I had a call from a nice gentleman working for Google called Shabhaz today. No, he wasnāt about to tell me that I wasnāt on the āfirst page of Googleā: he worked for Google My Business, where they want to verify businesses and suck them into the ecosystem, complete with dashboard and social features.
Iāve always ignored the postcards that come and the one time my curiosity was piqued, the blasted site didnāt work anyway. I canāt remember the specifics now, but I recall my usual reaction: āWhat Google says and what Google does are entirely different things.ā You come to expect it from US Big Tech.
I suppose if you ignore it for enough years, the Big G phones you.
I proceeded to tell Shabhaz all the reasons I hated (actually, thatās not strong enough a word) his firm, but kept repeating, āIām not angry at you, only at your employer.ā And words to the effect of, āA man has to make a living, so I donāt have a problem that you work for them, but this is a firm with highly dubious ethics.ā
He did say, āIf I had that experience, Iād hate them, too,ā and I had to correct him and expand on the stories: āItās not just about my experienceāitās all the things Google does that violate our privacy, not just mine, but everyoneās.ā
Nevertheless, you canāt stay angry at a guy who has had nothing to do with his bossesā incompetence, greed, avarice and tax avoidance, and is only trying to collect a pay cheque, so I agreed to help him out.
Of course, it didnāt work as planned, as updating the address leads to this:
The house has only been there since 1972, and Google Earth has it, but then we all know that Google Earth operates in some kind of parallel universeāparallel to even Google My Business, it seems. One day, I suspect Google will catch up with houses built in the 1970s.
But seriously, with three businesses all linked to my email address (Heaven knows how) I wonder if anyone has ever got any business through Google My Business.
Iāve been on Linkedin longer than most people I know and Iāve never received any work enquiries from it.
And Iāve yet to have anyone tell me that they found my business through Google, so Iām tempted to delete the listings for Jack Yan & Associates and Lucire from the My Business dashboard.
The thing is, I donāt want to read your reviews about my businesses on Google. I donāt want to risk getting piled on by unethical actors, which totally can happen in this day and age. If you want to reach us, thereās a good contact form with all the addresses on our sites.
So whatās the prognosis out there? Since I actually donāt use the site except as a last resort, and have little desire to, your experience far outweighs mine.
On a related note, this also made me wonder about competence.
Iāve never given my permission to be in the Yellow Pages. And the fact that Lucire does screen printing is news to me. Who makes up this bullshit and tries to pass it off as authoritative?
A Tweet to them is so far unanswered, so I may get in touch with them to have this listing removed. This one I can answer: since Iāve never been in the Yellow Pages, I can say, hand on heart, that Iāve never had any business from them. By the looks of it, theyāll never send me anything relevant anyway.
In summary, today’s thought about Google:
With any other business that screws people over this badly and this often, weād avoid it as much as we could. Instead, most go to Google, pull their trousers down, and bend over.
Thanks to my friend Bill Shepherd, I’ve now subscribed to The Ad Contrarian newsletter. Bob Hoffman is one of the few who gets it when it comes to how insignificant the FTC’s Facebook fine is.
Five (American) billion (American) dollars sounds like a lot to you and me, but considering Facebook’s stock rose on the news, they’ve more than covered the fine on the rise alone.
Bob writes: ‘The travesty of this settlement guarantees that no tech company CEO will take consumer privacy or data security seriously. Nothing will change till someone either has to pay personally or go to jail. Paying insignificant fines with corporate money is now an officially established cost of doing business in techland andāwho knows?āa jolly good way to boost share prices.’
There’s something very messed up about this scenario, particularly as some of the US’s authorities are constantly being shown up by the EU (over Google’s monopoly actions) and the UK’s Damian Collins, MP (over the questions being asked of Facebookāunlike US politicians’, his aren’t toothless).
The US SEC, meanwhile, has released its report on Facebook, showing that Facebook knew what was happening with Cambridge Analytica in 2015ā16, and that the company willingly sold user data to the firm. SEC’s Stephanie Avakian noted, ‘As alleged in our complaint, Facebook presented the risk of misuse of user data as hypothetical when they knew user data had in fact been misused.’ You can read the entire action as filed by the SEC here.
