The Rundown on Google PR

You know, this is what I'm always saying about webmastering and blogging: if it isn't one thing, it's another.

By this time on any other day (good day - when I feel well, etc.), I would have already rolled-out several posts and probably been hard at work on the site right now. But this whole PR thing really caught me off-guard and had serious repercussions.

You have to remember, I depend on sponsored posts to pay for things like trade magazines, comics, cable, domain name registration and hosting, and more. Most of what I pay for with the money I make through sponsored posting comes directly back to you in the form of reviews, discussion, general blogging, and so on.

Now, I'm not delusional; I realize full-well that I am not running a nationally-syndicated column here or anything like that. But until this last update, the Brian Harnois post was #1 in Google under a search for "Brian Harnois." The original Heroes review was #1 in Google under a search for "Heroes Premiere." You'll notice they have both "slipped" to #3 or lower by now. Not a nationally-syndicated column by any means, but given the popularity of Ghost Hunters and Heroes, that's not bad; that's pretty effing good, actually.

Both posts maintained a top-ranking for over a year and literally just lost their standing this month, after this outrageous and extortive PR "slam" by Google, owner of the Internet. Of course, both are major TV shows and have people like agents and managers to run around, posting links to their sites and MySpace pages and shit, and I never really promoted either posts individually - didn't even know they were top-ranking entries until a few months ago, when I signed-up for - wait for it - Google Analytics!

A lot has been made of sponsored posts in relation to this gangland-style move by the new Microsoft, and there is a lot of reason to believe it, but I am not 100% positive either have all that much to do with one another because our PR fluctuated, as did many other peoples', before resting on a big, fat goose-egg. Several bloggers have claimed they have never made sponsored posts, yet still lost PR. This coincides with Blogger's FTP connectivity issues, so we all may be jumping the gun a bit... but just a bit.

PayPerPost picked up on this "penalization" (like me some alliteration, I can't lie) several days ago and even mentions how one employee's blog was slapped, even though he never made a sponsored post! They claim that it is because he often blogs about PPP, mentioning it often in his entries.

So maybe you are wondering why I am flaunting Google's Law when they not only own the Internet, but several of my blogs are run through their own Blogger.com? Well, it's a simple matter of that for which I stand:

This is extortion and censorship, plain and simple; nothing more, nothing less... unless, of course, it's a technical error - in which case, it's a technical issue, plain and simple - I'm just not so certain it is anymore, given that it's been a few days and no one has heard anything from Google even after this has gone across the Blogosphere.

Think of it this way - and this is particularly aimed at the Luddites who so vehemently oppose sponsored posts: if you worked at a fast-food burger joint, would you think it right for Google, or anyone else, to decide that, since they believe red meat is bad for your health and leads to obesity, they can simply close your place of work? Or start locking-out customers or using bodily force to disallow them entrance?

You might say the analogy is going a bit far, but it isn't; this is effectively what Google has done to those of us who depend on sponsored posts to pay for what we do. Further, it is our work, our time, our effort...

And (theoretically) our blogs!

And that is the real crux of the matter here:

If Google does not want to see sponsored posts - excepting, of course, those that use Google AdSense ads - then why not slam the actual sites providing the programs? Better yet, why not send out some blog posts, disallowing them from Blogger/BlogSpot, or warning that they may take action against blogs and sites - and we individuals (because that's who they're hurting) - that have the audacity to attempt to make some money from what we spend time doing?

When you read a sentence in a book, such as, "He walked into the Burger King," or, "He took a sip of his Coke," those are paid placements for those products! Consider this scenario in a movie:

EXT. - Day
They walk past a Burger King with a prominent Coca-Cola billboard.

BOB
Hang on, you want a Coke?

ROB
I could go for some fries.

BOB
I don't really like their fries.

ROB
At least they don't put beef and shit in them and not tell you about it - that stuff leads to obesity.

BOB
Yeah. They better watch out - Google hears about it, they'll club seals outside the doors.

