Home >>  


Search Technology Powerful Enough to Track Bugs

November 24, 2008 · Posted in Wholesale Advertising Tips · 2 Comments 

If you ever doubted the power of search engines, the usefulness of key words or how important both have become in our daily lives, ponder this news.

Using a huge database of search terms — such as cough, fever and aches and pains – entered by sick people who go Internet medical sites before seeing the doctor, search engine Google claims it can predict flu outbreaks.

Google says its huge data pile of sickly search terms can be pinpoint tracked by region, is much more current than any institutional health surveys, and can sniff out flu epidemics even before public health officials or Centers for Disease Control knows there is a problem.

Here’s a plot of those sick search terms across the entire United States from June 2008 … through projections to May 2009. Note the predicted spikes in December and late February.

Google Flu Searches

The Guardian newspaper in the United Kingdom welcomed this Health + Technology news with a bit of Big Brother paranoia:

Google already has a window into our souls through our internet searches and it now has insight into our ailing bodies too.

For good or for “ill,” here is the rest of Google Hits to Warn of Flu Epidemics .

Share:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis

Buyers, Sellers, Online Advertisers, Search Marketers: The Chief Technology Officer Is In. Soon.

Whether you’re a global manufacturer or a national wholesaler, a niche market merchandise seller or regional chain store buyer, change and speed are about move down the product supply chain. If you do marketing, advertising, product sourcing or any corporate branding through Internet media channels, now is the time: Big change is on the way.

    > National Chief Technology Officer. Most corporations hired a CTO, Chief Technology Officer, not long after taking pencils and paper off employee desks and wiring the workplace. Better late than never, the U.S. government will finally seat a cabinet-level Tech Guru. President-elect Barack Obama is in the process of appointing the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer.
    > Big Push for Universal Broadband Internet Access. Two important decisions occurred on November 4, 2008: (1) The first tech-savvy U.S. president was elected. (2) The Federal Communications Commission ruled that White Spaces – unused portions of the wireless spectrum – are not owned and controlled by a handful of broadcast and telecom companies.
    > Tech Savvy 1: Marc Andreessen – Netscape founder, Facebook board member, pioneer Silicon Valley geek – was asked to meet with a stranger at the San Francisco airport back in February 2007. Andreessen said the stranger was “like a guy in a garage thinking of taking on the biggest names in the business” who was proposing the impossible – combine the power of online social networking with aggressive database development. And beat overwhelming odds. As Andreessen saw it: “We see a lot of that (crazy ideas) out here (Silicon Valley) and then something clicks.”

    The click echoed to the White House: The stranger, Barack Obama, had just thrown his long-shot hat into the presidential ring. Though he’ll surrender his BlackBerry when he walks into the Oval Office January 20, 2009 (Federal e-communications security rules), Obama will be the first Internet-savvy CEO of the United States. Long before, he’d already set out his attitudes and tech policies. Which is why the FCC opened up White Spaces to their owners, the American public.

    > Win One for All: Advocates of Net Neutrality (the Internet should not have different speeds, tollbooths or roadblocks depending on how much you pay to ride the superhighway) and Broadband Access (expanding inexpensive, high-speed Internet access to everyone in America) were natural enemies of large telecommunications and cable companies that became broadband monopolies over the past 20 years. No surprise that Open Internet Access folks also wanted to crack open unused White Spaces on the broadcast spectrum — space that can bounce broadband Internet access through mountains and buildings, across cities and rural areas. Cheaply.

    Open Access advocates squared off against the powerful National Association of Broadcasters, who wanted to hoard the White Space spectrum for commercial use. See Chicken Little Lobby Comes to New York from this Blog in October. Finally, the FFC ruled on November 4, 2008: Open Access Won.

    > Now We Catch Up. Bruce Kushnick — 25-year telecom analyst, chair of a customer advocacy group, director of New Networks market research – noted how far U.S. consumer Internet access has fallen from top of the mountain back in the 1990s:

U.S. share of worldwide Internet traffic has shrunk over the last decade from 70 percent to 25 percent. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) ranks the U.S. 15th out of 30 leading industrial nations in per capita broadband use. And Americans are getting poorer broadband telecommunications services — lower bandwidth — and paying more than citizens in most other advanced industrial countries.

Good news for search marketers, eCommerce entrepreneurs, online buyers and sellers: The Tech Doctor Is In.

Share:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis

Climb Inside the Brain of a Buyer: Market Research That Doesn’t Ask Questions

Online advertisers and search marketers have it easy: They get instant feedback on how well their key words pull prospective customers. Or, which pay-per-click ad description draws more clicks to a web site. Or, whether the clickable graphic in a display ad draws more eyeballs if it shows a woman wearing a bracelet, or if it shows a picture of the disembodied jewelry. All they need is a good Web Analytics package, plus someone who likes to crunch numbers, click-through rates, conversions to sale and glitzy reports. Easy.

See examples of all the above easily trackable search and display ads for the Wholesale merchandise industry at Top Ten Wholesale Advertising .

What marketer wouldn’t like to know what really goes on in the mind of an ad target? Web Analytics software can’t figure out what made someone click one search listing over another, or why a sales prospect reacted to one ad and not another on the same page. Enter Martin Lindstrom, author of “Buyology,” who does a Dr. Frankenstein set up called neuro-imaging in a lab that actually measures people’s brain waves as they look at marketing messages. No need to even ask them what they like or dislike; what turns them on or off.

Yes, Halloween just passed; but this is real. Call it “Brain Analytics.” Lindstrom’s conclusions:

· A strong brand trips a kind of religious reaction. Neuro-imaged brand maniacs – like Mac vs. PC users; or drinkers who knew the beer on the beach blanket with a lime wedge is a Corona before the label is even seen – showed the same brain waves as when they saw religious icons.

