Digital Media

NEW YORK--Web pioneer and conference honcho Tim O'Reilly warned the audience at the Web 2.0 Expo here on Tuesday afternoon that he thinks "we're headed into another ugly time." Namely, everybody is just being really nasty to each other. And it makes his hippie soul hurt.

For example, Rupert "Dr. Evil" Murdoch keeps threatening to pull News Corp.'s pay wall-guarded content from Google, perhaps offering an exclusive deal to another search engine for one hundred billion dollars (give or take a few bucks).

Those ubiquitous URL-shortening toolbars are throwing Web addresses behind a cloak of invisibility, O'Reilly said, and they "don't let you navigate freely like the Web used to work." With Google's Chrome hurling itself into the mix, the browser and operating-system wars are starting to look less "Mean Girls" and more "Aliens vs. Predator."

But O'Reilly's attitude isn't "bring it on, and get me a large popcorn with extra butter, while you're at it." Rather, he hinted that at least in some cases, he's willing to embrace Google as a big, cuddly, benevolent dictator in the midst of it all. It's "a monopoly that's a service of value to users," he said, adding that generally, when Google makes a product with the primary goal of one-upping the competition--Knol vs. Wikipedia, Checkout vs. PayPal--it's not a success.

That's probably because, at least right now, among all the giant robots stomping about the series of tubes, Google is the one that most resembles O'Reilly's vision of the "open Web." In a blog post prior to his speech, he predicted that Microsoft could take over this role. Or not. Either way, he insisted that "it's time for developers to take a stand."

Setting off this kind of electric shock in the Web's punditocracy is a great way to drum up attention and newsworthiness that doesn't have anything to do with philosophizing about the recession, extolling the possibilities of the real-time streaming Web, or predicting which dot-com figurehead is going to be the most plastered at South by Southwest this year. Thank goodness! That stuff was getting so boring!

And O'Reilly's rallying cry has already gathered reactions. Barbarian Group executive Rick Webb, for one, posted a colorful retaliatory blog post, in which he said that "setting aside the 'boo hoo, the Internet is becoming a bunch of walled gardens' arguments, when rational people have conversations about how to make the Web actually usable and not 95 percent piracy, spam, and fraud, almost every discussion starts with the proposition that there is no other realistic option but to chuck the whole thing and start over."

Of course, the Web should be in a state of "war." When have things been any different? It's a hub of innovation, competition, and constant change, and I think we all knew that already. The barrier to entry is low enough so that if there's a glaring problem with something, users will flock to whoever can create a better alternative. In fact, O'Reilly brought that up on Tuesday, when he talked about expensive in-car GPS navigation systems.

"The turn-by-turn directions from TeleAtlas cost $99 [on the iPhone], but Google is giving it away for free. This is a natural kind of extension for Google. I don't think Google is being evil here by being disruptive," O'Reilly said. "That's a massive user win, even though it is incredibly damaging to some existing companies and some existing business models. When Google offers free speech recognition, [that would be] an amazing win."

Is that legitimate innovation? Yes. But let's hope the "win" doesn't stop there. If Google manages to throw a sucker punch to Apple, Microsoft, or whoever else by offering something once-pricey for free, I should hope that the rest of the industry makes sure that it doesn't grow too complacent.

So let's get this straight: monopolies are bad, unless they're "nice" ones on behalf of companies that extol the virtues of Razor scooters, wheatgrass smoothies, and lava lamps. Competition is great, as long as everybody's nice to each other.

Doesn't quite make sense to me. But, hey, it's his show.

While it's waiting to be gobbled up by Google, AdMob isn't sitting still.

The mobile ad company announced Tuesday that it will deliver interactive video ads to the iPhone and iPod Touch devices. The ads, set to run this week, will let iPhone users surf the Web and check out other videos while the video ad is playing. AdMob believes advertisers and developers will take advantage of the video format by serving up interactive ads designed to pull in consumers.

"AdMob's new Interactive Video Ad Unit brings together consumers' love of watching videos on their mobile device with advertisers' goal of providing an interactive, social experience for consumers," said AdMob Founder and CEO Omar Hamoui in a statement. "We are excited to create new ways for advertisers to engage with consumers on their mobile devices and for the developers behind the most popular and engaging iPhone applications to effectively monetize."

