7 ms·

So what is this? A big PR piece so we'll feel all sorry for 'that poor Google CEO that's got such a tough job'? (first paragraph, he talks about how he's "not

by ColanR 9y ago

So what is this? A big PR piece so we'll feel all sorry for 'that poor Google CEO that's got such a tough job'? (first paragraph, he talks about how he's "not good at multitasking", and some things are "difficult".) At least, that's what I'm thinking after reading the article. it kinda makes sense, too, that Google is looking for a bit of a breather after this much coming against them. Still, I think the stuff they're dealing with is pretty much what they asked for. - ads next to "unseemly" youtube videos: this is their core business, and in every other place you buy ads it matters where those ads are placed and who sees them and in what context. This problem is exactly what Google is expected to solve. - gender inequality: this seems to come with the territory. every other CEO in the US, not to mention North America & Europe (etc.) is dealing with this too. - staff protest about Trump immigration policy: the CEO was on their side. In his words, "the fight will continue." He doesn't get to say this is a headache he's got to deal with when he takes that kind of approach. - a big regulatory fine. From what I've heard, it's almost impossible that Google wasn't rather careless in letting this happen. 'ask forgiveness, not permission' seems to be a mantra that Google follows, and this seems to be an instance where they're now asking forgiveness. - and finally, Google is 'too big' and people are worried about its power. "boo hoo, we were too successful." [sources for everything are in the main article or linked from it] Deal with it, Sundar Pichai. You've got the same job every other CEO has got, and the same pressure. Buck up.

autokad 9y ago
agree. i wouldnt be surprised if they weren't paid by google, doing something for a google employee, or invested in google.
- ocdtrekkie 9y ago
  Google does not pay for articles, AFAIK. However, having a high profile individual like Sundar Pichai interview with you has huge benefits for cash flow anyways: Your ad revenue will skyrocket, because other major sites will also cite you and link to you as they also post the story. Google does not have to pay a site for the site to profit from promoting Google. The big thing is, Google will not grant it's exclusive interview treatment to news sources which are heavily critical of them, which means that any news site or blog which gets interviews with Googlers isn't going to risk that revenue source by getting on the Google press folks' bad side. This is why sites like The Verge which regularly get insider treatment, and interviews with Sundar Pichai, Matias Duarte, and Astro Teller will never really write a truly critical article about Google.
ForRealsies 9y ago
Expect more PR articles for FAANG companies in the coming months. Elephant in the room: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/356170-trump-will-nominate-dc-antitrust-lawyer-to-chair-ftc http://thehill.com/policy/technology/356170-trump-will-nomin...
- sjg007 9y ago
  Trump probably has Google’s number because it was a big Clinton supporter. Thiel even referred to Google as a utility. I would say Facebook would join them but Thiel is on its board.
  - spacemanmatt 9y ago
    Microsoft has been behind all sorts of anti-Google lobbying to have them regulated as a utility, enforce anti-trust regulations against them in EU, etc. Anyone court watcher or MS watcher around since the late 90s knows they are entirely deserving of suspicion.
cisanti 9y ago
Indeed, the public and regulators are not pushing enough, the floor needs to be hotter for the CEO, whoever is in charge. Google has lost its cute startup image long time ago and people have realized companies are never out there for the social / greater good, just for profits. It's time to break up Google.
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago
  > Google has lost its cute startup image long time ago and people have realized companies are never out there for the social / greater good, just for profits. It's more than that. Their behavior has changed. Some years ago everyone was on their side because they were fighting for network neutrality and building Google Fiber and supporting Linux and providing Chilling Effects links to notify users of DMCA censorship and generally sticking it to the MPAA/Comcast/Microsoft. These days they're not only not really doing that anymore, now they're misidentifying videos with YouTube Content ID and infecting web standards with EME and tracking everyone much more comprehensively than they used to. People only think you're on their side as long as you continue to do things that show you're on their side.
  - ino 9y ago
    Aren't they also accomplices on the net neutrality attacks? They could stop companies from advertising "free" Youtube if they were for net neutrality. Same goes for Facebook and others, of course. some examples from the 3 big operators in Portugal: http://www.moche.pt/tarifarios/moche-legend/ http://www.moche.pt/tarifarios/moche-legend/ https://www.yorn.net/yorn/tarifario/yornx.html https://www.yorn.net/yorn/tarifario/yornx.html http://www.wtf.pt http://www.wtf.pt
  - majormajor 9y ago
    Those things are what gets HN riled up, but none of those things are noticed or cared about by mass consumer sentiment. That's driven by stuff like political stances, ad and content moderation practices, search result ordering, and other much less technical concerns.
    - 9y ago
dalbasal 9y ago
That was fun to read. :) I disagree with first part though, "don't write (like) this." Bloomberg's writing style is a little of old fashioned corporate sounding, but that's just style. It's also OK to write from a certain pov, including a ceo's. I agree with the rest. All comes with the territory. Good reminder how nuts that territory is.
- ColanR 9y ago
  Glad you enjoyed it. :) I sometimes to use parentheses to indicate rabbit-trails of thought, if that's what your comment was referring to. And yes, I guess it is pretty nuts to be running a big company. Not that many of us would know anything about that. :P
rajacombinator 9y ago
Poor guy might have to "spend more time with his family" and collect a 9 figure golden parachute. ;(
poj77 9y ago
Pfft...corporations and biz schools can't produce people who can solve these kind of problems, therefore we will see exactly what happened to HP, IBM, Sun, Nokia etc happen to Google. There is a long line of pointless CEOs that all these companies produced that nobody remembers today. Why? Cause they are programmed like robots to believe in infinite growth.

