“If you're not paying for the product, you are the product” is hogwash

https://plus.google.com/+BrianWhite1/posts/T56nDLcMHVk

by geekam • 12 years ago

29 20 12 years ago

plus.google.com

greenyoda• 12 years ago

"Everything Google does is done for our users. ... You are not product; you are our customers!"

Regardless of whether Google's users are its "product", I'd maintain that Google's customers are the people who give them money in exchange for a product or service (that's the general usage of the term "customer"). These would be mostly the people who buy ads, since selling ads is by far Google's largest source of revenue.

"Even Ads is viewed as a service to our users. Random ads are garbage. Useful ads are a benefit."

If I were a Gmail user, how would "useful" ads enhance my use of Gmail? They're a distraction to getting work done. I don't go to my e-mail when I'm interested in shopping for something, and I'm pretty sure that most other people don't either. In fact, I pay money to use an e-mail provider who does not show me ads.

mehwoot• 12 years ago

Regardless of whether you agree with the implied sentiment behind it, it is factually correct in Google's case. They are selling ads. The product is access to people to display ads to, which advertisers are buying.

On a further note, no, we're not ever going to love google anymore. Google is a huge multinational corporation that is beholden to its shareholders. That's just what happens when you get that big. We're not going to praise you for being moral, we're just going to use your products, and you're going to profit from it. That's the deal.

seizethecheese• 12 years ago

It occurs to me that maybe product/customer is a false dichotomy. Isn't it possible that users are customers of google's search results and products for google's advertisers at the same time?

Only when you imagine that a company can only have one product, does this dichotomy make sense. Google operates a system in which there are multiple products and customers. One could even arguably say that advertisers are the product in the sense that they provide users with patronage for their free searches.

cam_l• 12 years ago

Most sensible response here. Google created a win-win relationship for advertisers and consumers where the consumer / seller relationships run in both directions.. with themselves in between. As long as they maintain a level of impartiality in the relationship and do not seek to weight their exploitation in either direction, I for one am fine with the arrangement.

the second they do, of course, we are all fucked.

joyeuse6701• 12 years ago

"Even Ads is viewed as a service to our users. Random ads are garbage. Useful ads are a benefit. Yes, it's also a benefit to our publishers and yes, it's also a benefit to our shareholders. Since when did win-win-win arrangements become a bad thing?"

Lot's of assumptions in there, like the implication that an ad could be a good thing, that it could be 'useful' if its catering to you as a consumer I mean customer. We are definitely the product, offered to advertisers like sheep to the slaughter, but I suppose sheepherders do feed and provide shelter before they sacrifice you. If you think that's win win win for all involved, there are some serious moral lapses occurring in your reasoning.

fletchowns• 12 years ago

I really don't feel like I am a Google customer though. Google customers are the ones buying AdWords. All I am is a potential customer for Google's customers.

po• 12 years ago

I feel like I just read an article from a farmer about how much he cares about their animals. It's awesome to see a farmer who loves their animals. I would love to be able to buy meat only from people who really care about humane and healthy animals. And yes, it does make good business sense! Maybe Google is the Whole Foods of tech.

But, I'm not convinced that the users are the customers no matter how much care they are treated with. The money that keeps the data centers lit comes from advertisers who are are buying users' attention.

kijin• 12 years ago

Everything Google does is done for our users. Your happiness is always the first priority, even above Ads ... You are not product; you are our customers!

Imagine a farmer who cares very much about his animals, so much so that he is willing to accept a lower profit margin for the sake of his animals' well-being. The animals' happiness is always his first priority. I'd probably buy milk and meat from such a farmer.

It's not necessarily a bad experience to be a product. When winter comes, being a product of an ethical company is probably much more convenient than being a free, wild animal. But that doesn't change the fact that you're a product. You're just a happy, well-fed product. Sooner or later, it's off to the butcher with you.

The only sense in which users of Google's free services might be construed as "customers" is that we're purchasing those services with our fingers, eyeballs and personal information. Maybe that's true. But even if it is, that doesn't change the fact that Google takes our payment (fingers and eyeballs) and uses it in turn to pay advertisers. As long as Ads are in the picture, we can never be 100% customers. We'll always be both product and customer, as @seizethecheese said in a different comment.

