Google has entered into an agreement to acquire online ad-optimization firm Teracent, the search giant announced in a blog post on Monday. The transaction is subject to several closing conditions, but is expected to close by the end of the quarter.
Google said it has been "busy releasing new features and products to help improve display advertising on the Web," according to the blog post. After examining Teracent's technology, the company felt that it fit "neatly" into its display-advertising goals, the blog said.
Teracent certainly brings something new to Google's advertising efforts. The company's technology tweaks images, products, messages, or colors to optimize ad units based on the viewer's location, what language they speak, the kind of content they're viewing, the local time, and how well particular units have performed in the past. It does all that work in real time as the algorithm examines the ad's environment.
"This technology can help advertisers get better results from their display ad campaigns," Google wrote in a blog post. "In turn, this enables publishers to make more money from their ad space and delivers Web users better ads and more ad-funded web content."
Teracent should be integrated into Google's advertising efforts by the end of the quarter. Neither company divulged how much Teracent was acquired for.
Some looks at the new AOL branding.
(Credit: AOL)It's the media equivalent of moving out of your parents' house, heading to the nearest tattoo and piercing parlor, and yelling FREEEEEEDOM!: AOL has unveiled the "new brand identity" for its post-Time Warner era, slated to begin December 10 when it begins trading on the New York Stock Exchange as a separate company. And there's nary a blue triangle in sight. Instead, there's a plain new text logo presented with various backdrops, from cartoon scribbles to a rock-star hand symbol to a totally adorable goldfish.
The company is currently offering just a preview, and says in a release that a full unveil will come on the spin-off date. Yay, secrets! I love secrets! But we, of course, have many hints: like the fact that CEO Tim Armstrong, who joined the company in March after a long stint as a high-profile Google sales executive, keeps talking up AOL's future as a powerhouse in digital content and publishing. The company's array of niche blogs, which were hatched when AOL purchased Weblogs way back in 2005, are now its centerpiece.
So the new mood? "It's one consistent logo with countless ways to reveal," the release explained. Ooh, sexy!
The release also included a soundbite from Karl Heiselman, CEO of Wolff Olins, which AOL enlisted to help with the transformation: "AOL is a 21st century media company, with an ambitious vision for the future and new focus on creativity and expression, this required the new brand identity to be open and generous, to invite conversation and collaboration, and to feel credible, but also aspirational."
Of course, it's not all sunny: The company is on the verge of significant layoffs, as well as the possible chucking of non-"content" properties like ICQ and MapQuest, as the spinoff date grows closer.
Whatever. Isn't that goldfish cute?
For Madison Avenue, Facebook just got a little less free.
Last week, the massive social network announced that brands, advertisers, and marketers that want to run contests or sweepstakes on its platform have to go through an approval process first.
Getting that approval could be a new revenue stream for Facebook: according to multiple sources in the marketing industry, they're being told that running a promotion in a Facebook application or "fan page" requires buying ad space too.
It's pricey. The minimum ad buy is $10,000 for 30 days, using Facebook's self-service advertising system, according to documents seen by CNET, or $30,000 for 30 days of Facebook home page ads. Priority in the approval process will be scaled, based on how much advertising space has been purchased. It's a move that one marketing industry professional called, in perhaps a bit of hyperbole, "a little Death Star-ish."
A Facebook representative declined to confirm and said the company did not have any comment beyond official documents released on its Facebook Marketing Solutions page.
Let's step back. Cracking down on contests and promotions might seem draconian, but it's actually important for Facebook: the U.S. state and federal laws that govern sweepstakes are extremely complicated, and by allowing only approved contests, Facebook is making sure that its bases are covered.
"Any promotion that any brand, product, or company would run has to have a terms of service against it," said Gunter Pfau, CEO of the Stuzo Group, an agency that has developed numerous Facebook contests and sweepstakes for clients. "Also, depending on the prize value, they need to be filed with various state regulatory agencies."
What, exactly, is new for contests? If a brand is running a contest on its fan page, it has to be handled through an embedded, separately developed application--not, for example, in the page's "wall." Promotions also can't involve Facebook users manipulating their user photos or status messages specifically for the contest.
Legal experts agree that this is necessary. "The (new Facebook) guidelines really cover only a narrow subset of promotions, specifically sweepstakes, contests, and similar competitions," explained Thomas Williams, a partner at the Chicago law firm Howrey, who specializes in trademark law. "That type of contest or promotion is governed by a myriad of state and federal regulations, so what I think Facebook is attempting to do here is merely shield itself from liability that arises out of its users' potential violations of these laws."