Woah this was 12 days before US elections. Facebook employees knew stuff was going on but their DC office appears to have frozen them. Consumers were deceived and harmed through their personal data likely in order to protect Facebook's reputation and share price. pic.twitter.com/rTpSYptVPG
As I have been hashtagging, #Facebooklies. This is standard practice for the firm, as has been evidenced countless times for over a decade. The settlement: US$100 million. Pocket change.
Iāve found some forum entries about this, but they date back to the beginning of the decade. I alerted Jetstar to this in March, and the problem has worsened since then.
Basically, I canāt book online, and I donāt know why. Consequently, I booked one flight with Air New Zealand and only managed, after huge effort, to get the other (for a colleague) with Jetstar.
Back in March, I couldnāt book with Vivaldi, but I was able to switch to Firefox. I let Jetstar know.
Now, this strategy does not work.
Before you suggest it, cookies and caches have been cleared.
Hereās what happens after Iāve selected the cities and the dates, and I go to select times. Letās begin with Vivaldi on Windows, which is based on Chromium (which, as we know, is what Chrome, the browser Jetstar suggests you use, is based on):
Switching to Firefox now results in this:
Switching to Edge on the same PC gives this:
Fortunately, I also own Macs, so hereās what Firefox for Mac returns:
The only browser that works with the Jetstar website: Safari on Mac. As I’ve sold my Ubuntu laptop, I was unable to test using that OS.
Not many people would go to that effort, and while Jetstarās Twitter staff (after some pushing from me in DMs) said they would refer it on, I donāt expect anything to happen. Maybe Chrome would work, but Iām not ever going to download it to find out. Why invite Google on to your computer? But if that is the case, it seems foolish to limit yourself to such an invasive browser. My experience is that whatever is blocking me from booking with Jetstar (some may argue that this is a good thing), it is expanding across browsers.
Remember Tumblr, the platform owned by Verizon that I left?
I left because of Verizon’s policies, of placing their corporate agenda ahead of the users. I went to NewTumbl insteadāa site that Tumblr users might not know about, since Verizon has ensured that searches for its competitor come up empty.
I was very surprised to find that Verizon Media has opened an account at NewTumblāa site that they effectively tell their users does not exist.
And what are they doing on it? Running their sit vac ads for free:
It’s not technically in violation of NewTumbl’s terms, but what is interesting are their hashtags.
One of the hashtags is sexy, albeit misspelled as sexu.
Now, either you have to be sexy to work for Verizon (given the other hashtags used), or they are hashtag-spamming, in the hope their ads will be seen more widely.
It is, basically, douchebag behaviourābut this also tells us that NewTumbl has them rattled. Why else would they advertise here instead of a regular job site?
The effect on their brand is very negativeāsince people can see these ads for what they are: a cheap shot across the bow. This is how petty big US companies are. We see this from Google, so why not Verizon?
PS.: Unlike Big Tech and the bigger players in corporate America, I own up when I learn more. The Verizon account on NewTumbl was revealed to be a fake, and has since been deleted. However, Verizon’s censorship on Tumblr continues (you can’t find NewTumbl but you can find Pornhubāall hail their potential buyers!).āJY
In the last month, maybe the last few weeks, my likes on Instagram have halved. Interestingly, Lucireās Instagram visits have increased markedly. But as I use my own account more than a work one, I can see the trend there a bit more clearly.
Itās not unlike Facebook, which, of course, owns Instagram. While I havenāt used it for personal updates since 2017, I maintain a handful of pages, and I still recall earlier this decade when, overnight, engagement dropped 90 per cent. It never recovered. Facebook, like Google, biases itself toward those who can afford to pay, in the great unlevelling of the playing field that Big Tech is wont to do.
They know that theyāre structured on, basically, a form of digital drug-taking: that for every like we get, we get a dopamine hit, and if we want to maintain those levels, we had better pay for them and become junkies. But hereās the thing: what if people wake up and realize that they donāt need that hit any more? I mean, even Popeye Doyle got through cold turkey to pursue Alain Charnier in French Connection II.
