ZDNet editor in chief Dan Farber marked my one year Digital Markets anniversary last month by noting I have "covered the waterfront on emerging trends and the people at the heart of the business Internet," and I will continue doing so at my new blogging home: My very own InsiderChatter.com

I thank all my loyal Digital Markets readers and invite you to read me going forward at InsiderChatter.com

Goodwill to fellowmen; active effort to promote human welfare (Merriam-Webster).

In Why Google is more dangerous than Microsoftlast week, I dissect how Google.org, the "philanthropic arm of Google,”does not present asreally beingabout do-good philanthropy at all.

Google does not accept funding requests, Google.org underscores. Why a "Google Grants" program then?

To "donate" AdWords, often in repsonse to a court order to do so.

Another common thread that brought salesforce.com and Google together in their global alliance is their commitment to corporate philanthropy. In July of 2000, salesforce.com launched the Salesforce.com Foundation, which operates under the company's innovative 1/1/1 Model -- a commitment to deliver 1% Time, 1% Equity and 1% Product to nonprofit organizations and, most recently, to be "one" with the earth.

Since its launch, the Salesforce.com Foundation has donated their product to more than 2,000 nonprofits. Similarly, Google has also given free online advertising to selected nonprofits through its Google Grants program, supporting more than 2,500 nonprofit organizations in 16 countries to date. The Salesforce.com Foundation and Google are now teaming up to donate the new Salesforce Group Edition featuring Google AdWords to each other's nonprofit grantees. These selected nonprofits will be able to gain access to the same integrated sales and marketing success (online software?) that is available to the private sector at no cost. Salesforce Group Edition featuring Google AdWords will also be made available to additional nonprofits within the next quarter.

Google defends the philanthtropic "ROI" of its nocost to Google "donation" of AdWords campaigns:

Room to Read, which educates children in Vietnam, Nepal, India and Cambodia, attracted a sponsor who clicked on its AdWords ad. He has donated funds to support the education of 25 girls for the next 10 years.

Salesforce has a philanthropic effort in place that combines the personalefforts of its employees with the Salesforce in-kind "donations" ofits Web-based CRM service. Salesforce finds "meaningful activities for salesforce.com employees to use their six paid days off a year devoted to volunteerism, and promoting a culture of caring."

Google's $158 billion market cap is almost 30 times that of Salesforce. What's more, Google'ssupposedly do-good "mission" to "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful" is driven by"rocket scientists."

Should Google not change its corporate culture tune from one of free lunches at the Googleplex and personal birthday masages for Googlers to a real corporate do-good philosophy?

Perhapsfollowing in the Salesforce mold of supporting employees to really do something meaningful, for others, would be a good start.

SEE: Salesforce.com plays Google ad sales game: Big tease? Big letdown!

Why then, does it not solely go the Ask.com ad sales route as well, instead of continuing to rely on arch rival Google for its revenues?

Just weeks ago, in Ask vs. Google: Can $100 million buy IAC search happiness?, I reiterated: I have been asking if Ask will finally bite the who needs Google bullet and NOT renew the Google sponsored advertising linksdeal this year?

IAC Ask.com corporate parent CEO Barry Diller has promised to act within the coming months. Will he do the right IAC thing?

Jim Lanzone, Ask.com CEO says it is time to move beyond (Google's) "ten blue links." Isn't it time as well then to move beyond Google's "Sponsored Links"?

SEE Google showdown: Can Barry Diller win IAC search advertising war?

Ask.com now on its touted "truly new way to search":

Today, our search experience is taking a consequential leap forward in making all that information accessible in a coherent way, with the launch of Ask3D, a completely re-engineered version of Ask.com. No, you don't need red and blue glasses to see it. 3D stands for the three dimensions of searching - query expression, investigating results, and digging deeply into content. You used to have to visit three different pages or websites to see and search through each dimension. With Ask3D, you can now get everything you need on one page…in many cases above the fold.

This isn't just about getting more information; it's also about getting the right information. Accordingly, Ask3D literally morphs with each query you enter. No two searches are the same, so why should all search pages have the same stuff in the same order? We customize each page for each different query, based on relevance, but also based on what previous searchers on Ask found valuable for that query (or one like it).

Some people who see Ask3D may initially be taken aback. It looks different than other search engines (which look curiously like they did a decade ago). Some might say there's too much going on. We feared the same thing. That's why we tested Ask3D for nearly 6 months with 5% of our 25-30 million monthly users. Simply put, these people came away happier with their experience than "regular" Ask.com users - they had lower abandonment rates, higher pick rates, and higher frequency of use.

