New Heights in Googlephobia: “A Delinquent, Sociopathic Parasite”?

by on April 5, 2009 · 15 comments

Leave it to the English—famous for their superior fluency in the language that bears their name—to reach unparalleled heights of hysteria in the war of words being waged against Google. The Guardian’s Henry Porter claims that “Google is just an amoral menace: The ever-growing empire produces nothing but seems determined to control everything.”

Porter declares that Google is the world’s “most prominent WWM,” his acronym for the “worldwide monopolies that sweep all before them with exuberant contempt for people’s rights, their property and the past.”

Google is in the final analysis a parasite that creates nothing, merely offering little aggregation, lists and the ordering of information generated by people who have invested their capital, skill and time. On the back of the labour of others it makes vast advertising revenues – in the final quarter of last year its revenues were $5.7bn, and it currently sits on a cash pile of $8.6bn.

Let’s review Google’s 2008 Annual Report. Of Google’s 2008 Revenue ($21.78 billion), two-thirds ($14.41 billion) came from advertising on Google sites and just under one-third ($6.71 billion) came from advertising on Google Content Network (GCN) web sites (made up of publishers that sell their ad space to advertisers through Google AdSense). On this revenue, Google made a net profit of $4.2 billion after taxes. To put these numbers in context, Microsoft (Google’s closest peer) earned three times ($60.42 billion) Google’s revenue and produced 4.21 times ($17.68 billion) Google’s profit. Google’s revenue was just 0.1528% of 2008 U.S. GDP and its net income, 0.0294%.

So what does Google actually create with all that revenue? The answer is free content and services.

First, Google cross-subsidizes dozens of its own free services—starting with its search engine but also including email, a free browser, YouTube, a word processing suite, IM, maps, news, and much more.

Second, as the world’s leading ad network, Google supports a significant percentage of the free content and services offered by others. In 2008, Google paid out $5.28 billion (24.22% of revenue) to GCN publishers—significantly more than the $4.2 billion Google earned in net income (19.3% of revenue).

At a time when politicians think nothing of spending hundreds of billions of dollars at a time and even the word “trillion” no longer shocks our pre-hyperinflationary ears, $5.28 billion may not seem like much. Indeed, it’s just 30% of NASA’s 2008 budget. But, spread across the “Long Tail,” these dollars go a lot farther than even NASA’s deep space probes: They fund hundreds of thousands of GCN websites, ranging from traditional newspapers like the New York Times to social networks to countless community sites—including the Technology Liberation Front.

Wired Magazine editor-in-chief Chris Anderson has brilliantly described the “Long Tail” and explained how advertising plays a critical role in funding “Free!” But nothing puts the Long Tail of ad-supported Internet content into human terms like the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s video, “I Am the Long Tail:”

Check out IAB’s gallery of small publishers, too. Or, to get a sense of the amazing variety of the “Long Tail” of web services, check out’s famously overwhelming display of the logos for roughly 2726 apps “Web 2.0″ applications. While it can be harder to support web apps with advertising revenue than content sites, recent estimates indicate that over a third of all web applications rely on advertising.

But Porter says not a word about Google’s role as an economic fountainhead of online innovation and creativity. He simply dismisses Google as “delinquent and sociopathic.” One might dismiss Porter as just another crank in the “Long Tail of Googlephobia,” but his 188-year-old newspaper, The Guardian, is among the world’s most respected. With a circulation 1/3 that of the New York Times and 1/2 that of The Washington Post (in a nation five times smaller than the U.S.), The Guardian is serious when it claims to be “the world’s leading liberal voice.” For those unimpressed by any newspaper, note that Porter’s rant topped Techmeme today.

So rants like Porter’s are being heard—no matter how unfounded they are.

In terms of both credibility and exaggeration, Porter’s piece deserves a place at the very head of the “Long Tail” of hyperbole published by “serious” publications like The Guardian. While Porter doesn’t actually play the Reductio ad Hitlerum card (just about the only card he has left), his attack is, for sheer unfairness, strongly reminiscent of Whittaker Chambers’ infamous 1957 review of Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged in the normally-dignified National Review. The conservative Chambers, horrified by Rand’s atheism, equated her radical individualism to Hitler’s Holocaust, declaring: “From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: ‘To a gas chamber — go!'”

