Donald Trump is winning the Google Search Race

Donald Trump is winning the "Search Race" among GOP contenders for President. Above: Debate 2: Top Searched Republican Candidate By County - Top Searched Republican Candidate on Google by Count since first GOP debate. Highlight individual areas to see details. Scroll right to see second most searched candidate by county, change since the first debate and battleground states

Follow @johnmpoole

The Trump Phenomenon

Trump
via Google search: Donald Trump
via Wikipedia: Donald Trump

Phenomenom
via Wiktionary (Noun) phenomenon ‎(plural phenomena):

1. A thing or being, event or process, perceptible through senses; or a fact or occurrence thereof.
2. (extension) A knowable thing or event (eg by inference, especially in science).
3. (metonymy) A kind or type of phenomenon (sense 1 or 2).
4. Appearance; a perceptible aspect of something that is mutable.
5. A fact or event considered very unusual, curious, or astonishing by those who witness it.
6. A wonderful or very remarkable person or thing.
7. (philosophy, chiefly Kantian idealism) An experienced object whose constitution reflects the order and conceptual structure imposed upon it by the human mind (especially by the powers of perception and understanding).

Synonyms
(observable fact or occurrence): event
(unusual, curious, or astonishing fact or event): marvel, miracle, oddity, wonder
(wonderful person or thing): marvel, miracle, phenom, prodigy, wonder

Tweets by @realDonaldTrump

Follow @johnmpoole

Republican Debate Aftermath: Trump Triumphs on Google Search

First Republican Debate, The Aftermath: Trump Triumphs on Google Search (see above)

Real Digital Politics: Google gives a different story than Mainstream Media Narratives, "Inside the Beltway" Pundits, and Poltical Consultants' Focus Groups. 

Fox's GOP debate had record 24 million viewers - Aug. 7, 2015: "Fox's GOP debate was watched by 24 million viewers on Thursday night, according to Nielsen data, making it the highest-rated primary debate in television history. The event, featuring Donald Trump in his first debate, was also the highest-rated telecast in the nearly 20 year history of the Fox News Channel, a spokeswoman said. Rival executives and campaign aides also predicted unusually high ratings for the event, thanks to curiosity about Trump and the controversy over the "top ten" candidate criteria. But the ratings shattered even the rosiest expectations for the beginning of debate season. Television executives were stunned."

See also:

• First Republican Debate: August 6, 2015 - Google Trends
• Changing ranks of Republican candidates in the debate on Google search
• Domain Mondo: Google Knows Which 2016 Presidential Candidates You Search For (video)

Follow @johnmpoole

Murdoch vs Google, Rupert Disintermediated

Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation has complained to the European Commission about Google--

One day, even Google will go into decline - Telegraph: "... In a no-holds-barred missive, his [Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation] chief executive, Robert Thomson, has written to the European Commission complaining about a “cynical management ... willing to exploit a dominant market position to stifle competition”. When I heard about this, I imagined for one glorious moment that someone had got hold of an internal News Corp memo, detailing Mr Murdoch’s own private agenda, for this is a man who has spent much of his life ruthlessly pursuing the holy grail of monopoly. Both in UK national newspapers and pay TV, he came pretty close to achieving it. Yet against Google, Mr Murdoch’s achievements pale. It must stick in the craw. At nearly $400 billion, Google is capitalised at four and a half times the combined market worth of Mr Murdoch’s Twentieth Century Fox and News Corp, and an astonishing 40 times the value of News Corp alone, the holding company for all Mr Murdoch’s newspaper interests, including the Wall Street Journal, the Sun and The Times...."