Williams continued: "I think it's a prudent and reasonable step on Facebook's part. There are lawyers who specialize in sweepstakes law, and there really are a lot of twists and turns to it."
One thing it'll also do, Stuzo Group's Gunter Pfau explained, is keep dishonest campaigns and promotions off the Facebook platform. "I think it's great news for consumers," he said. "I think what Facebook is doing is really laying these guidelines in place for companies to protect consumers more."
But what about the new ad spend requirements? Facebook has historically pitched its developer platform and fan pages as a free way for advertisers and marketers to tap into the power of "the social graph"--its 300 million-plus active users and their connections to one another. And while it's clear that the company sees these free pages and applications as a stepping stone for ad dollars--Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg, for example, regularly gives Madison Avenue talks about the company's "engagement ads"--it doesn't have a long track record of requiring advertisers to pay for something that used to be free.
"It makes sense for Facebook, but (it's) a little discouraging to advertisers," commented Alisa Leonard-Hansen, who holds the title of social-media evangelist at digital-marketing firm iCrossing. "Facebook is continually trying to discover new ways to monetize, and they picked up on the trend that advertisers were using their pages to run contests and other promotions. I think Facebook was looking to be able to benefit from this marketing trend."
The ad spend requirements, too, could be considered partial compensation for the new human resources required in Facebook's approval process. Each company running contests on Facebook now has a designated advertising sales representative, and fan pages will continue to have to be policed for potential violations of both advertiser regulations and sweepstakes law.
There might not be a lot of friction as the new regulations go into effect. Companies that don't run contests on their Facebook fan pages or applications won't be affected. Even some that do, especially small-scale fan pages that could easily go unnoticed by Facebook, won't have to change much. "Of course, there are going to be savvy marketers who skirt this and run (contests) under the radar," Alisa Leonard-Hansen said.
It really goes without saying the obvious: this is Facebook's service, and it can do what it wants with it. That doesn't mean marketers will stop grumbling. As one put it in a phone call to CNET, "This is another example of Facebook saying, 'Sorry, eat it, you've got no choice.'"
Early on Monday, we learned that the new Verizon Droid does, indeed, swap "semi-functional, giggling-brat-vanity for a bare knuckle bucket of does."
Now, we have the visual evidence. It's evidence a defense attorney would rather enjoy.
The Droid is, apparently, not a smartphone at all. It is a robotphone, according to Verizon's latest TV ad. Yes, it punches its way through steel walls and crushes rocks. Which, I believe, is known in English classes as poetry.
The lyrical content is only heightened when the giggling-brat-vanity words are uttered by an announcer who sounds like he had a previous career as an enforcer with one of the Gambino bambinos.
As the contempt drips from his lips, we see various iPhone-like devices all blinged out in pinks and purples and sequins. They look like purses.
And the subtext, which is about as covert as a right cross from an inebriated wedding crasher, is that the Droid is for boys and the iPhone is for fans of "Project Runway" and "The Real Housewives of Orange County."
Yes, your Droid is your Mixed Martial Arts-lovin', bone-crushin' robot that's going to turn you into a man. And that's what all boys want, right?
The Internet Advertising Bureau has come out against new guidelines proposed by the Federal Trade Commission that would require bloggers to disclose their affiliations with sponsors, marketers, and free giveaways. The reason? The IAB claims that the rules unfairly regulate online media more than offline.
"What concerns us the most in these revisions is that the Internet, the cheapest, most widely accessible communications medium ever invented, would have less freedom than other media," IAB president and CEO Randall Rothenberg wrote in an open letter to FTC chairman Jon Leibowitz. "These revisions are punitive to the online world and unfairly distinguish between the same speech, based on the medium in which it is delivered. The practices have long been afforded strong First Amendment protections in traditional media outlets, but the Commission is saying that the same speech deserves fewer Constitutional protections online."
He illustrated it with a personal example:
So there I was last Saturday, about to send out on my Twitter feed--which automatically updates my Facebook page and links to my personal blog--a photograph of this wonderful baked halibut dish I'd just made as a surprise for my wife. I was in the middle of typing a rave review of the recipe, which I'd pulled from my favorite cookbook, "Delicioso! The Regional Cooking of Spain" by Penelope Casas. But before I could press the 'post' button, I stopped and canceled the whole thing.I remembered that the book was a freebie, sent to me by an editor at the Alfred A. Knopf publishing house 13 years ago. And I didn't want you guys to haul me into court and fine me for violating the rules you've just promulgated to muzzle social media.
The FTC has said that the rules, which stipulate that violations may face up to $11,000 in fines, are designed for education rather than punishment. But Rothenberg isn't buying it.