"If you're not paying for the product, you are the product" has been repeated so much on the internet that it has become a sort of cliche. But just because it's a cliche doesn't mean that it doesn't contain any grains of truth.

adamnemecek• 12 years ago

I can't tell if it's satire or not.

wmf• 12 years ago

In cases where Google can't find an ad that's relevant to the user, do they show no ads?

brokentone• 12 years ago

Often if you pay for the product, you are still the product. Your information is still being shipped off to all kinds of third parties and lots of ads still.

forgottenpass• 12 years ago

I was ready for someone to take that "If you're not paying..." line to task. As this was on google plus I just assumed it was by some opensource project member. They've got a convincing retort built in. It would take all of two sentences.

I edited my post to not be smarmy here, but this is just flat out wrong and I don't need to reiterate how google works. Brian, I believe you believe what you wrote. Until you and your privacy concerned co-workers get together to surface a "delete all stored data on me and opt out" button, I'm going to think you've let your close relationship with google warp your perspective and allow you to draw faulty conclusions on how far up your attitudes permeate.

gman99• 12 years ago

a "delete all stored data on me and opt out" button

You mean like: http://www.google.com/settings/ads/

That's all the information the advertising network (Doubliclick) has on you (atleast, based on the cookie on your current machine). A more permanent opt-out: http://www.google.com/settings/ads/plugin

If you use other google products (GMail, Youtube etc), they let you individually delete your accounts. Or you can go here and wipe all your data: https://www.google.com/settings/datatools

Not that I'm a google apologist, but it sure helps if you do a cursory search (or click on the "Privacy" link on the homepage) before complaining about something they already give you.

massysett2• 12 years ago

So that's why YouTube videos now have pre-rolls? They have absolutely no relevance to the video I'm about to watch. I also have to sit through at least five seconds of all of them and sometimes through an entire fifteen second one. That's because Google cares so much about its users? That's to improve my experience?

Nice try.

jonas21• 12 years ago

Videos with pre-rolls have them because the user who created the video chose to monetize it that way. This user receives at least 55% of the ad revenue, and sometimes more [1]. Without the ability to make money from ads, a lot of independent content creators would not be able to produce videos for you to watch for free.

So yes, this is an example of Google caring about its users -- as well as itself.

[1] http://variety.com/2013/digital/news/youtube-standardizes-ad...

massysett2• 12 years ago

"Caring about its users" does not explain why prerolls have no relevance to the content of the video. Nor does it explain how invasive they are. Google could have used an Adwords like program for Youtube. And if it's really about content creators, they could let the creators keep all the money from invasive prerolls, which might reduce their prevalence.

I'm not complaining about prerolls. YouTube is free for me; prerolls pay for it. It is however patently ridiculous to even suggest that for Google I am anything other than a product and an eyeball to be sold. This blog post reeked with sanctimony and prerolls are just one glaring example of that.

Silhouette• 12 years ago

If you're not paying money to someone, then you aren't their customer. It's really that simple.

The author here might not believe that, but somewhere up his management chain are people who do, and I'm quite sure the shareholders to whom the senior managers are accountable do.

I admire the grass roots sentiment here, but this was written by someone who has the luxury of being technical and not responsible for making money for the business. Try asking Eric Schmidt how he feels about privacy if you want to see how the big business guys at Google really think.

papaf• 12 years ago

Try asking Eric Schmidt how he feels about privacy if you want to see how the big business guys at Google really think.

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

lazylizard• 12 years ago

and.. publishers who get suspended without an accompany reason are...what?

mcv• 12 years ago

Google is not a monolith. Different parts have different customers. Many parts of Google provide free products. To those parts, we are the customers, because they make those products for us. But those are the parts of Google that don't make any money.

The part that does make money, the advertising part, has advertisers as customers. And their product is the entire internet on which to show those ads, including all the users of the internet.

You still get to see those ads even if you don't use GMail or YouTube. Even if you don't use search; Google ads are on all sorts of sites. Basically, they just want as many people as possible spending as much time as possible on the internet. The bigger the internet is, the bigger the pie of which Google gets a sizable slice.

“If you're not paying for the product, you are the product” is hogwash

Related Stories