Disintermediated: Newspapers, Broadcast TV, Rupert Murdoch

Follow @johnmpoole

Google, Eric Schmidt, Cuba, Internet Freedom

Google's Eric Schmidt Went to Cuba for Internet Freedom Visit - US News: "Google has been a voice for greater Internet openness in nations with strict laws on digital speech, in part hoping for more Internet users to become customers of their online suites of products. Schmidt also visited Myanmar in 2013 to discuss Internet freedom after that nation enacted free speech reforms after decades of military dictatorship... " (read more at link above)

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Mathias Döpfner has it wrong, Google Is Not Dangerous, But Governments Are

You can read Mathias Döpfner’s open letter to Eric Schmidt at the link below (excerpt follows):

Mathias Döpfner’s open letter to Eric Schmidt: "....This also includes the fiction of the culture of free services. On the Internet, in the beautiful colorful Google world, so much seems to be free of charge: from search services up to journalistic offerings. In truth we are paying with our behavior –  with the predictability and commercial exploitation of our behavior. Anyone who has a car accident today, and mentions it in an e-mail, can receive an offer for a new car from a manufacturer on his mobile phone tomorrow. Terribly convenient. Today, someone surfing high-blood-pressure web sites, who automatically betrays his notorious sedentary lifestyle through his Jawbone fitness wristband, can expect a higher health insurance premium the day after tomorrow. Not at all convenient. Simply terrible. It is possible that it will not take much longer before more and more people realize that the currency of his or her own behavior exacts a high price: the freedom of self-determination. And that is why it is better and cheaper to pay with something very old fashioned – namely  money. Google is the world’s most powerful bank – but dealing only in behavioral currency. Nobody capitalizes on their knowledge about us as effectively as Google. This is impressive and dangerous...."

No Google isn't dangerous, but governments are -- here's the difference: Yes, Google wants to know all about you (likes, dislikes, habits, preferences) in order to provide better, more responsive services to your needs--i.e., search, maps, email, etc, and to serve you relevant ads, BUT Google does NOT care who you are--your preference data is known but your personal identity is irrelevant to Google because they only want a commercial relationship with you, not a personal relationship. Governments, on the other hand, not only want to know ALL about you, AND also WHO you are--so that if need or want arises, they can physically locate you to arrest you, invade your home, confiscate your property, and do other stuff, including kill you. I don't know about you, but I would rather Google serve me better with services and show me relevant ads. For me there is no fear in that. But governments are different, and should be feared.


Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Google, NASA, Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab video

Google and NASA's Quantum Artificial Intelligence Lab

A peek at the early days of the Quantum AI Lab: a partnership between NASA, Google, USRA, and a 512-qubit D-Wave Two quantum computer. Learn more at http://google.com/+QuantumAILab

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Eric Schmidt's 2014 Predictions (video)

Eric Schmidt's 2014 Predictions - Dec. 30 (Bloomberg) -- In a rare interview, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt gives Bloomberg his outlook for 2014 trends. (Source: Bloomberg)

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Google challenges US gag order, citing First Amendment

Nothing like having to petition a secret Court (renown for its "rubber-stamp" approval of all governmental requests) to assert the constitutional right of free speech--

Google challenges U.S. gag order, citing First Amendment - The Washington Post: "Google asked the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) on Tuesday to ease long-standing gag orders over data requests the court makes, arguing that the company has a constitutional right to speak about information it is forced to give the government. The legal filing, which invokes the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech, is the latest move by the California-based tech giant to protect its reputation in the aftermath of news reports about broad National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance of Internet traffic. . . ."

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

UK tax debate and Google

BBC News - Google's Eric Schmidt 'perplexed' over UK tax debate: "Mr Schmidt told the BBC that the company did what was "legally required" to pay the right amount of taxes. Google paid £10m in UK corporate taxes between 2006 and 2011, despite revenues of £11.9bn. Mr Schmidt said it was up to the government to change its tax system if it wanted companies to pay more taxes. Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Start the Week, he said: "What we are doing is legal. I'm rather perplexed by this debate, which has been going in the UK for some time, because I view taxes as not optional. "I view that you should pay the taxes that are legally required. It's not a debate. You pay the taxes. "If the British system changes the tax laws, then we will comply. If the taxes go up, we will pay more, if they go down, we will pay less. That is a political decision for the democracy that is the United Kingdom.""

