Insider Chatter by Donna Bogatin

PayPerPost CEO Ted Murphy is stirring up a “Posties” revolt, spurring “everyday (i.e. PayPerPost) bloggers” to “write Google, and their Congressman.”

Just as Murphy took to the PayPerPost blog to lambast Google for “censorship” and a “monopolistic stranglehold on search and online advertisng,” however, Google’s fave presidential candidate, Barack Obama, was patting Google and its merry band of multi-millionaire Googlers on their backs during a mutual love fest cum personal political rally under the direction of CEO Eric Schmidt and team at the Googleplex.

Obama is the seventh candidate hoping to be the next president of the United States to make his or her campaign pilgimage to Mountain View. Bill Richardson undoubetdly still is sporting his scars from his “ultimate job interview,” as host Elliot Schrage, VP Global Communications and Public Affairs, led a visceral interrogation of the Governor, spurring Silicon Valley media to cheerfully portray Richardson’s performance as “awkward” and “bumbling.”

Schrage was quoted for condescendingly retorting to his guest, Governor Richardson: “Our nutritionist may end up running for president.”

Barack Obama was welcomed as the favorite Google son, though, with the Official Google Public Policy Blog fawning over the Congressman as the defacto honorary Googler in Chief. Obama has himself to thank, he put in a rocket scientist worthy performance, prepared even to “have a ready answer for a standard Google engineering question.”

Obama also proved himself worthy of the hefty Googler political contributions coming his way: The Obama “technology platform” is a shamelessy pro-Google one.

Moral of the Obama-PayPerPost story? Murphy ought to encourage his “Posties” to “write Obama,” rather than their “congressmen” about any evil Google doing!

What are the alleged Google bad deeds, according to Murphy? Google may have revamped its own proprietary way of evaluating Web page quality for its own use in its own proprietary systems, i.e. the mighty PageRank.

Murphy is calling for a revolt against Google because not only does he believe his PayPerPost blog network is potentially impacted by prospective potential changes in “free” traffic referred by private company Google’s search engine changes, but Murphy has himself used Google’s private, proprietary PageRank calculations as currency to sell his own blog advertising products, characterized by him as “attractive alternatives” to Google AdSense.

Murphy may be able to make a case against Google, nevertheless. After all, Google flaunts that its mission is to “organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and usefull” and “Posties” posts are decidely part of the “world’s information”!

Murphy is not helping his anti-Google campaign, though, by proudly taking advantage of “Google Custom Search” to power the PayPerPost blog.

PLUS: Google’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’: AdWords Inflation AND Google: U.S. Taxpayers To Finance GOOG Riches

PLUS: Paglo CEO ‘Nuts’ Over FREE ‘Google For IT’: INTERVIEW

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

YAY Google? Once again, $200 billion plus market cap Google envelopes its mission to gain cost-free access to and control of ALL the world’s information at Google.com–so it may sell high-priced, high margin ads against it–as a benevolent, altruistic effort to make the world a better place.

Google’s latest shrewd GOOG-centric maneuver has Senator Lieberman introducing a bill to amend the E-Government Act of 2002 seeking to reauthorize appropriations, and for other purposes.

The public facing PR arm of the high-powered Google Washington DC lobby machine–aka Google Public Policy Blog–waxes poetic about how it is “working to make publicly available government information more accessible to the public” and commends Lieberman’s Senate efforts to “help make government more searchable.”

While hailing the need for U.S. government transparency, however, Google itself is not engaging in political transparency.

Google does not disclose that its lobbying of elected U.S. government officials to require federal agencies to configure U.S. taxpayer financed systems to the optimal advantage of for-profit corporation Google may result in U.S. taxpayers funding the market growth of Google, to the advantage of the massive corporation’s shareholders.

Google is doing all in its power to ensure that the U.S. government conducts government by Google rules, underscoring that the bill requires federal agencies to ensure their compliance with Google-centric “best practices” for optimal Web “crawling” and directs the Office of Management and Budget to report anually to Congress on agencies’ progress in making U.S. Governement Websites Google-friendly.