"The Guides do allow you to pursue bloggers," he insisted. "They do hold individuals more liable than larger corporations. They do explicitly say online social media have less protection than offline corporate media. They do obstruct online companies' opportunities to drive cultural conversation more than offline companies'. They do threaten with prosecution book publishers, movie producers, and other companies that supply products to individual social media conversationalists."
The bigger problem is that offline media isn't subject to the same restrictions, he explained. And, according to the letter, clamping down on one medium but not another constitutes a First Amendment violation.
The FTC has not yet responded publicly.
Nobody's surprised: Internet-advertising revenues fell slightly in the first half of 2009, according to numbers released Monday by the Interactive Advertising Bureau and PricewaterhouseCoopers.
The trade group found that online-ad revenues dropped 5.3 percent to $10.9 billion year over year, representing a total loss of $610 million. That's an understandable loss, given how much the media business has had the wind knocked out of it, thanks to the recession. But the slide in digital advertising isn't nearly as dire, when compared to the overall ad industry, which fell 15.4 percent.
The IAB also brought up numbers from Nielsen indicating that online advertising is essentially flat--and that the only sector of the ad industry that is growing is cable television.
PwC partner David Silverman called online advertising "a vibrant, sustainable industry," and he reiterated that it's an "industry that really didn't exist more than 12 years ago."
There was not much talk about social-media advertising, which has made somewhat of a breakthrough in recent months: after much criticism that it would never be able to make much money, social ads got a boost from Facebook's announcement that it had reached a cash flow-positive status several quarters earlier than expected.
The social network, which now has more than 300 million active users, has been dipping a toe into virtual-commerce revenue streams but is still supported primarily by advertising.
AOL CEO and former Google sales exec Tim Armstrong.
(Credit: Google)We get it, Tim Armstrong. We know the still relatively new AOL CEO is all about reinventing the once-mighty online access company into a digital publishing powerhouse. But that didn't stop him from really hammering the point home at The Atlantic's First Draft of History conference on Thursday morning.
"What is the future of the company?" Armstrong, who previously served as a high-profile sales executive at Google, said in his talk, which was streamed live online. "If I had to describe it in one word, I think it's content, and I think it's content because there's an opportunity to marry what the content's already done with what the content can do."
One of his goals at AOL, he said, is to evolve and simplify the display advertising industry in a manner inspired by the success of search advertising. "When you have millions of advertisers that can sign up online in 10 minutes and run a global search campaign," he explained, "the same thing needs to be brought to display."
Armstrong has reason to believe in content. AOL acquired a solid portfolio of blogs when it purchased publishing network Weblogs Inc. in 2005, and the titles it's launched since then have largely been well-received--even though Armstrong promptly did away with the "MediaGlow" branding that had been established for the company's content division soon into his reign as CEO.
AOL has reach: 100 million visitors in the U.S., and 275 million globally. It'll soon be wholly independent from parent company Time Warner. Plus, the traditional print publishing industry is so beleaguered that it's about time a digital power stepped up to the plate.
But there are still plenty of issues at stake. Armstrong said that the ultimate answer to one of the biggest controversies in new-media publishing--do you charge for it or not?--will be that the Web will gravitate toward a mix of free, ad-supported content and paid offerings.
"I think consumers are smart. I think that if the content is really good, people will pay for it," he said. "I do think there's cases where I think if you can add enough value to content, people are going to pay for it. I think The Wall Street Journal's a good example of this."
Meanwhile, Armstrong expects the digital advertising industry to continue to mature, despite the fact that revenue has still been dampened by the recession. "When I came from Google to AOL the first meeting that I did was in Baltimore, at our Advertising.com (offices)," he related, referring to the ad network that AOL acquired in 2004. "One of the employees said, 'How many ad campaigns do you think we should be running?' and I said, I don't know, 500,000, and the audience went blank."
He continued, "The number was a few thousand, and for me that was shocking because I came from a place where we went from having a few hundred customers to having a million customers. And why hasn't AOL thought in that direction and that scale?"
Part of achieving that scale, he explained, involves getting pretty deep into local advertising markets, something that AOL sees as an untapped resource for both audiences and ad dollars. At the Atlantic event, he showed off some visuals from Patch, the local-news start-up that he invested in prior to his arrival at AOL; AOL ultimately acquired it. The start-up is currently restricted to about a dozen towns, mostly in New Jersey, but a gradual expansion is on the road map.
"In the town we're covering every single thing that a consumer in that town should be concerned about," Armstrong said of Patch, which employs a professional journalist in each town as well as aggregates local news from other sources. "The thing you don't see from the surface here is (that) we built a massive structured database underneath this. We've digitized the entire town."