Sounds rational to me. Why blame taxpayers for the tax laws passed by any government?

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Self-Inflicted Damage Of The Google Brand

Who's going to use Google's Evernote (Google Keep) now that everyone knows that Google will kill even successful products like Google Reader?

Finale for Now on Google's Self-Inflicted Trust Problem - James Fallows - The Atlantic: "I am about as pro-Google a person as you're going to find in the media. I've had friends at all levels of the company since its founding, and still do now. I've admired what Google has done in China; I live my info-life within the Gmail / Google Drive universe; and I am predisposed to take Google's side in most controversies, whether against Microsoft or the French. Including when it comes to its influence on the battered journalistic business model it has helped to overturn! But even I think it has done something brand-damaging. . . ."

Wonder if Larry Page or anyone on the senior "Google team" has ever heard of "branding," much less understands its importance. I doubt it after seeing the mess Google has made of Android and Google's idiotic announcement of Google Keep right after killing Google Reader. Steve Jobs (a guy who really knew the importance of branding--he kept a near bankrupt Apple alive by launching the "think different" campaign) must be laughing his a__ off!

The Google guys may be good engineers, but they are tone deaf when it comes to equally important things like user experience and loyalty. You break a user's trust, and that user is less likely to try your next product or service. A product or service is everything a user experiences. With Google Reader, the users' trust has been broken by Google. The subliminal message: never, ever, count on Google providing any service for very long (even one as loved, and successful, as Google Reader.)

If the Google Reader decision is indicative of the Google strategy going forward, they are in for a decline in fortunes. Once users' trust is destroyed, users go elsewhere. Google has lost control of Android--Taiwanese manufacturers are bundling Android (stripped of all Google services) into smartphone hardware packages assembled in China, and sold globally. Desktop search is moving to other venues--Siri, Amazon search, etc. Someday in the future, Google will look back and wonder, "why did we kill Google Reader?"

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Google Helped Honor FTC Chairman During Agency Inquiry

I hate to be cynical but is this really news? Everyone should know that Washington, today, is just about feeding the hogs at the trough--

Google Helped Honor FTC Chairman During Agency Inquiry - Bloomberg: " . . . At the time, the FTC was investigating whether Mountain View, California-based Google unfairly disadvantaged competing websites by favoring its own services in search results. The agency ended the 20-month antitrust probe on Jan. 3 with no enforcement action. Google agreed to voluntary changes in some search practices and signed a consent decree regarding the use of certain patents. “It’s a little bit odd that they’re donating to Common Sense Media at the exact same time they’re trying to influence Jon Leibowitz,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a watchdog group. “It really looks terrible.” Leibowitz, who had been chairman since 2009, announced on Feb. 1 that he would leave the commission. The White House announced today that current commissioner Edith Ramirez will succeed him as chairman. . . . "

It's sad that Google had to spend millions in order to defeat a meritless FTC investigation, but that's the reality of dysfunctional Washington and our so-called public servants like Jon Leibowitz. One wonders why anyone would give an award to any public servant for just doing their job, which after all is paid for by all of us. The whole practice is wrought with corruption, politics, and other vices.

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Google to BT and patent trolls: "don't tread on me"

Google is not naive to the ways of Washington (e.g., FTC), patent trolls, Microsoft, Oracle, Apple, or anyone else--now BT is going to think twice before it sues Google again:

Google slugs BT with four-patent countersuit after telco 'armed trolls' | ZDNet:  "Google has filed patent infringement suits against BT in the US and UK after the telco "armed patent trolls". Google filed a complaint on Wednesday in the US District Court for the Central District of California over BT's alleged infringement of four patents, some of which Google has acquired recently from the likes of IBM and Fujitsu. . . . The move follows BT's complaint against Google in the US District Court of Delaware in December 2011, which claimed over a dozen Google brands, from search and Google Maps to DoubleClick and Gmail, infringed on six of its patents. BT's patent actions have forced it to countersue, Google said. "We have always seen litigation as a last resort, and we work hard to avoid lawsuits. But BT has brought several meritless patent claims against Google and our customers — and they've also been arming patent trolls. When faced with these kind of actions, we will defend ourselves," Google said in a statement. . . ."