In other Google words, Google aims to make sure that U.S. taxpayers are footing the bill to make Google.com the world’s one and only go-to destination for accessing their own information–and thereby make AdWords even more expensive for advertisers and even more profitable for Google.

What’s more, the Googleplex triumperate–Schmidt, Brin & Page–will hold the U.S. Government to the fire, on behalf of GOOG shareholders.

MORE ON GOOGLE U.S. GOVERNMENT RULES: The Next President of the U.S. Answers to Google AND
Google CEO Schmidt: Anti-Microsoft Lawyers Good, Viacom Lawyer in Chief Bad AND
Google to World: AdWords Need Political Freedom AND
Google on Government, Schools: Google Search to the Rescue AND
Google Masters Art of Influence Peddling AND
Cisco to Google: Get Real! AND
Eric Schmidt: Google Cures What Ails the World AND
How Google Library Displaces Librarians

ALSO: Google’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’: AdWords Inflation

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Henry Blodget to Mary Meeker: oh no you didn’t! Issue a Morgan Stanley research report on a company that was “exaggerated, unwarranted, or lacked a reasonable basis,” as the SEC says I did for Merrill Lynch.

Blodget gleefully skewers Internet bubble cohort Meeker for being too “bullish” on Google due to math errors, although in admonishing Meeker’s calculations, Blodget posted some wrong numbers of his own. Of course, in the Blodget view of the world, HIS wrong numbers are merely “typos,” Mary, though, quite contrary.

Blodget is well versed in spinning himself out of valuation binds, and seeking to rewrite Internet history, as I analyze in a skewer of my own: Henry Blodget Has Internet Boom Lessons For NBC

It is obviously ironic that Blodget would blow a multi-billion dollar Internet bubble over valuation whistle on fellow bubble blower Meeker, as Blodget had the SEC whistle blown on him for analyst conduct unbecoming.

Litigation Release No. 18115 / April 28, 2003

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Henry M. Blodget, 03 CV 2947 (WHP) (S.D.N.Y.)

SEC SUES MERRILL LYNCH AND HENRY M. BLODGET FOR RESEARCH ANALYST CONFLICTS OF INTEREST FIRM AND BLODGET TO SETTLE WITH SEC, NASD, AND NYSE

The Commission’s Complaints allege that:

Blodget aided and abetted Merrill Lynch’s fraudulent research on GoTo.com. Further, Merrill Lynch and Blodget published research on five other companies [24/7 Media, Inc.; LifeMinders, Inc.; Homestore.com, Inc.; Excite@Home; and Internet Capital Group, Inc.] that were not based on principles of fair dealing and good faith and did not provide a sound basis for evaluating facts, contained exaggerated or unwarranted claims, and/or contained opinions for which there was no reasonable basis.

In the words of Tracy Pride Stoneman, securities lawyer, on Blodget, Meeker and Internet booms:

With Henry Blodget and Mary Meeker pushing tech and Jack Grubman pumping telecom to their brokers and the investing public, it is not happenstance that millions of investors ended up concentrated in volatile, speculative securities. The sad reality is that millions of investors not only paid for this advice in the form of commissions and fees, but they also paid for it with their life savings.

The SEC on Blodget’s penalties:

In his settlement, Blodget has agreed to pay $2 million in penalties and an additional $2 million disgorgement, all of which will be placed into a distribution fund for the benefit of customers of Merrill Lynch. In the SEC action, Blodget also has agreed to a federal court order that will enjoin him from future violations of the federal securities laws and NASD and NYSE rules. Blodget also has agreed to be barred from associating with any broker, dealer, or investment adviser.

Beware Blodget AND Meeker (their math, of course).

ALSO: GPhone Frenzy and Google’s New Risk: Corporate Communication Snafus

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Why are Viacom and NBC Universal seeking to make their DMCA opinions known to Judge Howard Lloyd in the matter of IO Group v. Veoh Networks via a “amici curiae” brief? Because the outcome ”may have an impact on the numerous lawsuits pending against YouTube, Grouper, Bolt, and other Internet Websites that operate similarly to Veoh.”

