Twitter | Search | |
Stasys Bielinis
1/3 HUH?! 

 An NYT story about MSM lobbying body’s weird “study” with super clickbaity $4.7B number based on another questionable study by some little known consulting firm based on an off-hand remark by Marissa Mayer in 2008, 11 years ago ... ?
Marc Tracy / New York Times: News Media Alliance study, to be given to US House ahead of hearings, claims Google made $4.7B from the work of news publishers in 2018 via search, Google News
Mediagazer Mediagazer @mediagazer
Reply Retweet Like More
Stasys Bielinis Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
2/3 Released just ahead of the House hearings where it will serve as talking points for US House elected representatives to beat Google up and look good on TV and mainstream papers and news sites for the next few news cycles?
Reply Retweet Like
Stasys Bielinis Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
3/3 NYT asked no Qs about the issues with this study? Just the “Study: Google Made $4.7B Billion From the News Industry in 2018” headline? Conflict of interest, anyone? How does this lousy reported and edited thing helps counter the narrative prevalent on the right of MSM’s bias?
Reply Retweet Like
Stasys Bielinis Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
PS. If you are wondering where that original "Google earns $100M from GNews" number came from: From here: And that number is so easily debunked/challenged when it is used for the purpose of lobbying to levy tolls on Google:
Reply Retweet Like
BobPurvy Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
I worked at Google 11 1/2 years, including in Ads and Maps. News does NOT funnel searches to Google; what it does is keep anyone else from getting news traffic. A good bit of the time, the snippet is all you need. Furthermore ....
Reply Retweet Like
BobPurvy Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
Furthermore, Maps also loses money, but it's incredibly great PR. Always when I told people I worked in Maps, they would say "I love Google Maps!"
Reply Retweet Like
David Sanger, Photographer Jun 9
Replying to @Staska
do you have a link to the actual study ??
Reply Retweet Like
Stasys Bielinis Jun 9
Replying to @BobPurvy1
Not sure about a point you are making. 99% of time today dozens of online pubs write the same story up. E.g - Trump tweets. I go and search in GNews for "Trump Mexico Tariffs" Then I think - ah canceled, move on. Or - why/how?- click How do you calculate what $ to share ^^?
Reply Retweet Like
Stasys Bielinis Jun 10
Replying to @davidsanger
There is no link, yet. NYT got an exclusive preview. The full study and a link to the study should show up on Monday, NYT says (in the original article): ".... according to a study to be released on Monday by the News Media Alliance."
Reply Retweet Like
BobPurvy Jun 10
Replying to @Staska
You're right, Stasys. If Reuters stopped letting Google index their site, BBC or AP would step up and supply the exact same story. Too much competition, unfortunately. In the old days, media would have to pay AP or UPI to even know what happened.
Reply Retweet Like
BobPurvy Jun 10
Replying to @Staska
Just to amplify: Many Google products that SEEM unprofitable could be viewed as "blocking anyone else." In 2005, someone might have made video into a big business, but Google preempted them. Someone might have made online maps into a big business, but .... Same for news.
Reply Retweet Like
David Sanger, Photographer Jun 10
Replying to @Staska
Reply Retweet Like
David Sanger, Photographer Jun 10
Replying to @Staska
OK . aside from spurious extrapolation of the $100m Marissa Meyer figure from 2008, the report makes a huge mistake looking at total revenue instead of net income, thereby ignoring operating costs, research, administration, sales, marketing and tax expenses.
Reply Retweet Like
Josh Greenbaum Jun 10
Replying to @Staska @Google
So your point is... that is a victim here? They played no part in devaluing the news industry by effectively making its content free? They only supply News as a public service? Newspapers should be grateful that Google feeds them readers who click on ads? Just asking....
Reply Retweet Like
Stasys Bielinis Jun 10
Replying to @josheac @Google
No. I don't think Google is a victim. I think US pubs trying to get antitrust exemption so they can band together to compete with Google/FB on ads or at least get more leverage is a good effort. My problem was with atrocious quality of that NMA study and NYT's reporting on it
Reply Retweet Like
Dan Raile Jun 10
Replying to @Staska
So...two massive lobbying operations are squaring off in the NYT which is shading towards its own best interest? Kind of hard for me to find my outrage here
Reply Retweet Like