There are also fewer ads on Ask.com than any other major search engine.

Fewer ads perhaps, but STILL Google derived ads!

Ask.com will NEVER beat Google at the search game, unless it has the guts to wage war against Google on the entire search front, the (winning?) search and search advertising battlefield.

SEE: Google bets billions to lock-in search dominance Why Google Search will NOT rule the Universe!

Google piggybacks on Intel: What about Intuit?I underscored when Intel announced a not so "groundbreaking" collaboration with Google last month; I compared the Google Intel AdWords resale deal with the not so fruitful Google Intuit AdWords resale deal.

Upon the Wall Street Journals' tease a few weeks ago of a "major" Google Salesforce.com alliance, I predicted Google partners up? Salesforce.com deal NO Microsoft killer. Ispeculated a possible Google-Salesforce.com deal would also be inspired by the Google Intuit deal.

Moreover, contrary to the grandiose visions projected by WSJ, "“Google, Salesforce.com weigh alliance to battle Microsoft,” I also underscored, just three days ago in Salesforce.com CEO: Google is good, very good,the existing Salesforce.com-Google AdWords connection, which has been in force for quite a while.

This past Friday, Iwrote about the ongoing Salesforce.com Keiden AdWords collaboration: Salesforce for Google AdWords debuted last year, designed as a for fee program,based notably on technology obtained with the Salesforce acquisition of Kieden Corporation, a third party search marketing company.

I aslo warned, however, that the Google-Intuit Web-based “alliance” announced many moons ago with much fare shouldNOT serve as a best practices for Salesforce.com emulation.

Apparently though, even the CEO Marc Benioff best of them finds it difficult to not be swayed by Googley charm.

Following perhaps one of its biggest recent teases, Salesforce.com now offers a big letdown: Salesforce.com and Google "are expected" to launch a "combined Web site"today that is designed to allow the online customer relationship management software maker to act as a reseller for Google's AdWords.

Google, Salesforce.com YAHOO? NO! (Not so) BIG DEAL!

While the "deal" may be hailed as representing a "market opportunity" of 900,000 Google AdWords customers and a pool of 20 million small businesses, neither Google or Salesforce.com shareholders ought to beuncorking any big future revenues champagne.

It seems that Benioff did not reach out to CEO peer Steve Bennett, regarding thenon-event that Intuit's AdWords resale deal with Google CEO Eric Schmidt resulted in.

I projected a big Googley letdown for Intuit, from the get go, upon the Google Intuit announcement last August.

"We haven’t seen a huge lift" is how Bennett has subsequently evaluated the supposed QuickBooks-AdWords mutualbooster.

I aptly predicted last August: Google QuickBooks 2007: Death of Yellow Pages, local newspapers? NO

I said of the Intuit-Google AdWords resale deal upon its announcement in 2006:

Google has been unsuccessful to date in capturing the small business advertising market on its own and in collaboration with a direct sales partner; Its alliance with Intuit does not present itself as a sure fire way to improve its track record.

Contrary to Schmidt’s beliefs, savvy small businesses are not waiting impatiently for Google to give them a turnkey desktop icon enabling Google to fetch all of their company financial information to do what it likes with.

Contrary to Schmidt’s beliefs, savvy small businesses are not waiting impatiently for Google to give them a turnkey icon on their desktop so they can get sucked into the Google-centric AdWords raise your bid continuously auction scheme.

NEVERTHELESS, big-time CEOs, of big-time companies, continue to set themselves up for big Googley letdowns.

The latest, Benioff of Salesforce.com, via his "new" Salesforce Group Edition featuring Google AdWords. Not quite spanking new, the Group Edition replaces Salesforce.com's entry level "Team Edition."

Thebig innovations?: 1) Link toGoogle.com forbuying Google AdWords and 2) Salesforce.com analytics enabled Google AdWords client landing pages.

As I oft say, Google love does not conquer all; Neither does the Google "brand."

WHO WILL BE THE NEXT CEO TO "FALL" FOR GOOGLE ADWORDS SALES?

ALSO: Google OS? Why Microsoft STILL rules

Why? Google “owns” the Web experience, but to “improve” it, Google must go through the Microsoft-owned desktop, as I analyzed in Google’s love hate relationship with the desktop.