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Chromebook Pixel is everything you need (and more)

Just a couple of weeks ago I posted How to Build a Better Chromebook. Now Google has brought to market just that--Chromebook Pixel. Finally, a performance Chromebook!

Google Chrome Blog: The Chromebook Pixel, for what’s next: " . . . Speed: Speed has been a core tenet of Chrome and Chromebooks since the beginning. For Pixel, it’s critical that the overall experience, everything from loading webpages to switching between apps, is near instant. Powered by an Intel® Core™ i5 Processor and a solid state Flash memory architecture, the Pixel performs remarkably fast. Connectivity: The Pixel has an industry-leading WiFi range thanks to carefully positioned antennas and dual-band support. Long-term evolution (LTE) is engineered directly into the machine, delivering fast connectivity across Verizon's network, the largest, fastest 4G LTE network in the U.S. (LTE model optional). It also comes with 12 free GoGo® Inflight Internet passes for those times you need to connect while in the air. Storage: Since this Chromebook is for people who live in the cloud, one terabyte of Google Drive cloud storage is included with the Pixel. This enables you to save, access and share photos, videos, documents, and all of your stuff from all of your devices, from anywhere. . . ."

Combine the above with the Google Apps and  Chrome browser's utility offline (see below) and you have everything you need (and more). Goodbye Microsoft and Apple!

Chrome launcher for offline apps comes to Windows | ZDNet: " . . . The feature, currently available only on Google's Chromebooks . . . is "a dedicated home for your apps which makes them easy to open outside the browser", Google said in a post on its Chromium blog on Wednesday. On Chromebooks, apps can be "pinned" to the launcher with a right-click for faster access to more frequently used apps. The feature is more of a desktop organisation tool, which, for other desktops and laptops, is designed to support a class of browser app that Google calls "Packaged Apps". These are written in HTML5, JavaScript and CSS but live outside the browser. . . ."

About Google Docs, Sheets, and Slides offline - Google Drive Help: "You're able to view Google documents, spreadsheets, and presentations even when you don't have an Internet connection. You're also able to edit Google documents and presentations offline. It's really handy when you're on an airplane or train without wireless Internet! . . . "

Enable Google Docs Offline - Google Apps Help: "From the Google Apps control panel, you can allow your users to view documents and spreadsheets even when they don't have an Internet connection. To do this, you need to enable Google Docs offline. . . "

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

£1bn Google London headquarters

What do you do when you have lots of cash (billions of $$) overseas you can't bring back to the US (without paying exorbitant taxes)? Real estate in central London is probably a smart investment--

Google to build £1bn UK headquarters at London's King's Cross | Technology | guardian.co.uk: "Google has completed a £1bn property deal to move its UK headquarters to a brownfield site in London's King's Cross area. The US technology giant has purchased a 2.4 acre site between King's Cross and St Pancras stations and plans to build a seven and 11 storey complex due to be complete in 2016. Google already has two central London offices – one in Victoria and one on St Giles High Street – from where staff are expected to be relocated. The move forms part of the regeneration of the King's Cross area following the opening of the Eurostar terminal at St Pancras in 2007. Organisations that have moved into the area since then include Guardian News & Media, publisher of MediaGuardian, and art college Central St Martin's. Google's purchase mirrors its property strategy in Dublin, where it bought a building outright for 2,000 staff in 2011."

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

How Low Will Microsoft Go?