Viacom has a $1 billion lawsuit in progress against Google’s YouTube for “massive copyright infringement.” NBC has been a good cop, bad cop Google tease; NBC enjoys the fruits of YouTube promotion, while taking every opportunity to attack its DMCA fueled business model, without intitiating a direct lawsuit on its own behalf, however.

Viacom and NBC assert they “have an interest in “the development of the law of intellectual property generally, and particularly with respect ot the DMCA and its application to services such as Veoh”:

Viacom and NBC have a “direct, specific, and tangible interest” in:

Whether Veoh’s activities, and those of Internet Websites that operate in a manner similar to Veoh, are entitled to the protections of the “safe harbor” of Section 513(c) of the DMCA.

They are not, as Viacom and NBC seek to prove:

Many of Viacom’s and NBCU’s most valuable copyrighted works have been copied, performed, and disseminated without authorization by video-sharing Websites such as Veoh, YouTube and others. Viacom and NBCU have a strong interest in preserving the strength and viability of all of their legal rights and remedies in response to such conduct.

In WikiYou to Aaron Cohen: ‘YOU Screwed Over BOLT! Not once but twice!’ I cite my interview with Cohen in Februrary when he believed he could save Bolt from disintegrating due to copyright infringement liability: “2007 will be the year in which the Internet community and traditional copyright holders find economic partnerships that are mutually beneficial,” he told me.

Cohen was unable to find such financial harmony for Bolt, after all; His turnaround vision unraveled. Bolt.com is history. Bolt has “ceased” operations and its creditors are being redirected to a third party advisor of  “secured and unsecured creditors.”

All online video sharing sites fueled by no need to pay for content, DMCA driven business models, risk the same fate as Bolt, even YouTube.

ALSO: Google Demands NBC Universal Spread YouTube Fair Use Gospel

PLUS: How Google Abuses DMCA, NOT Universal Music: Sorry EFF & ‘Mom’ and Zuckerberg Message: Facebook Resistance Futile, Billions of Stubborn Email Accounts Targeted

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Facebook rules? Now, more than ever. Mark Zuckerberg even has Google at Facebook attention.

DIGG TOO.

Remember when Digg’s Kevin Rose and Jay Adelson promised to “go down fighting” instead of “bowing down to a bigger company”?

“If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying” Rose boasted in defending Digg’s right to host HD-DVD encryption key code. His infamous (but belated) “Digg This: 09-f9-11-02…blog battle cry for digging democracy still stands.

Was Rose’s InDiggnation but a one time thing though? “We won’t delete stories containg the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be,” were Rose’s leaked code must be free fighting words in May. 

In face of Facebook’s legal threats regarding its leaked code, however, Digg has no such free the code stance.

Gone is Digg’s democracy of news defiance, in favor of Facebook’s defiant legal threats.

Facebook Legal to Digg re Digger submissions at Digg “Facebook source code leaked, Actual PHP code”:

If these materials are not expeditiously removed, we reserve the right to pursue all legal remedies available to us, including seeking damages and injunctive relief.

Digg response to Facebook? Compliance.

No Digg news democracy problem? Digg is even selling ads against its capitulation announcement! Digg ads (still) by Google, a fellow Facebook capitualtor.

Google, of course, is an old hand at firing off DMCA takedown notices, a skill perfected at its YouTube no need to pay for the copyright content of others “business.”

Google’s Blogger, the Google property where Facebook’s not so secure code was proudly displayed, has a well honed “Digital Millenium Copyright Act” do’s and don’ts in place and “Facebook (not so coding) Secrets” has gotten the don’t treatment: The Facebook code is gone.

Facebook is trying to clean the Web of its dirty little coding secrets.

When will Facebook really save face though and come clean on why big bad “bugs” are wreaking havoc at the not so safe Zuckerberg haven?

