COMMENT
Google's algorithm of life: rejoice and be wary.
By THOMAS HAZLETT
827 words
24 May 2007
London Ed1
Page 15
English
(c) 2007 The Financial Times Limited. All rights
reserved
Tomorrow just arrived and it is about
time. How many George Orwell novels or Ray Bradbury
stories has it taken us? At long last, we may soon be
able to click on the electronic screen to find out what
is in our heads.
Thank you, Google. You are aiming to
organise what so many of us have confused - namely, our
lives. Flummoxed by the choices and complications of
multi-dimensional reality, you are reducing it all to a
simple computational problem. And you remember to do
what the rest of us have been forgetting: save the
receipts.
Also e-mails, web surfing
destinations and e-searches. Keep a list of those, run a
few algorithms the size of Portugal, and presto:
optimisation problems solved. Careers, mates,
consumption, investment, leisure and spiritual
replenishment all laid out trim and tidy. Uncluttered,
just like the Google Search page. This is well beyond
our wildest.
To think that people are complaining.
They are unnerved that, after all these millennia, it
took a couple of geeks from California to get the rest
of us straightened out. They point to the massive
intrusion into our private lives that would be entailed
when a corporate behemoth, now valued at Dollars 150bn
(Pounds 76bn), stored so much information about our
choices, lifestyles and thoughts that it ended up
knowing quite a bit more about where we should be headed
than we do.
There is a point to the fear. New
information flows require some hard choices about whom
we trust. Intention-based advertising has led Google to
untold riches in financial markets, supplying a 21st
century death knell to the old advertising model. Those
banner ads of the internet, not to mention the
ubiquitous e-mail spams made lucrative by virtue of the
demand for male potency and hair restoration products,
are almost wholly eclipsed by the sensational efficiency
of pinpoint advertising, with news of what one might
actually want to purchase, as pioneered by Google
Search.
But that very progressive business
model is an invasion of privacy, if you are going to get
picky. Google knows that when you search "Orlando
hotels" you are a sitting duck for a rich raft of
commercial offers, just as if it was reading your mind.
Or your e-mails. Hence, when Gmail was introduced to
make that reading a bit easier for Google, the squawking
was intense. " Google is scanning your private e-mail to
locate the keywords that generate the ads," wrote Walter
Mossberg, the influential technology columnist, in The
Wall Street Journal. " Google is risking its reputation
for honesty."
A bill to ban the service passed the
California state senate, receiving only one dissenting
vote. Respected internet activists expressed outrage.
Google's executives were dumbfounded - particularly when
they saw that Gmail accounts, then tightly controlled
and hard to acquire, were trading on Ebay for Dollars
100. The company grasped the irony instantly. While its
reputation truly was at stake, it was offering
innovative services that consumers really wanted.
Intention-based advertising is revolutionary in its
efficiency. People flock to this environment. Gmail is
today a runaway hit.
At the same time, they will continue
flocking only so long as the price is right. If Google
fails to protect personal data from abuse, the company's
single most important asset goes up in smoke. Without
the reputational capital to do seamless business with
hundreds of millions of internet users, Google's profits
would go the way of the dotcom bubble.
Google Search, Gmail and myriad other
services are today intrusive data mining enterprises -
and extremely popular with customers. The company's
enormous capital resources, driven by Wall Street's
excitement over a media model that actually works, help
solve the consumers' conundrum. The share values of the
search giant can only tip-toe in the troposphere so long
as those hard disks remain protected. When Google scans
them to find what job listing we might like to see or
what spa we need to visit, we tend to be pretty happy.
Where standards slip and private information leaks to
unwanted purposes, or is sold to low-ball retailers, we
are all going to get crazy. We will take Google's equity
with us.
Google's marketing under the "Don't
be evil" theme is one of the last old-style types of
advertising slogan that still works. For customers and
shareholders alike. The rude awakening for many is that
they supposed that this was a different kind of company
and that the markets it opened were upside down from
others. They are finding that privacy, like other goods,
has trade-offs, and that even the purest of souls must
make hard choices.
The writer is professor of law and
economics at George Mason University, where he is
director of the Information Economy Project of the
National Center for Technology and Law