by ColanR 9y ago

autokad 9y ago

agree. i wouldnt be surprised if they weren't paid by google, doing something for a google employee, or invested in google.

ocdtrekkie 9y ago
Google does not pay for articles, AFAIK. However, having a high profile individual like Sundar Pichai interview with you has huge benefits for cash flow anyways: Your ad revenue will skyrocket, because other major sites will also cite you and link to you as they also post the story. Google does not have to pay a site for the site to profit from promoting Google. The big thing is, Google will not grant it's exclusive interview treatment to news sources which are heavily critical of them, which means that any news site or blog which gets interviews with Googlers isn't going to risk that revenue source by getting on the Google press folks' bad side. This is why sites like The Verge which regularly get insider treatment, and interviews with Sundar Pichai, Matias Duarte, and Astro Teller will never really write a truly critical article about Google.

ForRealsies 9y ago

Expect more PR articles for FAANG companies in the coming months. Elephant in the room: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/356170-trump-will-nominate-dc-antitrust-lawyer-to-chair-ftc http://thehill.com/policy/technology/356170-trump-will-nomin...

sjg007 9y ago
Trump probably has Google’s number because it was a big Clinton supporter. Thiel even referred to Google as a utility. I would say Facebook would join them but Thiel is on its board.
- spacemanmatt 9y ago
  Microsoft has been behind all sorts of anti-Google lobbying to have them regulated as a utility, enforce anti-trust regulations against them in EU, etc. Anyone court watcher or MS watcher around since the late 90s knows they are entirely deserving of suspicion.

cisanti 9y ago

Indeed, the public and regulators are not pushing enough, the floor needs to be hotter for the CEO, whoever is in charge. Google has lost its cute startup image long time ago and people have realized companies are never out there for the social / greater good, just for profits. It's time to break up Google.

AnthonyMouse 9y ago
> Google has lost its cute startup image long time ago and people have realized companies are never out there for the social / greater good, just for profits. It's more than that. Their behavior has changed. Some years ago everyone was on their side because they were fighting for network neutrality and building Google Fiber and supporting Linux and providing Chilling Effects links to notify users of DMCA censorship and generally sticking it to the MPAA/Comcast/Microsoft. These days they're not only not really doing that anymore, now they're misidentifying videos with YouTube Content ID and infecting web standards with EME and tracking everyone much more comprehensively than they used to. People only think you're on their side as long as you continue to do things that show you're on their side.
- ino 9y ago
  Aren't they also accomplices on the net neutrality attacks? They could stop companies from advertising "free" Youtube if they were for net neutrality. Same goes for Facebook and others, of course. some examples from the 3 big operators in Portugal: http://www.moche.pt/tarifarios/moche-legend/ http://www.moche.pt/tarifarios/moche-legend/ https://www.yorn.net/yorn/tarifario/yornx.html https://www.yorn.net/yorn/tarifario/yornx.html http://www.wtf.pt http://www.wtf.pt
- majormajor 9y ago
  Those things are what gets HN riled up, but none of those things are noticed or cared about by mass consumer sentiment. That's driven by stuff like political stances, ad and content moderation practices, search result ordering, and other much less technical concerns.
  - 9y ago

dalbasal 9y ago

That was fun to read. :) I disagree with first part though, "don't write (like) this." Bloomberg's writing style is a little of old fashioned corporate sounding, but that's just style. It's also OK to write from a certain pov, including a ceo's. I agree with the rest. All comes with the territory. Good reminder how nuts that territory is.

ColanR 9y ago
Glad you enjoyed it. :) I sometimes to use parentheses to indicate rabbit-trails of thought, if that's what your comment was referring to. And yes, I guess it is pretty nuts to be running a big company. Not that many of us would know anything about that. :P

rajacombinator 9y ago

Poor guy might have to "spend more time with his family" and collect a 9 figure golden parachute. ;(

poj77 9y ago

Pfft...corporations and biz schools can't produce people who can solve these kind of problems, therefore we will see exactly what happened to HP, IBM, Sun, Nokia etc happen to Google. There is a long line of pointless CEOs that all these companies produced that nobody remembers today. Why? Cause they are programmed like robots to believe in infinite growth.