Is Google a media company? The question got several answers at PaidContent.org. Even though some of my friends say it is, I still don’t think
Google is a media company — especially in the context of trying to
compare it to Time-Warner, which is the context in which the current
debate emerged.
But, I will agree to this: It owns some new
media properties. And so, therefore, I guess it can be compared to GE,
which describes itself to its shareholders as, “a diversified
technology, media and financial services company.” (A significant
difference: Google generates about $100 billiion less in annual
revenues than GE.)
A link-magnet of a story: Within just a few hours of it going online, over 100 people have added the Business Week cover story regarding online collaboration to their del.icio.us pages and have tagged it in numerous ways.*
Because we use business-related tags in the preparation of links that appear on news.smallbusiness.com, I have a rather unique vantage point in monitoring how fast and how often business-oriented stories are added to del.icio.us lists. In the four weeks or so I’ve been watching, no story has even come close to this.
*Tags being used in the del.icio.us accounts for the Business Week cover story: business collaboration internet economics social socialsoftware cooperation skype p2p article toread sharing technology wiki web network opensource social_software future smartmobs web2.0 ideas wikipedia net media culture
Rich: Ketchum PR, which has no blog or RSS on its website, issues a 1,055-word press release announcing a new “personalized media” practice that will advice clients on things like blogs and RSS and podcasting.
(via: BL Ochman)
What Jonah Bloom said: “To Web cognoscenti, the ad-supported vs. paid content argument is so 2001.”
(via: iwantmedia.com)
What Jon Friedman says: “I have a problem with a blogger who presents the view that Google is a “media” company.”
I agree.
It can be confusing to those who want to declare any company that derives the largest portion of its revenue from advertising a “media company,” but it’s just not. Nor should they want to be. Google can make lots more money doing what it’s doing than any media company can.
They serve media companies and will pump hundreds of millions of dollars of revenues into the coffers of media companies this year, and, in some niche cases, compete with the media industry, but they are not a media company.
However, they can be categorized as a marketing-communication services company.
They can be categorized as a media services company.
They can be categorized as a technology company.
And some of their products can be classified “new media.”
But calling them a “media company” and comparing them to Time Warner is a mischaracterization of their business and displays a misunderstanding of what they do and what a media company does.
The Frist Center is podcasting, sort of: Nashville’s Frist Center for the Visual Arts is creating audio programming that is intended for distribution via its website. As soon as they offer a means to subscribe to each new post (RSS), they’ll be all they way there — perhaps a first among major art museums around the country?
Sold: We have a winning bid for the boxed Green Hills T-Shirt Auction. A bidder from Austria is going to be the proud owner with a $41.49 contribution to the the EFF legal defense fund in support of their efforts to defend bloggers being sued by Apple. A $25 matching contribution brings the total to EFF to $66.49.