Does it gall CEO Schmidt to have to “Microsoft-enable” Google products? OR, does he get personal satisfaction in “using” Microsoft to achieve his Microsoft domination end-game.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, even if Google Gears is eventually fully realized, Google will not by default own anything particular, at the particular expense of Microsoft.

Google Gears is not ready for prime time and there is no way to know when, or if, it ever will be, especially in terms of consumer use. In the meantime, no company in the game will be standing still, Microsoft or any other player. No one can predict what the landscape will look like one year from now.

In any event, the Google Gears kills Microsoft stance is fundamentally flawed.

Michael Arrington trots out such a Microsoft is doomed thanks to Google argument, in defense of a Google buys Salesforce.com scenario.

Until last week it wasn’t clear exactly how Google would be competing with Microsoft’s dominance in the operating system and office space. But then Google introduced Google Gears…They’re bypassing the operating system (the browser is the new operating system) and their apps will now offer a real alternative to Outlook and Office. Small and medium sized businesses will no longer have just one real choice when loading (and paying for) software on their PCs. And when you combine all that stuff with Salesforce’s CRM apps and developer platform, Microsoft has a real problem. The future of software delivery is the browser.

Of course in the Google Cloud future vs. the Microsoft Desktop legacy battle, Google has a vested interest in pushing for the “future of software delivery is the browser.“ BUT, the browser is still accessed via the desktop, the laptop…which are run by operating systems. Usually, those operating systems are supplied by Microsoft.

Small and medium businesses today, and for the foreseeable future, will have the same (lack of) choice “when loading (and paying for) software on their PCs.” The operating system is often pre-loaded and it is typically a Microsoft OS.

Google will have an even harder time ruling the enterprise.

I spent this morning at the NYC Googleplex listening to the Google Apps Premiere pitch and heard the Google Enterprise pitch at the Enterprise Search conference last month.

Consumer-driven Google does not get the enterprise and it is unlikely that it will get meaningful enterprise customer business.

As I wrote Friday:

Microsoft dazed, confused and gasping for air? Google wishes. What big bad Google innovation is there that has escaped Microsoft?

Google is the undisputed leader in search and search advertising, for now. BUT the search game is the only one Google is winning, despite its endless efforts to diversify.

SEE: Google Office wins? Declares enterprise hierarchies ‘dead’ Do Google Apps really trump Nintendo Wii and Apple TV? Is Google Enterprise Search a joke? Google to big business: Google love belongs in the Enterprise!

In Google Enterprise strategy: ‘Death to the hierarchy’" last November, I reported Michael Lock, Director of North American Sales for Google Enterprise, exhortation at the NYC Googleplex,

“Death to the (Microsoft) hierarchy”:

Given the “explosion” of unstructured data in the enterprise, “old methods of information management don’t work,” Lock asserted. He also offered a remedy: “Death to the hierarchy!”

Lock put forth personal anecdotes to proclaim “you don’t put email in folders” and declared GMail the victor over Outlook.

Lock spoke of the old (pre-GMail) Outlook days when he would “look forward” to his transcontinental commutes for six hours of time to “categorize email.”

Lock entertainingly, but pointedly, emphasized that Google solutions do not demand what he portrayed as labor intensive and inadequate user categorization via hierarchical folder structures. Lock then used his own GMail account to illustrate what he believes is the superiority of implicit organization via a single, intuitive search box, a Googley one. Lock proudly concluded that he has left behind hundreds of Outlook folders.

At the time, I asked Lock for a projection of when Google will succeed in bringing “Death to the hierarchy.” Lock offered that forward thinking enterprises are moving away from hierarchical data organization, but no specific date for an absolute demise of the "hierarchy" was provided.

Nonetheless in his return visit to the NYC Googleplex this morning, Lock said in the affirmative: “Hierarchies are dead.”

“Data has changed and it doesn’t come in columns and rows,” Lock underscored.

Lock provided the diverse audience of NYC professionals at the “Google @ Work” enterprise sales pitch with three key takeaways, “lessons that enterprise IT can learn from Google:

1) Fast is better than slow, 2) Simple is better than complex, 3) Assume chaos and deal with it.

Lock asserted the now familiar Google Enterprise rallying cry: Enterprise IT is in a sad state of affairs, but consumer friendly Google is to the enterprise rescue.

Lock on the antiquated enterprise way of doing IT business:

Define all requirements, Buy vs. build, Issue RFP, Select vendor, Do bakeoff, Define implementation plan, Customize application, Build end-user training plan, Deploy application.

The world has sped up, but how IT deploys has not,Lock deplored.

