Is The State Interventionism The Final Stage of Internet Marketing?
No way! This is ridiculous! Well, this was exactly my first reaction when I heard about this troubling prediction. So, who's the "prophet" we owe our gratitude for sleepless nights and increased blood pressure? Well, do you know who is the so-called "Forrest Gump of the Internet?" Evan Ev Williams is a proud holder of this "title," although I'm not quite sure what's supposed to mean, is good or bad, after all. I just want to mention a couple of things about Ev Williams, which will make you take his predictions very seriously. We should be very grateful to him for allowing to use software, which made is possible to "call blogs blogs." In addition, he's the co-founder of Twitter and founder/CEO of Medium.com, which can be best described as "YouTube for prose." This online writing platform is passionately embraced by Silicon Valley executives and POTUS himself. Of course, after a series of great things and achievements you shouldn't shoot in your own legs with a reckless and ridiculous statement such as this. Right? Yet, the trouble is, Ev Williams isn't the only "advertisement interventionists."
The 85% Red Alarm
I'm not sure about you, but I was completely unaware that according to Goldman Sachs almost 85 cents of every single dollar spent in online advertising was reserved for Google or Facebook at the beginning of 2016. So, what's the big deal about it? I'm not surprised. For our cyber Forrest Gump, this is a bad news. Why? Well, there's something called the "web's terminal illness," including the "dark open web's future." This isn't a new concept, but when you blame social networks then it is. Williams identifies powerful social media algorithms as the beginning of all troubles and a very dangerous phenomenon. What could it be?
The answer in hidden in the book called "The Master Switch," where a Columbia University Law Professor Tim Wu explains the patterns every major telecommunication technology has to inevitably experience. So, according to Professor Wu we have a relatively brief and enthusiastic period characterized by positive openness. However, before you even know it, you end up in a monopolistic and catastrophically "atrophied closedness." Believe it or not, our good old hated Edward Snowden government comes to the rescue. Unless the government itself doesn't do something about it, our beloved Internet is very likely to experience the fate of railroad, electricity, cable, and telephone.
All of these technologies went through the same pattern, which ended up all the same: an unhealthy combination of monopoly and not particularly inspirational closedness. Wait, isn't our World Wide Web supposed to be free and open all the time and forever?
Big getting bigger, greedy becoming...
The Net will be (always) free. Who would even dare to catch the wind? Right? However, online ads have this allergy condition when you mention the word freedom. What's the best case scenario? Google and Facebook are going to shake hands and ride together into the sunset. They will say, look buddy, this number of 80% isn't fair, let's share it with the other guys. Not even Hollywood can buy this ridiculous scenario. Microsoft just acquired LinkedIn. Maybe Facebook or Google will buy Twitter. Yahoo has been wearing an acquisition target sign for some time. You cry your eyes out to come up with the winning Internet marketing formula, but little do you know that the hypothetical "triumvirate" (Microsoft, Google, and Facebook) enjoys a golf game, whiskey, and cigars, while discussing the very future of online advertising. Who you gonna call?
MonopolyBusters?
Microsoft had its monopoly episode. That was almost twenty years ago. If the government hadn't intervened, we would all have had MS logo tattoos on our right shoulder among other things. The EU Commission is trying to discipline both Google and Facebook when it comes to privacy and taxes. Sounds familiar? You may ask what all of these have to do with love and ads? Well, all of these "monopolists" aren't here to improve our lovely user's experience.
To tell you the truth I can recall the ending of Forrest Gump movie. Guess, I have to see it again.
The 85% Red Alarm
I'm not sure about you, but I was completely unaware that according to Goldman Sachs almost 85 cents of every single dollar spent in online advertising was reserved for Google or Facebook at the beginning of 2016. So, what's the big deal about it? I'm not surprised. For our cyber Forrest Gump, this is a bad news. Why? Well, there's something called the "web's terminal illness," including the "dark open web's future." This isn't a new concept, but when you blame social networks then it is. Williams identifies powerful social media algorithms as the beginning of all troubles and a very dangerous phenomenon. What could it be?
The answer in hidden in the book called "The Master Switch," where a Columbia University Law Professor Tim Wu explains the patterns every major telecommunication technology has to inevitably experience. So, according to Professor Wu we have a relatively brief and enthusiastic period characterized by positive openness. However, before you even know it, you end up in a monopolistic and catastrophically "atrophied closedness." Believe it or not, our good old hated Edward Snowden government comes to the rescue. Unless the government itself doesn't do something about it, our beloved Internet is very likely to experience the fate of railroad, electricity, cable, and telephone.
All of these technologies went through the same pattern, which ended up all the same: an unhealthy combination of monopoly and not particularly inspirational closedness. Wait, isn't our World Wide Web supposed to be free and open all the time and forever?
Big getting bigger, greedy becoming...
The Net will be (always) free. Who would even dare to catch the wind? Right? However, online ads have this allergy condition when you mention the word freedom. What's the best case scenario? Google and Facebook are going to shake hands and ride together into the sunset. They will say, look buddy, this number of 80% isn't fair, let's share it with the other guys. Not even Hollywood can buy this ridiculous scenario. Microsoft just acquired LinkedIn. Maybe Facebook or Google will buy Twitter. Yahoo has been wearing an acquisition target sign for some time. You cry your eyes out to come up with the winning Internet marketing formula, but little do you know that the hypothetical "triumvirate" (Microsoft, Google, and Facebook) enjoys a golf game, whiskey, and cigars, while discussing the very future of online advertising. Who you gonna call?
MonopolyBusters?
Microsoft had its monopoly episode. That was almost twenty years ago. If the government hadn't intervened, we would all have had MS logo tattoos on our right shoulder among other things. The EU Commission is trying to discipline both Google and Facebook when it comes to privacy and taxes. Sounds familiar? You may ask what all of these have to do with love and ads? Well, all of these "monopolists" aren't here to improve our lovely user's experience.
To tell you the truth I can recall the ending of Forrest Gump movie. Guess, I have to see it again.