Twitter posted changes to its terms of service Thursday, assuring users that they own their tweets while leaving "the door open for advertising" opportunities.
"The revisions more appropriately reflect the nature of Twitter and convey key issues such as ownership," Twitter co-founder Biz Stone wrote in a company blog. "For example, your tweets belong to you, not to Twitter."
In announcing the new terms of service, Stone also addressed the topics of abusive behavior and spam. These are four highlights Stone called out:
Advertising--In the Terms, we leave the door open for advertising. We'd like to keep our options open as we've said before.Ownership--Twitter is allowed to "use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute" your tweets because that's what we do. However, they are your tweets and they belong to you.
APIs--The apps that have grown around the Twitter platform are flourishing and adding value to the ecosystem. You authorize us to make content available via our APIs. We're also working on guidelines for use of the API.
Spam--Abusive behavior and spam are also outlined in these terms according to the rules we've been operating under for some time.
The prominence of the advertising revision seems to suggest that the microblogging start-up is warming up to an advertising-based model, a dramatic change from comments Stone made in May.
"There are a few reasons why we're not pursuing advertising--one is it's just not quite as interesting to us," Stone said at the Reuters Technology Summit.
Certainly the ownership message is designed to avoid the user backlash created by a revision to Facebook's terms of use that some interpreted to mean that Facebook claimed ownership of user profile data and photos.
At one point sources said he was a "dark horse" candidate to replace outgoing MySpace CEO Chris DeWolfe, but now MySpace ad sales and marketing head Jeff Berman is departing the News Corp. division entirely.
Following rumors and reports earlier Thursday, the announcement was made in a company blog post by Owen Van Natta, the former Facebook executive who ultimately did replace DeWolfe as CEO of MySpace earlier this year. Berman, who had previously been the head of MySpace's video division, had been at MySpace for about three and a half years.
MySpace has enlisted the services of media strategy firm Media Link to work on improving its advertising product, Van Natta's blog post added. Media Link is run by Wenda Harris Millard, the former sales exec from Yahoo and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia.
A report earlier on Thursday had suggested that Millard would be hired by MySpace outright; that was erroneous, as it turns out.
Earlier this week, MySpace also formally confirmed rumors that it would be acquiring iLike, a social music service that's also supported by advertising--but not successfully enough to rake in real dollars, as its price tag was reportedly a paltry $20 million.
NEW YORK--Broadcast network CBS will be advertising its fall TV season with a video-chip ad embedded in an issue of Entertainment Weekly.
The September 18 issue of the Time Inc.-owned magazine will feature the first video ad to appear in print, George Schweitzer, CBS marketing president, said Wednesday at a press conference at the company's headquarters here.
The ad with embedded video.
(Credit: Caroline McCarthy/CNET)The ad will be launched in partnership with PepsiCo to promote Pepsi Max soda and the TV network's Monday prime-time lineup. Not everyone will be seeing it: the ad will appear in a magazine insert sent to subscribers in the New York and Los Angeles areas--an edition without the video chip will be sent to subscribers elsewhere and show up on newsstands.
The technology for the battery-powered ads was manufactured by a Los Angeles-based company called Americhip, and each ad can handle about 40 minutes of video.
Here are some more details about the Americhip technology: the screen, which is 2.7 millimeters thick, has a 320x240 resolution. The battery lasts for about 65 to 70 minutes, and can be recharged, believe it or not, with a mini USB cord--there's a jack on the back of it. The screen, which uses thin film transistor liquid crystal display (TFT LCD) technology, is enforced by protective polycarbonate. It's a product that has been in development at Americhip for about two years, spokesman Tim Clegg told CNET News via e-mail.
"It's leadership in innovation, which we really stress at CBS in every part of our company," Schweitzer said of the ads, which were developed with the collaboration of the Ignition Factory, a division of the Omnicom Group's OMD media agency.
PepsiCo has been experimenting with edgy, experimental ads for some time now, distributing millions of 3D glasses for its SoBe LifeWater Super Bowl ad earlier this year. It more recently launched a new Mountain Dew flavor by inviting prominent Twitter users to a party at a trendy Brooklyn venue.
Pepsi Max is the company's new diet soda geared toward men, advertised earlier this summer with bold print ads that declared, "Save the calories for bacon."
"The evolution of marketing television in the fall--it used to be as simple as this," Schweitzer said, holding up a vintage copy of TV Guide. "It was axiomatic in those days. If you took an ad in TV Guide, people watched your program. Not anymore."
Disclosure: CNET News is published by CBS Interactive, a unit of CBS.
This post was updated at 1:38 p.m. PT with more details about Americhip's technology.