· Don’t buy the old adage, Sex Sells. Because it only sells sex. Fewer than one in ten men who saw a sexually suggestive ad could remember what the product was; twice as many subjects recalled the product in unsexy ads.

· TV ads may be self-defeating. By the time they turn 60, most viewers have been exposed to 2,000,000 TV commercials. The study concluded that traditional ads have caused a sort of brain fatigue and are no longer memorable.

· Successful advertising doesn’t work only through the eyes. Other senses that strongly influenced offline buyer behaviors: Hearing (European shoppers bought French or German wines, depending on which country’s national anthem was playing when they shopped!). Smell (In-store bread bakeries; Fast-food restaurants that use artificial food smells, like bottled “French fry aroma”).

· Last, don’t tell the rich product placement managers at film and TV studios, but using a product as a background prop on a set gives back no brand recall from viewers. (Examples are a Yellow Book Directory propped near Ben Stiller’s computer as he looked for help in “Night In the Museum,” and tossing FedEx branded express packages on the set of a James Bond Film.) The placed marketing message only worked if the product and brand were written into the story. (Think Reese’s Pieces candy used to attract an alien in the movie “E.T.: The Extraterrestrial.”)

Share:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis

Is Google-Yahoo Ad Deal Failing? Let’s Count the Ways.

No gloating, now. Rumor says the Google-Yahoo mega deal to join online advertising forces is sinking.

As noted here in September, an ad partnership between the two largest search engines sure looked anti-competitive. Letting one combo control 70-to-90 percent of the search/display advertising market looked like a negative for small-to-medium online businesses, who’d be out-bid by big national advertisers with deeper pockets. Then, even the Big Fish Advertisers (like the Association of National Advertisers with its combined marketing budget of $100 Billion a year) protested the Google-Yahoo deal to Department of Justice for regulatory review. See Big Online Advertisers Blast Google/Yahoo Deal: Hello, Justice? Get me Anti-Trust.

Meghan Keane of Wired’s Blog says it “just seems mean spirited” to start attacking the Google-Yahoo search deal now that it’s falling apart. Okay. No gloating. No schadenfreude (German for “taking comfort from the shadows or afflictions of others”). But have a look at the reasons, guesses and theories that Search Engine Marketing gurus are coming up with to explain why the Dance of Two 800-pound SE Gorillas missed the music.

Conspiracy Theory #1: Microsoft is laughing behind the curtain. As the distant 3rd ranked search advertising network by revenue, any deal breakers between number one (Google) and number two (Yahoo!) is good news for competitor Microsoft. Microsoft Live Search even launched a pay-per-action bonus payback program that rewards buyers who stay on its pay-per-click search advertising reservation. Neither Google nor Yahoo! followed suit. (See From the Search Ad Trenches: Can Microsoft Kick Google in the Pay-Per? Will Google Feel It?

Conspiracy Theory #2: Too many advertisers, consumer rights groups and politicians weighed in against the proposed ad deal, which would have let Google serve search ads next to Yahoo key words that were not performing profitably. Such Thumbs Down lobbyists against the G-Y ad partnership argued that the deal would be monopolistic, anti-competitive and end up raising minimum bids on all search ad campaigns, which would push smaller entrepreneurs out of the SEM boat to drown.

Opponents to the deal included: ANA trade association, cited above; a consumer group, U.S. Public Interest Group, who argued that an ad partnership between the Top Two search engines would have negative impacts on consumer online privacy; Texas Congressman Joe Barton of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who didn’t care for the incomplete answers he got from Google or Yahoo in hearings about why this deal would NOT limit competition in online advertising; Yahoo employees (deep background, only) who allegedly are concerned that Google + Yahoo would be an “effective monopoly;” and Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, into whose regulatory lap this ad deal got tossed in September.

Conspiracy Theory #3: Search Advertising revenues are holding steady, even during economic downturn. ** Online Display Advertising revenues are falling. Almost one-half of Yahoo’s revenues come from display advertising. Therefore, Yahoo is in a bind and must make a deal. With somebody.

** A Search Ignite study concluded U.S. search ad spending grew 27% over last year. Besides search ads being Google’s strong suit, Google also gets over half of its revenues from outside the U.S. (Good for Google.) However, Ross Sandler with Search Ignite survey partner RBC Capital Markets, cautions that even the stronger search advertising market slowed down in the Retail sector in late September.

Back to Yahoo’s situation – Yahoo! has been talking to Time Warner about its America Online property, and a rumor as late as October 30 suggested AOL and Yahoo are currently conducting “due diligence” of their financial strengths and weaknesses. Counter rumors say that suggesting the next proposed ad deal will be between Yahoo! and AOL is both “an exaggeration” and “not imminent.”

Conspiracy Theory #4: The final theory about why Google and Yahoo! may be walking away from this ad partnership deal now is: Blame It On Presidential Elections! This might be the winner. The Big Three search engines (Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft) have known all along that a likely Republican presidential nominee would continue a laissez-faire attitude toward government regulatory responsibilities. (See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Let the Free Market Sort It Out.) They also knew that a likely Democratic presidential nominee would insist that tax-payer supported government workers, like those in the Department of Justice, earn their paychecks and actually enforce regulations already on the books. (Stuff like denying anticompetitive mergers and keeping the economic playing fields level.)

Our national political temperature through October 2008 suggests that the President and the Congress after November 4 may flip to a Democrat POV. So, now was the time for Google and Yahoo! to stand down their lawyers and arguments that this advertising partnership is not anticompetitive after all. They have not yet sent the caterers or musicians home on this wobbly wedding reception. Both insist the marriage offer is still on the table. We’ll know soon.

Share:
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • TwitThis