Iāve written about social media fatigue before, and the over-sharing that can come with it. More than once I blogged about being āFacebooked outā. And as you quit one social medium, itās not too hard to quit another.
Iāve made a lot of posts on Instagram but I value my privacy increasingly, and in the period leading up to the house move, I began doing less on it. And without the level of engagement, whether thatās caused by the algorithm or my own drop in activity, Iām beginning to care less, even if Instagram was more a hobby medium where I interacted with others.
And since I have less time to check it, I actually donāt notice that I have fewer likes when I open the app. I only really know when I see that each photo averages 15 likes or so, when figures in the 30s and 40s were far more commonplace not very long ago.
So whatās the deal? Would they like us to pay? Iām not that desperate. I donāt āGram for likes, as it was always a hobby, one that I seem to have less time for in 2019. I never thought being an āinfluencerā on Instagram was important. The novelty has well and truly worn off, and as friends depart from the platform, the need to use it to keep them updated diminishes. In the last fortnight I recorded three videos for friends and sent them via Smash or Wetransfer, and that kept them informed. You know, like writing a letter as we did pre-email, but with audio and video. Instagram just isnāt that vital. Email actually serves me just fine.
As I said to a friend tonight, even Twitter seems expendable from oneās everyday habits. Especially after March 15 here. You realize that those who are already arseholes really want to stay that way, their life ambition probably to join certain foreign-owned radio stations to be talking heads. But since they lack the nous, the best they can manage is social-media venting. And the good people want to remain good and have the space to live their lives happily. So why, I began wondering, should we spend our time getting our blood pressure up to defend our patch in a medium where the arseholes are, by and large, gutless wannabes who darenāt tell you have of the venom they write to your face? Does anyone ever put a Stuff commenter up on a pedestal and give them respect? While there are a great many people whom I admire on Twitter, and I am fortunate enough to have come into their orbit, there are an increasing number of days when I want to leave them to it, and if they wish to deal with the low-lifes of this world, it is their prerogative, and I respect them for doing something Iām tiring of doing myself. Twelve years on Twitter is a long time. At the time of writing, Iāve made 91,624 Tweets. Thatās a lot.
Unlike the arseholes, each and every one of these decent human beings have successful lives, and they donāt need to spend their waking moments dispensing hate toward any other group that isnāt like them in terms of genitals, sexual orientation, race or religion. And, frankly, I can contact those decent people in media outside of social.
Maybe the fear of Tweeting less is that we believe that the patients will overrun the asylum, that weāre the last line of defence in a world where racists and others are emboldened. That if we show that good sense and tolerance prevail, as my grandfather and others wanted to do when they went to war, then those who harbour unsavoury thoughts toward people unlike them might think twice. I canāt really argue with that.
But I wonder whether Iāll be more effective outside of social. I publish magazines, for a start. They give me a platform others do not have. I donāt need to leave comments on articles (and over the years, I havenāt done much of that). And I have websites I visit where I can unwind, away from the shouting factories of American Big Tech. Most of us want to do good on this earth, and the long game is I may be better off building businesses Iām good at rather than try to show how much smarter I am versus a talentless social media stranger.
No, Iām not saying Iām leaving either medium. I am saying that Iād rather spend that time on things I love to do, and before 2007 I had enough to do without sharing. Some of the colleagues I respect the most have barely set foot in the world of social, and right now I envy just how much time they have managed to put into other important endeavours, including books that are changing lives.
Big Tech must know the writing’s on the wall.
PS.: From a discussion with the wonderful William Shepherd when he read this on Twitter (the irony is not lost on me given the subject).āJY
One thing about Twitter, it never sleeps. So when I can't sleep, it is an easy way to waste the early morning. 4:15 in LA, hey Jack.
"Last line of defense" is a good way to phrase it. Or, at least know when they have gone totally crazy from their own venomous rage.