Are there any limits to how low Microsoft will go?--

Behind Google's Antitrust Escape - WSJ.com: " . . . In a sign no Google effort was too small to go unnoticed by Microsoft, John Sampson, a director of Microsoft's federal politics operations, last year urged at least one member of Congress from Washington state not to support a Google event in Seattle last year called "Get Your Business Online" that catered to small businesses. Google spent millions of dollars on Get Your Business Online, a nationwide campaign that included multiday workshops in states such as Iowa and Texas in which Google helped local businesses set up websites and an online business listing tied to its search engine, free of charge. In an email to a congressional office in March 2012, Mr. Sampson said such events were partly aimed at soliciting small businesses to support Google. "Although these programs have an air of goodness," he wrote in the email reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, "Google is in fact using this program to develop a grass-tops network" of small businesses they can "activate to their defense" if the FTC tries to bring a case. Some Washington lobbyists, including those who have done work for Google, said that the Get Your Business Online effort has perhaps had more impact on federal lawmakers than any lobbying done on Capitol Hill. A Google spokesman declined to comment. A Microsoft spokesman declined to comment on Mr. Sampson's outreach efforts."

Really Microsoft, have you no shame?

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

Antitrust, Politics, Economics

As a follow-up to my post yesterday Google Has Learned The Ways of Washington--Government Bureaucrats, Lawyers, Lobbyists, $$$, I couldn't pass up posting an excerpt from the following--

Jenkins: Al Gore Is Good at Rent-Seeking (and Microsoft Isn't) - WSJ.com: " . . . Microsoft still tries to make money by selling consumers products they want, though it has launched some stinkers in this regard . . . its latest stinker was more up Mr. Gore's alley: a multimillion-dollar investment in trying to foment a government antitrust crackdown on Google. That effort went conspicuously bust Thursday when the Federal Trade Commission let Google go with token remonstrances about its business practices. . . . As FTC chief Jon Liebowitz acknowledged this week, antitrust agencies live to bring "big cases." The FTC staff, whose revolving-door career interests would be enhanced by a Google prosecution, was an easy sell. Less so the agency's political appointees who must decide yea or nay. The media wasn't clamoring for a Google crackdown. Congress was less than enthusiastic. The Obama White House, known to be close to Google, was disturbingly mute. Antitrust is supposed to be entirely about clinical economics but never is. FDR's antitrust chief Thurman Arnold once said that antitrust was a collective squeal of resentment against businesses that annoy us with their success. Google hasn't been sufficiently annoying. Notice, by the way, that the astute Arnold went on to found Arnold & Porter, one of the great Beltway law firms . . ."

Tweet   Follow @johnmpoole

Google Has Learned The Ways of Washington--Government Bureaucrats, Lawyers, Lobbyists, $$$

Washington DC produces nothing but deficits, legislation, regulations, and bureaucracy. But that vast ecosystem, which sucks money from the rest of the nation, is now the wealthiest metropolitan area in the USA--recession?--not in Washington where government continues to spend, and lobbyists and lawyers get fat and rich, while the rest of the nation has suffered through the worst recession since the Great Depression.  Also, Washington has taught everyone else a lesson--if you get too big and successful (like Google) then "we will bring you down"--if nothing else you will have to spend years explaining your business processes and industry practices to bureaucratic morons at agencies like the FTC which open investigations on meritless claims ("FTC never had compelling evidence against Google, and its lengthy and expensive investigation came up essentially dry"); the FTC even hired expensive, outside Washington counsel because (apparently) FTC staff counsel is too incompetent and inept. Nonetheless, Silicon Valley is wise to the ways of Washington, and hence Google knew it would have to pay the "tax" levied by the FTC and other inquiring agencies of the US government--the "tax" being the cost to hire lobbyists and lawyers (as well as the opportunity cost of diverting corporate resources to deal with and counter the FTC "investigation")--some might even call the FTC investigation a government-sponsored "shakedown"--after all, we all know the revolving door between government and law firms and lobbying firms in Washington D.C.--

How Google beat the feds - Tony Romm - POLITICO.com: "Google escaped from a nearly two-year federal antitrust probe with only a few scratches by proving that the best defense is a good offense. Instead of ignoring Washington — as rival Microsoft did before its costly monopolization trial in the 1990s — Google spent about $25 million in lobbying, made an effort to cozy up to the Obama administration and hired influential Republicans and former regulators. The company even consulted with the late Robert Bork and The Heritage Foundation and met with senators like John Kerry to make its case. In other words, these traditional outsiders worked the system from the inside."