Why so enterprise conservative? Lock suggested. After all, Google is not so worried about getting things just right. Lock: “We put the product on the Internet before it is ready.” Why? “Fail quickly and learn from it,” Lock proclaimed.

Current delivery models have “insane” complexity, Lock warned. Take email, as a case study in bad enterprise business. Lock lampooned what current enterprise email operations entail:

Operating system, Email servers, security servers, Backup storage servers, Spam filer, Content repositories, Tape back-up, Mobile delivery server, Database to support content repositories.

The Lock ace in the hole: “Then there is that ‘Patch Tuesday‘ by some big vendor.”

What is the enterprise solution? It couldn’t be more simple, five letters is all it takes; GMail.

Lock nevertheless acknowledged there is still some enterprise reticence against “letting my email on someone else’s servers.”

How silly, though, Lock indicated. After all, he said, you are not afraid to put money in a bank are you?

To make his point Googley clear Lock showed a picture of a mattress, and then one of an ATM.

ALSO: Do Google Apps really trump Nintendo Wii and Apple TV? Is Google Enterprise Search a joke? Google to big business: Google love belongs in the Enterprise!

The questions are open for debate, and they were debated, this morning in NYC at the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s User-Generated Content & Social Networking Forum, with the participation of:

Cheryl Guerin, VP Promotions & Interactives, MasterCard, International Tom Lynch, VP Marketing Strategy, Central Region, Avenue A | Razorfish

“What’s your priceless pick?” Mastercard asks consumers at Priceless.com, leveraging its long standing “priceless“ brand development theme strategy:

This is your chance to tell the world what's "Priceless" to you. Your Priceless Pick can be just about anything--an experience, a place, your favorite charity, a restaurant, a song--anything! You can even submit your own photos, video clips, and audio files, it's easy. Just, remember, the best priceless picks are the ones that other people can experience for themselves.

For Guerin, the “fill out the blanks model” of the Mastercard consumer-focused initiative represents a good formula for providing users a voice, but a controlled by the brand one.

If consumers want to “submit a pick,” a “priceless” one, they are taken to a well-structured online form. Mastercard then vets the submissions and only showcases those that serve to support the overall branding and marketing objectives of Mastercard.

Guerin underscored that Mastercard’s Priceless.com initiative is viewed as a component of the company’s overall integrated campaign strategy and is therefore supported by traditional (big) media spend and ROI analysis.

The consumer-focused Website had its “coming out” at the Academy Awards to generate awareness and trendy buzz. Mastercard evaluates Website traffic and user engagement at the site to gauge success, as well as the volume of user “picks” submissions.

Guerin proudly noted that with 100,000 submissions, consumers are actively engaging with the brand in a positive way, “only 200 entries were inappropriate.”

Not all user-generated advertising and marketing campaigns can be so finely structured, however.

What happens if something goes wrong? Lynch believes that if brands do not engage consumers in “relevant and meaningful” ways, they will be “called out” by passionate user groups.

There is a “dynamic shift” in the power equation between brands and their audience, according to Lynch.

Because groups can mobilize faster and build momentum, marketers can not hope to just “talk over them,” Lynch said, “there is nothing we can do to “make them go away.”

The genie is out of the bottle, and “the only control we have is to engage a dialogue.”

Why is Google so proud of itself? In sugar-laden frosting,Google announces Google Apps is #1!

Google even flaunts that Apps is a "winner" over Nintendo Wii, Apple TV, and the Slingbox Pro, and has the proof, so Google believes.

Apple TV, and the Slingbox Pro, further reinforcing the convergence between business and consumer technology. Internally, Google Apps is a collaboration between Google enterprise and consumer teams. It's great to see that it's paying off.

Google declares Google Office victory.

Just asGoogle does not seem to be paying much attention to what Google Apps users are really saying about Google Apps, Google does not seem to have paid attention to what PC World actually said about Google Apps!

Even Google's own rationale for Google Apps presents asa double edged Apps sword, touting its desire for aGoogley consumerization of the enterprise.

"Friends of Fred Thompson" is not the newest fan club for the actor known for playing NBC "Law & Order" head district attorney; It is a committee incorporated in papers filed last week with the Secretary of State of Nashville, Tennessee to "promote the potential candidacy of Fred Thompson for the office of president of the United States," according to AP reports.

Campaign 2008 is already in full swing and Thompson will have much Republican ground to catch up on: Fundraising and(more political) recognition. Aside from his show biz skills, Thompson has served as Senator for the State of Tennessee.