My feeling is there will be an exodus soon but I donāt know why yet. My online activity on Facebook is not unlike my forum activity during Bush 43. And I know itās diminishing here and on Instagram.
I remember on Vox, I was happy blogging to an audience of strangers, and I wonder whether something similar is going to be the next creative outlet for people, especially as workālife balance becomes more important, and the US ā20 election cycle heats up.
The media will give politics wall-to-wall coverage, the consequence being that the public tires of it when going on to social media platforms. At some point, self-preservation has to kick in and that rage is going to do no one any good. The bots will also put people off.
Now for something actually important beyond my first world problems. Journalist Suzie Dawson has a fantastic piece outlining how the smear of ‘serial rapist’ is part of the playbook used against senior members of Wikileaks. Her article is well worth reading, especially in light of how the mainstream media have spun the narrative against Julian Assange. He’s not alone: two other men have had campaigns launched against them, with no substantial evidence, thereby diminishing the seriousness of what rape is.
It is lengthy and well researched, but if you haven’t the time, at least consider the briefer post linked from here.
Here’s a sure-fire way to lose readers and cost you ad revenue.
It seems Haymarket’s Autocar (which I have been reading in print since 1980) wasn’t pleased about people using online ad blockers, so it created a warning.
The trouble is I don’t use ad blockers. In fact, you can see a massive advertisement underneath the warning:
In fact, that ad keeps changing, so I guess the advertiser is charged for totally useless impressions.
Clicking ‘I’ve disabled my Ad-Blocker’ does nothing.
I decided to click the other option, for advice on how to whitelist the ad blocker that I do not have.
I presume whatever’s in that blue box are the instructions, which are illegible. Autocar often talks about the difficulties behind some car infotainment interfaces, but you’d hope a publisher with a budget that far exceeds mine would get this right.
The irony of this effort is that Autocar winds up losing ad revenue. I have Tweeted them, so here’s hoping this silly tech can be removed so I can help their bottom line. You do wonder about their bosses sometimes thoughāmaybe this sort of abrasive behaviour comes from the top.
Looks like the viewing rate has picked up again for Autocade despite a relative lack of updates over the last six months (in no small part due to our move). Tomorrow itāll exceed 16 million page views.
Some of the last few entries have been about filling in gaps: the Renault Clio V is out, yet only entered into the database on May 29; the Singaporean Holden Calais (and corresponding Malaysian Opel Calais) the day after, with Autocade possibly the only website which corrects another well propagated error by Wikipedia on this car; the fifth-generation Toyota RAV4, which made its motor show appearance over a year ago; and the Nissan 180SX of 1989. Autocade doesnāt profess to be a complete encyclopƦdia, since itās an ongoing, developing work, though it does surprise me where the gaps are sometimes. I often have the photos filed away, but wait till the mood hits. Or, in the present case, waiting till some of my reference books re-emerge as Iām still, three weeks later, living out of boxes.
As with each million before, hereās a summary of how the traffic has developed:
March 2008: launch
April 2011: 1,000,000 (three years for first million)
March 2012: 2,000,000 (11 months for second million)
May 2013: 3,000,000 (14 months for third million)
January 2014: 4,000,000 (eight months for fourth million)
September 2014: 5,000,000 (eight months for fifth million)
May 2015: 6,000,000 (eight months for sixth million)
October 2015: 7,000,000 (five months for seventh million)
March 2016: 8,000,000 (five months for eighth million)
August 2016: 9,000,000 (five months for ninth million)
February 2017: 10,000,000 (six months for tenth million)
June 2017: 11,000,000 (four months for eleventh million)
January 2018: 12,000,000 (seven months for twelfth million)
May 2018: 13,000,000 (four months for thirteenth million)
September 2018: 14,000,000 (four months for fourteenth million)
February 2019: 15,000,000 (five months for fifteenth million)
June 2019: 16,000,000 (four months for sixteenth million)
Itās interesting to note that Autocade has had five million more page views since June 2017; yet it took six years (three times as long) to get the siteās first five million. At the time of writing, the database has 3,813 models, an increase of just 32 since the site gained its 15 millionth page view.