Will anyone be surprised when papers like The Guardian give space to a modern-day Chambers to rant about how Google is the Third Reich reborn—or how Google is The Matrix made real? Every rant like Porter’s makes it just a little harder to have a serious, rational conversation about Google and its impact on society—both good and ill. If that’s the kind of “journalism” Porter thinks Google is killing, it’s not worth saving. The only thing more ironic than Porter’s attack on Google for undermining serious journalism—something of which he himself seems incapable—is the juxtaposition of Google’s ads with Porter’s official profile on The Guardian:

  • Andrew W

    Funny, I was just writing the same issue from another angle: hysteria about Google's ostensible monopoly on orphaned books. Against the hysteria, Google CEO Eric Schmidt is a calm, knowledgeable, persuasive voice. There's a great New Yorker podcast/Google video of Schmidt talking through these issues with the New Yorker's Ken Auletta if you're interested:

  • Pingback: New Heights in Googlephobia: “A Delinquent, Sociopathic Parasite … - Local Tech Experts()

  • Medela

    I liked this post, you have covered it really well, keep posts like this one coming! subscribing to your feeds right away.

  • MikeRT

    Porter declares that Google is the world’s “most prominent WWM,” his acronym for the “worldwide monopolies that sweep all before them with exuberant contempt for people’s rights, their property and the past.”

    Says the man who lives under a government which gets its agents in the paper nearly every hour, on the hour for exuberantly attacking people's rights, their property and cultural traditions. You can't read British headlines without seeing stories of abuse and political correctness that make Google look, by comparison, like Jesus coming in on His white horse on the day of judgment to battle the armies of Satan.

  • MikeRT

    Speaking of having contempt for people's rights and property, just one of many examples of Britain's finest at work taking the gold medal every time. Only in Britain, could you have a government that arrests good samaritans for “theft by finding” while boisterously condemning a corporation for indexing content.

  • Brian

    Well written article. Between the Guardian attack and the recent swipe by the New York Times over orphaned books coming on the heels of an attack by an interest group called Free Press demanding that AT&T allow competitor Skype to access its telephone infrastructure at no charge, I have come to the conclusion that the world has gone completely insane. In part we're seeing scathing attacks of Luddites who fear what they don't understand, and in other parts, we're seeing attacks by groups of people who don't understand why anyone should be allowed to profit, nor do they understand the value that a profitable company can bring to society.

    Without profit, we would never have nor be able to enjoy Google Earth. But then, there are those who still haven't gotten over being shown that the earth isn't flat, nor that the earth is not the center of the solar system. Imagine what Google could do with orphaned books. The very libraries so afraid of losing power could instead discover an affordable way to bring content to those who depend on the library. And newspapers, reeling in mounting losses, instead of casting Google as the devil, could find that with a clear assessment of what really makes them valuable (their reporting and ownership of content rather than the printing presses), that Google could be their friend, not their enemy. But the media is so intent on fighting the last war that they can't understand that the business model is changing under their feet. And those who refuse to understand that will be rudely swept aside.

    Your article could have been shrill and scathing, but instead took a quiet and well considered tone. In a time when reason seems to be the victim, your article refuted silly arguments from the Guardian in a rational manner, making them all the more ridiculous. Kudos!

  • Berin Szoka

    Thanks, Brian. That's very kind. Unfortunately, I fear that the Luddites will go on trying to break the machines that benefit us all.

  • Berin Szoka

    Thanks, Brian. That's very kind. Unfortunately, I fear that the Luddites will go on trying to break the machines that benefit us all.

  • Berin Szoka

    Thanks, Brian. That's very kind. Unfortunately, I fear that the Luddites will go on trying to break the machines that benefit us all.

  • Pingback: Google’s New Advertising Trademark Policy & Consumer Welfare | The Technology Liberation Front()

  • Pingback: “Google Bigotry,” Corporate-Bashing & Human Envy — Technology Liberation Front()

  • Pingback: no no hair removal 8800 for men()

  • Pingback: phentermine meridia xenical review()

  • Pingback: Panel Institut()

  • Pingback: Watch Breaking Bad Online()

Previous post:

Next post: