next with 101 million unique visitors.

    But rather than list the top 10 websites by monthly unique visitors, check out the below infographic to see the other websites that made it into the top 10:

     

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Jenni Baker

    Tags: Twitter, Online, Bing, Apple, Facebook, Yahoo, Consumer insight, Google

  • Schmidt: "There will be an Android in every pocket"

    29 February 2012

    Eric Schmidt 

    Google executive chairman Eric Schmidt has expressed high hopes for its Android operating system, even going as far as to say that in just 12 years time, every consumer across the globe will own one!

    As Google's ex-CEO addressed delegates during a keynote speech last night at the Mobile  World Congress in Barcelona, his bold statement about Android's impending success was met by cheers of laughter and clapping, as competitors such as Blackberry and Nokia sat in the wings at what is considered the biggest global event for the mobile industry.

    "A mobile experience at least at the level today will be available to everybody, at a fraction of the price," he said. “In 12 years, handsets are going to be 20 times faster, which means phones that cost  $400 now will be available for $20."

    "If Google gets this right, there will be an Android in every pocket," he said. "At our current growth rate, this is possible."

    He made the statement following a live demo from Google's Hugo Barra showcasing  'Chrome App for Android' which is now available in BETA. He described the app as "a product that brings together for the first time these two technology worlds."

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Jenni Baker

    Tags: Mobile, Google

  • What Google+ Pages mean for marketers

    09 November 2011

    Google + launched at the start of the year and is Google’s best effort to date to break the social networking headlock that Facebook has applied so expertly in recent years. Leveraging the huge user base of Google accounts for services such as Gmail and Picasa, Google + has over 40 million registered users and it has grown faster than both Twitter and Facebook.

    Up until last night the platform was only available to individual users with a Google account – however, the introduction of Pages for businesses, brands and places will increase the amount of consumer centric content and we should expect to see awareness increase further over the coming weeks. You can read more about Google + Pages here and here.

    The key differences that we can see at the moment between profile pages and business pages are:

    Pages can’t add people to circles until the page is added first or mentioned
    The default privacy setting on your page profile is public (so be careful with those office party pictures!)
    Pages have the +1 button
    Pages can’t +1 other pages, or other stuff on the Web
    Pages don’t receive notifications via email, text, or in the Google bar.
    Pages can’t use the Hangout (video chat functionality) on mobile.
    Local pages have special fields that help people find the business’ physical location.

    As we understand it, everyone should now have access to be able to create their business or brand page which can fit into the following five categories:

    Local Business or Place
    Product or Brand
    Company, Institution or Organisation
    Arts, Entertainment or Sports
    Other

    For local business that have already claimed their Google Places, there is currently no way of connecting the two as Google want to keep Places tied to Google Maps and local search while the Pages functionality will focus on keeping customers or fans engaged.

    What this means for Social Media Marketers:

    It’s going to be very similar to running a Facebook brand page. You access your page through a personal account but you’ll have the ability to choose whether you want to act as yourself or the business page.

    You can do many of the same things that a personal account can do, including:

    Share photos
    Share videos
    Share links
    Conduct Hangouts– this is a feature which we think could be a real USP for Google + Pages over the other major social networks, as brands can conduct ‘How To’s’ or ‘face to face’ videos with customers or Fans. The Muppets + Page have already posted a Hangout with Kermit and Miss Piggy (unfortunately we missed it but will be there for the next one).

    Pages can follow people, but not until they’ve first been followed. This is a welcome development to the way Twitter currently operates, where business accounts follow a load of people in the hope of getting a follow-back. With Google +, you will need to earn the follow.

    Apparently it’s cool for a business to have multiple Google+ pages. So if you are a company with multiple brands, that’s certainly a bonus – but only if you have a good reason for each entity to have its own dedicated page.

    There’s likely to be Google+ API release in the future so expect a wave of development to be done with that in the form of apps, similar to what we’ve seen with Facebook.

    What this means for SEO Marketers:

    The launch of Pages is going to have an impact on SEO as not only are these going to be included in the Search results (as yet unclear exactly where) but how people interact and share with the + pages is likely to be fed back and used in the calculation of the Search results.

    Google is encouraging business and people to connect (and it wants that data), so it is important not only to set up your business profile but engage with your customers through this channel. This will have obvious benefits for users and customers but will also feed positive data to Google to help improve your position in the Search results.

    As well as this you are able to search directly for a Brand or business by entering the ‘+Site’ query – for example +Pepsi

    What this means for PPC and Display Marketers:

    The Google+ Page will serve as both the social hub connecting all aspects of a brand’s presence across the Google network. Google’s +1 has been spreading across the web for months and brands will now be able to connect the dots via these pages.

    We think Google+ will have an impact on the targeting and delivery of both PPC & display on Google as user adoption rises. Marketers who leverage the +1 button may see benefits through visibility, relevancy and targeting and performance.

    That’s our 2 cents worth for the moment. If you are a current I Spy client then expect a call very soon to discuss this further and

    You can check out the I Spy Page here. It will get more interesting soon (don’t worry!).

    Ed Hartigan, Crowd Control account director, I Spy Marketing

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Bloggers' Gallery

    Tags: Social Media, Google

  • The Google soap opera

    14 September 2011

    If brands were characters in a soap opera, and I'm not talking about soap operas like Coronation Street or Eastenders, but one of those slick big budget affairs that are the speciality of Aaron Spelling, then Google would be one of the leading ladies at the centre of the drama in the business and the bedroom. Think Joan Collins as Alexis in Dynasty.

    This engaging image has been helpfully illustrated by this infographic from searchinfluence.com, which tracks the various activities of Google over the past nine months. Sadly they have opted not to use a selection of wild dresses and killer accessories in the visuals. A Dynasty-inspired media business graphic is just what’s been missing from the industry.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Mark St Andrew

    Tags: Google

  • SEO: Google’s Organic Search Sitelinks Offer Brands More Online Visibility

    30 August 2011

    by Doug Platts

    Brand marketers cannot afford to be passive in their online marketing efforts in today’s search culture. One of the most important aspects of today’s online marketing is in the search engine results page (SERP). Google Sitelinks are arguably the best feature to come to the search engine results page (SERP) for brands in the past 5 years. The evolution and growth of Sitelinks has been especially interesting for brand marketers to watch, and the latest changes to Sitelinks offers a very real chance for your brand to directly benefit in a big way.

    We cheered when they first appeared and for the most part cheered louder and louder up through where we stand today. The cheering came mostly out of the excitement stemming from being able to affect brand search results to some degree. The latest changes have given brands the gift of dominating the SERP for searches on their brand name.

     

    WHAT’S NEW

    Google rolled out an update, on August 16th, to the layout of Sitelinks as they appear within SERPs. These changes include:

    • The number of Sitelinks has also increased from a maximum of 8 to 12.
    • Sitelinks increased in size and now have snippets including a brief description and URL.
    • More pages are eligible. No longer limits Sitelink-eligible pages to those that are 1 directory off the root directory. Many more pages are now potential Sitelinks.
    • The amount of space given to a site within SERPs for branded searches has greatly increased with this change (iCrossing expects to see increased click-through rates for brand terms as a result of this change)

    12-PACK IMPACT
    In this situation less is not more. More is more.

    Until recently, the only pages that were eligible to be Sitelinks were pages that were pages 1 level down from the root directory. This blocked the possibility of seeing product-level pages appear as Sitelinks. This can get a site visitor deeper into your site where the majority of conversions occur.

    Users now have more options within your brand’s set of Sitelinks. A variety of additional mid-level pages can now appear as Sitelinks, which can be a strategic way to guide users toward category-level pages when these pages have proven to be strong performers.

    Internal Linking is now more important than ever. Descriptive naming conventions within anchor text and link attributes will be even more important to ensure accurate, useful Sitelinks.

    Search engines use your internal linking to determine the names of Sitelink results by determining what anchor text is used to point to the Sitelink-eligible pages. So if a Sitelink is appearing for a page you’d like to be featured but the title isn’t what you’d prefer, then look at your universal navigation files and modify the related anchor text in those files.

    Reputation Management is another business element that can be affected by smart use of Sitelinks. One application of this concept is to allow your site’s main Customer Service page to remain eligible as a Sitelink by not demoting it. If the Customer Service page is already a live Sitelink, you may want to keep it there. Sure, it’ll cost you one of the 12 Sitelink slots where you otherwise could feature a conversion-friendly page, but giving users easy access to customer service will win you some favor.

    It’s common to hear that people are fed-up by how difficult it is to find out how to contact a brand. Be the exception, sacrifice a Sitelink, and have a competent customer service staff to win over users for the long-term.

     

    Not getting your full brand coverage

    Whilst these new Sitelinks are appear for the majority of brands there are still some instances of where they are not appear, Where we have noticed this is when there is more than one domain that could be the primary brand domain for that query.

    For example DKNY has multiple domains, and so far Google has not determined which is the right brand domain to display Sitelinks for:

    Hugo Boss on the other hand does have the site links as there is no confusion

    Similarly where there is ambiguity around whether the search query is a brand term or not, for example ‘mac’ could be either the makeup brand or the Apple product

     

    I’m sure as Google analysis click-through data it will start to refine this updated and single out specific domains.

     

    WHAT YOU CAN CONTROL
    Brand marketers cannot control all aspects of Sitelinks, but Google does give us the ability to essentially block, or “demote,” specific pages from appearing as Sitelinks.

    Your Google Webmaster Tools account (sign-up here) gives you access to a list of pages from your site Google considers eligible to be a Sitelink. Even though you cannot choose which pages will appear, you can affect which page will not appear.

    In the past, Google has had the policy of allowing one block per page without the possibility of reinstatement. That no longer is the case as demotions can be turned off to allow the page to once again be eligible to appear as a Sitelink. This is an excellent opportunity to take advantage of seasonality changes in the popularity of your pages. While you can’t explicitly choose a Sitelink, you can demote pages that aren’t vital to your business goals in the current season. Google doesn’t guarantee that it will follow your wishes, and it can take time to see the changes live in search results, so we don’t recommend making drastic changes on a frequent basis.

     

    EARLY RESULTS
    Here at iCrossing, we’ve taken a look at the brands of our clients to see if more or less traffic is going to their sites from search engines since the change to Sitelinks, and they are definitely showing a significant uplift in organic click-throughs for traffic across the board.

    Any increase in organic search traffic begs the question of how branded PPC results might be affected by this change. Initial iCrossing PPC findings are forthcoming soon, but you should consider the specifics of your current  branded efforts and evaluate performance before and after this launch.

    Traffic increases are great, we’re all for them, but these surges don’t mean much if a quality site experience is missing on the other side of the click. Trends such as Google Sitelinks still require foundational best practices for your brand’s website. Take some time to examine the user experience on the pages that are eligible to appear as Sitelinks. Some fine tuning could unclog the pipes of traffic coming your way.

    Sitelinks should give you a great start by getting users to deeper pages more quickly, but it’s (as always) up to you to close the deal.

    This post was written by Doug Platts, head of Natural Search at iCrossing.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Juliet P. d'Arguesse

    Tags: Online advertising, Search, Google

  • Walking on the Bing side

    08 July 2011

    I still remember the day that I was introduced to the world of Google. I was in high school and my English teacher took us all down to the library to show us how to do research online. She showed us Google and instructed us to use it when looking for anything online and from there my Google addiction began. I now have a Gmail account, use Google Maps on my phone, use Google analytics to track what I publish online and most importantly still exclusively use Google for search.

    This week that all changed.

    I am still not 100% sure how the idea to have a ‘Bing Week’ came around – where the C Squared editorial team only used Bing for search, images, maps etc – but the honest motivation was to be able to ridicule it publicly at the end of the week. I am not sure why, but us journalists take a lot of pride in saying how rubbish something is and making sure that EVERYONE knows it! And sometimes you naturally fear and judge that which you do not know.