ROB
Yeah, let's hurry up so we can go vote.

That entire exchange is nothing more than a paid advertisement for Burger King and Coke (BK actually carries Pepsi products, which is why I used Coke), followed by a public announcement for voting (movie companies get tax breaks and things for shit like that). Oh, and you might have noticed the prominent billboard placement outside the restaurant. During the shot, you might also see a famous brand-name pair of sneakers or other clothing articles, and so forth.

This is how entertainment works, people; this is how Things are done and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Further, lest you forget, this is a free blog! You are bombarded with this type of advertising on TV and in movies all the time and you have not only become anesthetized to the practice, you pay for movie tickets and have to sit through commercials when you watch TV. You picking up what I'm laying down?

Now, let's go one step further and surf on over to Google - I can't rightly recall the address just off the top of my head and I wouldn't want to jeopardize my PR by sending traffic their way - you see the highlighted sites at the very top of the page? See the ones along the right-hand side of your screen? Those are paid listings; the companies who paid for those sites would not have those high placements without having paid Google for them...

You see the black ads along the top and the sidebar? Those are from a little program I'll call "Google AdSense." Google makes money from these ads and passes a very small pittance along to those of us who use the program and actually do the work - that's how companies treat talent and that's why they're having a little walk-around on the coasts. You are encouraged to sign-up for this program when you sign-up for a BlogSpot blog. Nothing wrong with that, either!

Except that, they can't exactly offer a "free" blog and bankroll it with this program without requiring you to sign-up for the program when you get a free blog here. Nothing wrong with that, either; I signed-up for AdSense regardless, and if it was a requirement for having a BlogSpot blog, that seems fair to me. But it isn't - yet - and there is nothing in the TOS about sponsored posts or ads.

Of course, like credit card companies and other monopolies, Google is not forced to tell us that they are changing their policies; they can just do whatever the living hell they please and the current administration will never attempt to stop them. Google freely promotes pornographic websites under the guise of freedom of speech, and regardless of how you feel about that little subject, porn sites generally have a few ads and pornographers are not generally what you'd call "decent" people.

This is what gets me about this whole thing: Google has no reasoning behind doing this other than unchecked greed - a kind of Grecian hubris whose tragedy has affected all of us and left Google to play the fiddle... okay, okay, but you get what I'm saying? I mean, if they are going to "crackdown" on something, I can think of at least 24097049824309 worse things right off the top of my head! This is nothing more than a strongarm tactic and it's completely unwarranted. By utilizing AdSense ads on my sites, I work for Google, so wtf is the problem here, other than that they want more of my revenue?

And for those Luddites who are all anti-sponsored posts, look: I don't yank you off the pole and kick the singles out of your garter belt; I don't swat your hand with the spatula while you're flipping burgers; I don't give a damn what you do, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else and it's legal! If I were writing a syndicated column, you would have to pay for the paper or slick which carries it, and if you decided you don't like me or what I write or what the hell ever, you can just skip over it and I'll never know otherwise unless you write and tell me. And then I'll just slush your little missive and go on about my busy day - but I digress...

Whether or not you agree with sponsored posts is only part of the point; you ought to be against this anyway because it is censorship, because it is greedy, because it is shady and under-handed and could eventually threaten your freedom to say what you want online.

What if Google decides they don't want to affiliate themselves with blogs or sites that are anti-organized-religion or anti-political? They can just strip you of your PR and suddenly, you have no real voice because no one can find your site online...

Again, if Google wants to change their policy and tell me I cannot use any other program besides AdSense on Blogger blogs, I'm down with that; I'll just switch providers. If they said I have to sign-up with AdSense to get a free Blogger blog, I'm cool with that; nothing wrong with sending them a few dollars a day for a free blog. But to "penalize" my site, which I pay for with my own money and own the content to - lock, stock, and barrel?

That's censorship, plain and simple.

Let's just hope I'm still able to post to my blogs after this is published...