SEE Zuckerberg Insecurity Exposed: A Facebook Bug Attacks Again

ALSO: USA Today Anti Social Media? Gannett CEO Warns Staffers of Blogger Speculation

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN

Henry Blodget can NEVER live down the tough lessons he learned “back in the first Internet boom.” the one HE helped fuel!

Nevertheless, he won’t stop trying.

At his “old” blog, “The Internet Outsider,” Blodget comes clean on his NOT welcome in the securities industry, EVER, status:

Internet Outsider provides informal analysis of Internet companies, finance, trends, and third-party research. The site is edited by Henry Blodget, a former Wall Street Internet analyst.

IMPORTANT!: Internet Outsider is a publication, not an investment advisory service. We do not offer personalized investment advice.

Henry was a Managing Director and Senior Analyst at Oppenheimer & Company and Merrill Lynch & Co.Henry was a party to an industry-wide regulatory complaint about conflicts of interest between the research and banking divisions of brokerage firms. He participated in the global settlement and is precluded from working in the securities industry.

Not so, however, at his new blog, co-founded with fellow Internet 1.0 veterans Kevin Ryan and Dwight Merriman, “Silicon Alley Insider.”

Blodget not only no longer advises readers that he “is precluded from working in the securities industry,” he cockily aims to rewite “first Internet boom” history; Handily ignoring the havoc he helped wreak, Blodget seeks to paint Eliot Spitzer the villain:

From 1994-2001, Henry was a technology analyst at Prudential Securities, Oppenheimer & Co., and Merrill Lynch. He ran Merrill’s global Internet research practice and was ranked the No. 1 Internet and eCommerce analyst on Wall Street by Institutional Investor. He was later keelhauled by then-Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in a wide-ranging complaint about conflicts of interest between the research and banking divisions of brokerage firms (for details, please see sec.gov.)

It is not surprising that Blodget is trying to live down his Intertnet past. Even Blodget, though, can not rewrite history.

Tracy Pride Stoneman, securities lawyer, on Blodget, Meeker and Internet booms:

With Henry Blodget and Mary Meeker pushing tech and Jack Grubman pumping telecom to their brokers and the investing public, it is not happenstance that millions of investors ended up concentrated in volatile, speculative securities. The sad reality is that millions of investors not only paid for this advice in the form of commissions and fees, but they also paid for it with their life savings.

Blodget is now giving Internet boom “advice” to public corporations, free of charge. In response to New York Times reporting on NBC-iVillage, Blodget offers NBC a handy four-step lesson in how to realize its dreams:

1. Viewers don’t visit web sites just because you promote them on TV.
2. Don’t decide to move Manhattan staff to New Jersey.
3. Don’t create bad TV shows to promote web sites–viewers hate bad TV shows.
4. Don’t panic and buy web properties just because Rupert Murdoch hit a home run with MySpace.

Pithy perhaps, but not productive.

The promise of integerated TV to Web and vice versa promotion is yet to be fully realized, but it is a real, driving force behind YouTube AND the networks. CBS Interactive’s recruitment of top Google exec, Patrick Keane, case in point.

Keane was named Executive Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer at CBS Interactive, in February, after serving as Head of Advertising Sales Strategy at Google.

Keane’s role at CBS Interactive is to “implement systems to market and sell its content on a growing variety of emerging media platforms and expanding the CBS roster of advertisers.”

Specifically, Keane helps CBS “monetize new inventory generated by next-generation platforms.”

While a vice president, Jupiter, Keane extolled “the value of TV promotion in building a Web media business.’ While at Google, however, he helped spread an opposite gospel, preaching the value of YouTube promotion in building a TV network business.

Don’t aspire to be Rupert Murdoch, either, Blodget concludes. REALLY?

While Blodget is precluded from working in the securities industry for conduct unbecoming, Murdoch continues to work his media magic in the world of publicly traded media conglomerates.

SEE: Norman Pearlstine ‘Excited’ by a Rupert Murdoch Led Dow Jones and Qmecom Mass Personalized Video Ad Platform: Yahoo SmartAds, Digitas Beware

ALSO: Why Google Will NEVER Pay For a Local Ad Sales Force

CONTACT DONNA BOGATIN