    So, on Monday we all switched our default search engine on our web browsers to Bing – naturally we all had Google. And in this first task we learned our first ‘Bingism’ – Mozilla really wants you to use Google and switching to Bing is not as straight forward as it could be. But we all got there eventually.

    The next task was finding out the time it is in Singapore. We are a global company so searching for time zones is something that we do often (it took a lot for me not to write ‘Googling for time zones’ by the way).

    When we searched ‘What time is it in Singapore’, the Bing result was a list of websites that could give the time:

    Bing Singapore search

    However we are all use to putting this search request into Google where the time appears above the search results: 

    Google Singapore search 

    But that’s hardly anything to moan about.

    Next was searching for images. Basically, Bing’s image search offering is awesome. Not only can you search for my beloved Oprah Winfrey but you can also then filter those searches by head and shoulder shots, ones where she is wearing red perhaps or even the layout of the image – square, wide, or tall (things that Google also offers) but there are small added bonuses that make Bing image search standout for me, such as, suggesting related people, suggesting related searches to Oprah and being able to look at my search history in a quick glance. 

    Oprah Bing search

    Next and perhaps the decider was the wholly grail of Google - Maps. I didn’t find much difference on the Bing map compared to Google’s except for the fact that it is considerably more detailed and I did miss Street View. Plus, I had to cheat once or twice and use Google Maps on my phone due to the lack of a Bing option. I am too new media to print out a map. 

    Google Maps 

     Bing search

    So what’s the verdict?

    I actually like Bing and I will not be switching my default browser back to Google: which is a big deal in my world!

    The truth is there really isn’t that much separating the two, search is search. And while they both have subtle differentiators at the end of the day they both deliver the same result. And while it does feel good to have one less Google influence in my life, I will miss making fun of @joewalton at Weber Shandwick for being an avid user of Bing because I am now one too ...

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Martina Lacey

    Tags: Bing, Search, Google

  • Don’t tell me ... show me

    29 June 2011

    Believe it or not there is more to the Cannes Lions Festival of Creativity than late night beach parties, yachts and having drinks on the Carlton Terrace.

    There are meetings. There are plenty of meetings, and everyone showing you the latest thing they have created and why it is better than the competition on the creative, media agency and media owner side.

    By far my winner for the “look at what we have got” category was Google. It was not that they had anything new to show – in fact I had seen it all before but it was the way in which it was delivered that made it stand out from the crowd.

    While it could have been tempting to trot out some execs to tell us how good Google is instead they decided to show us and they succeeded with the Google Creative Sandbox.

    Google partnered with brand experience agency Flourish Creative to create an area at the Festival where not only could you take part in some early morning yoga or have a complimentary smoothie but you could play and engage with Google’s products and offerings.

    Instead of telling us how great Google Voice Search is we were encouraged to play Chubby Bunny, the game where you have to cram as many giant marshmallows in your mouth as possible and see if Google Voice Search can still understand what you are saying. My partner in crime @creamglobal Mark St. Andrew got a record number of five in his mouth before he was incomprehensible!

    Mark Chubby Bunnies

    If you wanted to know where all the cool kids in Cannes were the info was a QR code away, thanks to Google’s heat map which told you which places and parties were the hottest.  

    And the back to search, the photo (below) of me inserted into an iconic Benetton ad was still recognisable on Google Search as being a Benetton ad despite my beautiful face being in the middle.

    Martina Benetton ad

    Let’s not forget about Google’s latest offering, +1 – entry into the Sandbox was granted after you placed your +1 on a giant map, when I first visited the lounge I was proudly the only person with a +1 in Beijing.

    It can be hard to achieve standout in Cannes in amongst the mass of delegates and vendors touting for business but in my opinion Google stood out from the pack by following my favourite acronym: KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)!

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Martina Lacey

    Tags: Google

  • Google: Socially awkward

    19 May 2011

    It feels like we’ve been saying this for years now, but Google is proving time and time again that it simply does not understand social.