The video ads will automatically pop up as iPhone users access certain content and applications. The ads will also offer a video player so that people can control and interact with them. To make sure the ads run at a decent clip, AdMob uses a network of distributed servers to push them out. Each video is saved in different file sizes, with the most appropriate one streamed based on the connection type, such as 3G or Wi-Fi.

AdMob is one of the top advertising providers for the handheld and portable device market, a position that convinced Google to cough up $750 million in stock to buy out the company. With its multimedia capabilities and huge market share, the iPhone has proven a fertile ground for video ads, with the first ones popping up in early 2008 and growing since then.

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.'"

The next time you search Google for life expectancies or number of Internet users in the U.S., you'll find the specific figures plus an interactive chart letting you compare the U.S. with other countries.

Since Wednesday, Google has been tapping into data from the World Bank to provide key details and interactive charts on specific topics along with its own search results. The goal is to better help you search for and compare certain types of public data.

The World Bank is providing Google with facts and figures on 17 key indicators, including population growth, fertility rate, gross national product, and energy use.

Enter one of the 17 indicators into a Google search. You can phrase it as the specific indicator, for example, "population world," or type it as a natural question: "What is the population of the world?"

At the top of the search results, you'll find a thumbnail chart along with the latest statistics. (According to the World Bank, 72.4 percent of the U.S. population is on the Internet as of 2008.) Click on the chart or accompanying link, and up pops a larger interactive graph where you can visually compare the U.S. with other countries by clicking on their check boxes.

(Credit: Google)

You can embed the chart's HTML in your own blog or Web page and opt for the data to be updated automatically anytime the World Bank's information changes. Finally, a link for more info brings you directly to the World Bank's Web site where you can dig further into the results of your search.

This latest partnership with World Bank is part of Google's effort to offer data beyond that which it can grab from your average Web page. Back in April, the search giant started integrating stats and charts from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But the World Bank is the first source to provide global data for Google. The World Bank's figures come from its World Development Indicators (WDI), a collection of data derived from its own research and that of 30 other sources. The global data includes statistics on social, financial, and environmental areas encompassing more than 100 different countries.

You might suffer paralysis in several digits when I tell you that there is now a dating site exclusively for those deemed gorgeous.

BeautifulPeople.com exists to protect its members from having to espy the corpulent, the disproportioned, and the downright fugly-puglies.

On its home page, next to a photograph of a quite impossibly eugenic couple, the site presents its most famous media quote: "The sexiest Web site in the world today."

Entertainment Weekly? No, CNN.

Now, another august publication, the Telegraph, has reported some painful news from this online island of the beautiful: BeautifulPeople.com says British people are ugly.

Perhaps you might wish to blame the fish, chips, haggis, curry, and 14 pints of lager consumed by the average inhabitant of the Fragmented Kingdom. Perhaps you might indicate that such a lifestyle suggests an increasing amount of procreation between beings of indeterminate provenance in indeterminate places.

Some feel the British image problems begin with their teeth.

(Credit: MyBulldog/Flickr)

But BeautifulPeople.com revealed that only 12 percent of British men and 15 percent of their female cohorts were accepted by the prettiest online community in the world. This compares rather desperately with the 65 percent of Swedish males who enter this refined paradise and 76 percent of Norwegian women.

The site went live around the world just a couple of weeks ago and so far 83 percent of those who have attempted entry have failed to satisfy the bouncers.

Oh, did I mention that when you present yourself at BeautifulPeople.com's doors you have 48 hours to impress with your deeply ingrained pulchritude and your pulsating profile before you are voted in or out?

BeautifulPeople.com's managing director, Greg Hodge, told the Telegraph: "It hurts me. I'm British."

I am concerned, as I often am, for the Brits.

They donate so many pretty actors and actresses to the world--Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller, Ian McKellen, Judi Dench, Michael Gambon--that one wonders if they are using their theatrical greats to cover up for some serious national genetic deficiencies.