The FTC Smartly Ends Its Imprudent Google Search Antitrust Investigation - Forbes: " . .  . Fortunately for Google, throwing money at the problem seemed to work really well . . . But is that really how the system’s supposed to work? Google wasn’t the only player spending like a drunken sailor. The FTC hired an expensive outside lawyer and invested countless staff hours. And Google’s enemies spent plenty of money themselves, both directly and through advocacy groups like Microsoft's "FairSearch."  For example, Microsoft has put on its own event (both in DC and in Europe), and see this San Jose Mercury News list of Microsoft-supported influencers (the article also tries to enumerate Google beneficiaries). With the FTC investigation over, we might project a recession in the legal industry when all of this money stops sloshing around. In the end, though the FTC reached the right result from its investigation, the money avalanche left me with a queasy stomach. As the cynical maxim goes, “he who has the gold makes the rules.” When titans clash over antitrust matters, it’s a fine line between justice being served and justice being bought."

Yes, unfortunately, that is how the dysfunctional Washington system works. And the sad thing is, the staff and Commission of the FTC probably think they are operating in the public interest--really! What a waste of resources. Another sign of America in decline.

There once were concepts of public service and stewardship of public resources (including taxpayer funds) in Washington. No more. Today, in Washington, it's just about feeding the Hogs at the Trough.

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

The FTC, Microsoft and Google

The comment excerpt to the Microsoft response to Google's victory before the FTC (an investigation which should never have been opened and was a monumental waste of taxpayer funds)--

The FTC and Google: A Missed Opportunity - Microsoft on the Issues - Site Home - TechNet Blogs: "Microsoft, please stop complaining. Start innovating. The Internet is the most level, ultimate playing field. And just because you're losing doesn't mean you should try to paint the winner as evil."

and the following article says it all about how lame Microsoft is when it comes to competing with Google--

Google's FTC Settlement Is An Epic Fail For Microsoft: "Microsoft had a pretty lousy year in 2012, putting out a string of big products – Windows 8, Windows Phone 8 and the Surface tablet – that all turned out to be be disappointing. But those pale in comparison to what may be the biggest disappointment in Microsoft’s history — its failure to convince antitrust regulators to take action against Google. After a 19-month investigation and despite much prodding from Microsoft, the Federal Trade Commission has reached a settlement with Google that basically amounts to a slap on the wrist. This is a crushing blow to Microsoft, which has spent millions of dollars on lobbyists and phony grassroots groups over the past several years hoping to land Google in hot water. Indeed, Microsoft’s obsession with Google doesn’t just border on crazy. It is crazy, and not just a little tiny bit crazy but full-blown, bunny-boiling, Ahab-versus-the-whale nutso. . . . "

Microsoft's idea of innovation and competing is to run to government agencies and get them to open investigations on competitors based on meritless claims. At some point, you would think the government would have enough sense to quit asking "how high" when Microsoft says "jump."

Tweet    Follow @johnmpoole

FTC Announcement Concerning Its Investigation of Google

FTC to Make Announcement Concerning Its Investigation of Google: ". . . regarding the specific allegations that the company (Google) biased its search results to hurt competition, the evidence collected to date did not justify legal action by the Commission,” said Beth Wilkinson, outside counsel to the Commission. . . . the FTC’s mission is to protect competition, and not individual competitors. The evidence did not demonstrate that Google’s actions in this area stifled competition in violation of U.S. law.”"

Right decision--just a shame that the FTC wasted millions of dollars and 2 years investigating Google for meritless claims.

Tweet   Follow @johnmpoole