    DodgeballDodgeball

    When it purchased Dodgeball back in 2005, Google was four years ahead of the global trend for location-based services. By buying the market leader, it had a huge opportunity to capitalise on and dominate the market before it emerged. What did Google do with it? Discontinued the service and released its creator, Dennis Crowley, to continue with a new project. A few years later, he created Foursquare, which is currently seeking funding at a valuation of over $500 million… while Dodgeball sits in the dusty Google cabinet of ‘almosts’.

    Google did well to: Spot the location based trend early.
    They missed a trick by: Failing to capitalise on it, and killing Dodgeball before it flourished.
    They should have: Retained Crowley and taken advantage of their foresight.

     

    Google Wave

    A few years later, Google returned to the social market with its new collaboration service, Google Wave. This was announced to much excitement, being proclaimed as the future of web communication and with beta invites being sold for up to $70. Eventually it was released… and the community replied with a collaborative ‘Huh?’ – the user experience was incredibly confusing and the mass population had no idea how to use it. A social media platform exists to facilitate human connections and, while Wave had some interesting functionality, it operated in a very convoluted way and didn’t satisfy any basic human needs. So, it was soon unbranded and released as an open-source platform due to lack of interest.

    Google did well to: Excite the community by offering a new approach to collaboration.
    They missed a trick by: Trying to change human behaviour too much by creating a needlessly complicated user experience.
    They should have: Kept it simple, and focused on the consumer need rather than the technology.

     

    Google BuzzGoogle Buzz

    Not one to give up, the company decided to take another attempt at social with Google Buzz. Buzz was a social messaging service that integrated into Google’s existing communications platforms and allowed people to share information and content easily. This seems like a useful tool on paper but, yet again, Google managed to screw it up. The launch of the product was completely overshadowed by the inherent security issues of Buzz, as well as its intrusive nature. Google didn’t realise just how personal to the consumer social media is. And while the security issues were minor in the grand scheme of things, Buzz had lost the community at ‘Hello’.

    Google did well to: Spot the opportunity for a centralised communication platform.
    They missed a trick by: Making the product too invasive, and allowing the security issues to take the spotlight off of it.
    They should have: Focused on helping consumers consolidate their existing networks, rather than adding a new one to their already buzzing lives.

    +1+1

    And now we come to the present day, where Google is preparing itself to hit the social market once more with a new service: ‘+1’. However, this already seems destined to be another failed social opportunity for Google because, once again, the UX has been thought through in a very sloppy way. The +1 button can be experienced in two different ways: firstly, on third-party websites with the exact same functionality as Facebook Likes (who have partnered with their rivals, Bing), but without the social graph to back it up; and secondly, in the search results.

    As it currently stands, Google is asking users to press the +1 button if they ‘like’ the content being delivered. But because this call to action is placed before the web experience is even delivered, there is no way for the user to know whether they like the content or not until they’ve left the site. At that point, Google has already lost them. Do the developers of +1 really expect users to find a site through Google, view its content, then head back to Google to press a button? It’s a ridiculous user journey and a mechanic destined to fail; Google has yet again introduced a service with incomplete functionality and, unless +1 is swiftly re-imagined, it will inevitably lose the public’s interest at the first hurdle.

    Google did well to:  Join the social search market before Bing managed to dominate it.
    They missed a trick by: Failing to create a partnership with Facebook, and creating a badly thought out user experience.
    They should have: Created a partnership with Facebook to access their social graph and existing user base.

    Google is one of the most logic-focused companies in the world; the company is built on intelligent algorithms that eliminate the need for social input. By relying on social data, Google is either admitting that its algorithms aren’t as intelligent as previously claimed, or it’s damaging its own service. This is a fork in the road for the company; rather than hedging its bets between the two routes, Google needs to commit to either an algorithmic or a social path, if it wishes to retain dominance in either.

    By Felix Morgan

    Felix Morgan is senior creative technologist at Billington Cartmell !nvent. See more of its work here.

    This post was spotted on Right Brain, Left Brain Blog on creamglobal.com.

    Comments (0) | Permalink

    Posted by: Juliet P. d'Arguesse

    Tags: Social Media, Google Buzz, +1, Google Wave, Google