4 ms·

Google are accidental PR geniuses. The whole 'do no evil' thing was instinctive PR, not really thought out in the den of some PR genius. They made their brand

Google are accidental PR geniuses. The whole 'do no evil' thing was instinctive PR, not really thought out in the den of some PR genius. They made their brand synonymous with the word 'search' - my god man, that's worth billions, minimum. They've done it in an oddly naive 'authentic' way, by I think truly believing their own schtick, and drinking their own coolaid. And I'm not nearly as cynical as the above posters, Google is way more ethnical that most companies. My god man, if Google wanted to they could change electoral outcomes, simply form a massive hedge fund and beat everyone at investing, do evil things the likes of which we've never hard of. I'm constantly impressed by how actually objective they've been about a lot of stuff given 99% of other CEO's would have abused the data position a long, long time ago. Not to say they are perfect, but ... compared to most, they have been pretty good. Though that's changing. They've done it without any hardcore ad spends, or any real classical marketing attempts to make us believe things one way or another, so kudos on them. But yes, they are kind of bad at most classical parts of marketing, communications ... heck even some kinds of product management. But the 'Engineers first' mentality got them where they are, I'm going to doubt that part of their DNA will change.

ars 8y ago
Do no evil was a reaction to Microsoft. I don't know how old you are, but back in the 1990's/2000's Microsoft actively tried to destroy/takeover the internet (in favor of desktop and/or vendor lockin), and Google's "Do no evil" was a reaction to that: A promise to grow the internet. And they kept that promise! Look at the internet today. Microsoft is no longer "evil", and the internet is fine, so "do no evil" is no longer necessary. People assumed do not evil had something to do with privacy, or this or that, or lots of other things people read into it. It didn't. It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  I'm old enough to be an Engineer living 1k away from Google when it was born. I'm not sure if I believe DNE was exactly about Microsoft, rather a more general mantra. In 98' the founders were running around giving talks about how 'advertising was ruining the internet' which wasn't really an MS things. So I think MS was just one factor, but yes, most don't remember a time when they were so dominant.
- repsilat 8y ago
  > "do no evil" Not that it matters too much, but the motto was the much less ambitious (and more achievable) "Don't be evil".
- auslander 8y ago
  > they kept that promise! Look at the internet today I am looking. What I see is it being devoured by Google. Search 99%, Chrome 80%, private email 90%, Google accounts for work, for school kids, and Google Analytics tracking in every web site.
  - metildaa 8y ago
    Citations & context? Your numbers seem unrealistic, Google does not operate 90% of email accounts. Search is definitely seeing erosion courtesy of competitors that have gotten more competent and numerous in the last few years.
    - auslander 8y ago
      > does not operate 90% of email accounts I said private email accounts.
      - metildaa 8y ago
        Outlook.com, Mail.com, Yahoo, AOL and numerous others have significant marketshare among personal accounts. Your comment claims these private email accounts don't exists.
- albedoa 8y ago
  > It didn't. It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet. The Wikipedia article [1] presents the motto (which is actually "Don't be evil") as being much more than that, from its origin and throughout its use. On second look, it doesn't even use the adjective "open" or mention standards. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil
- int_19h 8y ago
  > It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet. So, where's the open standard for Hangouts? (It used to be XMPP when it was Google Talk. But it's not anymore. And even back when, it wasn't federated, contrary to "the open Internet.") In general, it feels like you're right, but only in a sense that Google did drive open standards - to bludgeon Microsoft. Which it did quite successfully, and we're all better off for it. But now that they have their own empire, they're not so keen on all that open stuff anymore, whenever they have a monopoly position to abuse.
robin_reala 8y ago
Chrome advertising was absolutely everywhere for a good year, multiple major TV commercials and billboard campaigns in the UK at least.
- reitanqild 8y ago
  Yep. And it was abusing their dominant position in search to kill competing browsers. I don't know why they haven't been punished for that yet after the successful taming of Microsoft some years ago.

ars 8y ago

Do no evil was a reaction to Microsoft. I don't know how old you are, but back in the 1990's/2000's Microsoft actively tried to destroy/takeover the internet (in favor of desktop and/or vendor lockin), and Google's "Do no evil" was a reaction to that: A promise to grow the internet. And they kept that promise! Look at the internet today. Microsoft is no longer "evil", and the internet is fine, so "do no evil" is no longer necessary. People assumed do not evil had something to do with privacy, or this or that, or lots of other things people read into it. It didn't. It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
I'm old enough to be an Engineer living 1k away from Google when it was born. I'm not sure if I believe DNE was exactly about Microsoft, rather a more general mantra. In 98' the founders were running around giving talks about how 'advertising was ruining the internet' which wasn't really an MS things. So I think MS was just one factor, but yes, most don't remember a time when they were so dominant.
repsilat 8y ago
> "do no evil" Not that it matters too much, but the motto was the much less ambitious (and more achievable) "Don't be evil".
auslander 8y ago
> they kept that promise! Look at the internet today I am looking. What I see is it being devoured by Google. Search 99%, Chrome 80%, private email 90%, Google accounts for work, for school kids, and Google Analytics tracking in every web site.
- metildaa 8y ago
  Citations & context? Your numbers seem unrealistic, Google does not operate 90% of email accounts. Search is definitely seeing erosion courtesy of competitors that have gotten more competent and numerous in the last few years.
  - auslander 8y ago
    > does not operate 90% of email accounts I said private email accounts.
    - metildaa 8y ago
      Outlook.com, Mail.com, Yahoo, AOL and numerous others have significant marketshare among personal accounts. Your comment claims these private email accounts don't exists.
albedoa 8y ago
> It didn't. It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet. The Wikipedia article [1] presents the motto (which is actually "Don't be evil") as being much more than that, from its origin and throughout its use. On second look, it doesn't even use the adjective "open" or mention standards. 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t_be_evil
int_19h 8y ago
> It was just one thing: Open standards and promoting the open internet. So, where's the open standard for Hangouts? (It used to be XMPP when it was Google Talk. But it's not anymore. And even back when, it wasn't federated, contrary to "the open Internet.") In general, it feels like you're right, but only in a sense that Google did drive open standards - to bludgeon Microsoft. Which it did quite successfully, and we're all better off for it. But now that they have their own empire, they're not so keen on all that open stuff anymore, whenever they have a monopoly position to abuse.

robin_reala 8y ago

Chrome advertising was absolutely everywhere for a good year, multiple major TV commercials and billboard campaigns in the UK at least.

reitanqild 8y ago
Yep. And it was abusing their dominant position in search to kill competing browsers. I don't know why they haven't been punished for that yet after the successful taming of Microsoft some years ago.