One can only appeal to the British government to launch an immediate campaign in all media. The government should spend some of its vast advertising resources in encouraging its most striking citizens to put their finest jaws and fingers forward and apply for membership to this site.

National pride is at stake. And if the British can substantially increase their presence on BeautifulPeople.com, it might be the start of yet another British cultural renaissance.

Correction at 7:25 a.m. PST November 12: This article incorrectly stated the percentages of consumers planning to use social media and mobile phones to assist in their holiday shopping. Seventeen percent of consumers who were surveyed plan to use social media to help them shop, and 19 percent plan to use their mobile phones.

If you're looking for just the right gift for Aunt Sally, you may find yourself turning to social networks and your mobile phone this holiday-shopping season.

More consumers expect that these two aspects of technology will help lead the way this year, according to a recent survey from consulting firm Deloitte.

Deloitte, which surveyed more 10,000 consumers for its 24th annual holiday-shopping survey, drillled down on technology's effect on buying habits by releasing new statistics on Wednesday.

The survey found that 17 percent of consumers plan to use social media during the holidays. Of that 17 percent chunk, 53 percent plan to use social media to research gift ideas, 52 percent intend to check the wish lists of relatives and friends on social networks, and 60 percent plan to hunt for discounts and sales using social networks.

Mobile phones are also becoming a tool for bargain-hungry shoppers.

Among those surveyed, 19 percent plan to use their mobile phones to assist in holiday shopping. Of that 19 percent chunk, 55 percent expect to use their phones to find store locations, 45 percent to research prices, 40 percent to seek product information, 32 percent to find discounts, and 25 percent to buy a holiday gift.

The good, old Internet still rates as a top spot for holiday shoppers, with 22 percent saying they'll shop primarily online this year and 44 percent expecting to use a coupon they find online.

Online research is big for key purchases, with 39 percent saying they read reviews of stores or products written by other consumers and 34 percent indicating that such online reviews influence their buying decisions more than advertising.

The relationship between brick-and-mortar stores and their Web sites seems to be symbiotic. Among those questioned, 65 percent said they've purchased an item online after finding it in a store or catalog, while 78 percent said they've bought a product in a store after seeing it on the store's site.

"Consumers are turning to mobile, online and social media during their entire holiday shopping experience," Stacy Janiak, a Deloitte vice chairman, said in a statement. "Retailers should consider harnessing this activity to turn browsers into buyers with one-click access to coupons, promotions and purchasing tools. This year's leaner in-store inventories may also open the door for retailers to lure customers to their online channels where it is easier to access inventory, no matter where it is located."

Commissioned by Deloitte, the survey was conducted online by an independent research firm between September 24 and October 2 and included responses from 10,878 consumers.

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 always-impressive Boy Genius Report has gotten its hands on a copy of Verizon and Google's newest commercial for the Droid. The commercial's called Stealth, and it's rather amazing, even though it doesn't tell us much about the Motorola handset that's set to drop Friday.

Mysterious and well-shot, the commercial should start running on TV this week, according to BGR. We're guessing you'll see it first during Tuesday night's premiere of "V" on ABC, or maybe during the World Series. With something this high budget you'd expect Verizon to put it in front of as many eyes as possible. We'll be watching the skies on 11/6.

There are many ways of showing respect to those you don't actually respect.

So it's touching to see that Apple has not only produced a few "Get A Mac" ads to darken the hearts of those about to upgrade to Windows 7, but has also donned its Wellington boots, gone down on its knees, and offered a dig in the grubby world of search.

I am grateful to The Next Web, who discovered that Cupertino has been throwing a few grenades into Google searches such as "Download Windows 7" and "Windows 7 download."

(Credit: The Next Web)

While one naturally expects to see ads for Microsoft stores adorning these searches, Apple has slipped in ads that suggest the best way to upgrade to Windows 7 is to actually purchase something from the Apple family.

Some might find it amusing simply that Apple is using such a tactic. But perhaps others will be a little disappointed that the wording for the ad is so straight. No jibes. No subtle suggestions that Windows 7 is merely a Manchurian macrame version of Vista. Not even a hint that Windows 7 will make you more miserable than eggnog ice tea.

How sad.