"The Search Party: Google squares off with its Capitol Hill critics" - Ken Auletta

Summary: "The Search Party: Google squares off with its Capitol Hill critics" is an article by Ken Auletta, published in early 2008 in The New Yorker. In this article, Auletta discusses Google's new presence in the political arena to an audience curious about Google's growing influence. Although Google was a multi-billion dollar company for several years in the early 21st century, Google was never very politically active. It was not until Google's founders realized the potential harm that could be done to their company by not having political influence that they decided to establish a substantial Washington, D.C. office. Google's stated mission as a company is "to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful” (1). The main problem with making "information" your company's main "product," is that other companies own most, if not all of that information, creating conflict. With Google's extension of their company beyond Search, they have caused alarm within several different industries. Many of these companies have called for an anti-trust case to be brought against Google, but no case has been substantiated thus far. Closely tied with Google's Search is their advertising: AdWords and AdSense. These extremely successful advertising efforts have allowed Google to nearly surpass the combined advertising revenues of the major television boradcast networks (NBC, ABC, CBS, & Fox). When Google wanted to acquire DoubleClick, an online advertising giant, anti-trust flags were waved, but eventually put down after Google successfully acquired this company in mid 2008 (a few months after this article was published) [Source]. Google CEO, Eric Schmidt, claims "the more Google knows about a user the better the search results" (4). Critics of Google worry that there is danger in a company that depends on advertising to collect so much data on consumers through their searches. In other words, many people worry about privacy issues with Google, but Google has taken steps to lessen the worry. Searches are stored on Google servers for 18 months (lessened from 24 months previously). The article claims that Google will need to manage itself as a company, deciding whether it will continue to get "you to what you want as fast as you can and getting out of the way ... or will it become 'a source of content, a platform, a destination?'” (5). Recently, Google has expressed interest in the cell phone market, but has yet to lead in this industry. Schmidt, in response to critics, argues that what "kills a company is not competition but arrogance. We control our fate” (7). Inquiry: Google is a company that is trying to take over the world, and they seem to be succeeding. It is hard to name a new media industry or market that Google does not influence. It is interesting comparing Google's image to other companies such as Microsoft. Microsoft, a technology company, states that its mission " is to enable people and businesses throughout the world to realize their full potential" [Source]. This mission does not sound much different from Google's mission, but yet Google is nearly revered as a company while Microsoft is just trying not to be hated. I would argue that Google is looked at differently by consumers because their products are generally viewed as free. From my personal experience, many people cite the high cost of software as a reason for their dislike of Microsoft. When you have a company like Google that is giving equivalent resources that are perceived as free, "free" will always win (in a popularity contest at least). Consumers would prefer to "pay" for software by the searches they perform and ads they see instead of a direct monetary transaction. Google's value lies most in what it is able to discern about its users. As the recent Google Super Bowl commercial displayed, our searches tell a story: Many consumers worry that this knowledge could be used in negative ways, but others point to Google's motto of "Don't be Evil," and trust that Google will not misuse this information. This trust is vital for Google's success as a company. Without consumer trust, Google will have nothing. This information that they gather is very valuable when speaking about advertising. As an example, Facebook has been valued at nearly $11 billion dollars, not because of its great success at turning a profit, but because investors know that information Facebook users put on their profiles is an advertiser's dream come true. Facebook, as well as Google, are able to use information about users to create targeted ads, making them more valuable to potential advertisers. Questions:

• Google is thriving in this new media world without an end in sight. Do you foresee a point in the future when Google will reach a "breaking point" because of their involvement in such a wide variety of industries? Or, does this scattered involvement ensure their success as a financially stable company for the future?

• Many consumers worry about the information that Google collects. Do you believe this worry is validated?

• Google is currently an 11 year old company, but yet their earnings rival the GDP of small nations. What do you believe made Google such a successful company in such a short amount of time?