Rudolph Giulianiis currently leading the Republicancampaign 2008 pack, followed by John McCain and Mitt Romney.

Does Thompsonhave a shot to follow in the Ronald Reagan tradition? [poll id=103]

More in this Digital Markets Special Series:

Google sweet talks its way to political power Google CEO Schmidt on ‘Personal Democracy’: Up For Sale Reagan, Schwarzenegger win big in Republican debate campaign 2008 Hillary is the new Bill: Clintons plot White House coup, again Hillary Clinton in command for ‘when’ President Google, YouTube target $80 million political ad spend Google wins big as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battle

STAY TUNED TO THIS DIGITAL MARKETS BLOG FOR CONTINUING COVERAGE OF WHAT I AM CALLING “USER GENERATED POLITICS” 2008

Google, of course, is on the case, big time.

TheGoogleplex is spending billions not only investing in engineering R & D to "optimize" its SERP ranking algorithims, but, perhaps more importantly,to build-out its "massively scalable infrastructure" around the search world.

In the first quarter of2007 alone, Google spent $597 million in Capital Expenditures, the majority related to IT infrastructure invesments, including data centers, servers and networking equipment. In 2006, Google invested $1.9 billion in CapEx.

Saul Hansell, the New York Times today touts hewas "allowed"inside access to the Google search engineering team who "explained more than they ever have before in the news media about how their search system works."

Perhaps the Hansell assertion is correct that Google never before "explained" to the "news media" about how Google search "works," but that does not mean that the Google "secret" search sauce, aspresented byHansell, has not already been understood, presented and analyzed by some in the media, without need of "special" access to a sanitized Googleplex meet and greet.

While interesting,Hansell's article serves to confirm Google search operations modus operandi,rather than uncover any spanking new Google search ground.

SEM Beware: Google deals blow to search engine marketing I underscored upon the announcement of Google's much ballyhooed Universal Search last month. I wrote:

In one fell Universal Search swoop, Google has wreaked havoc not only on searchers and Websites, but on the entire multi billion dollar search marketing industry.

Think the almighty Google PageRank was an impossible organic nut to crack? Even fearsome Matt Cutts won’t be able to finessse his way through the Sisyphean search engine marketing challenge that will be the “new and improved” Google.com.

The Hansell "conversation" with top Google engineer Amit Singhal, at "the top of a bright chartreuse stair case in Building 43" of the Googleplex, supports my contention.

Google, and Hansell, seek to present an image of Google perpetually "tweaking" its "ranking algorithm" to optimize in a "frantic quest for perfect links":

The search quality team makes about a half-dozen major and minor changes a week to the vast nest of mathematical formulas that power the search engine.

Not only doesGoogle continuously change the manner in which it determines SERP ranking, Google may weigh "more than 200 types of information" in determining Google search rankings.

I characterize such an ever moving Google search organic ranking target as Sisyphean, Hansell dubs theGoogle organic search maze a "magical, mathematical brew."

Undoubtedly NOT so magical, though, for those SEMs seeking to know whatis actually brewing at the Googleplex, in in order to optimize client Web properties for ranking within the golden top SERP threesome.

After all, as Hansell dutifully spins, "what Google does is akin to 'rocket science.'" How can a mere search marketer compete wth a Googley rocket scientist!

Search markters will not be the only ones frustrated by Google's big Universal Search changes, though. In making Google SERP results even less of a known quantity, Google runs a big risk of alienating its core search audience.

In Why Google Search will NOT rule the Universe!I make a case for whyGoogle's new Universal Search SERPs will meet the fate of the now infamous Coca-Cola threatening New Coke fiasco.

Just as Coca-Cola used millions of dollars worth of market research to justify turning its back on the 100 year old strong secret Coca Cola formula for success and ended up back peddling and drowning in New Coke tears, the new Google.com will regret it ever fiddled with the successful, butunadorned andunimaginative, Google.com.

Hansell also makes a big search deal out of 1) Google's copying and caching of "the entire Internet" in its "huge, customized data centers" and 2) The Google search results "freshness quandry."

Neither Google issue is a new one.

I have written extensively about Google's server farm build out, SEE: Google plots server farm land grab in Europe.

Google Web page caching? It has been subject to "fair-use" lawsuits. SEE: Will Google pay for content?

Google SERP (un)timeliness? Upon Universal Search, I wrote: Google Search: Big, bad multi-billion dollar sandbox on just that notion, and how it serves Google AdWords purposes quite well:

If Google was indeed a public service, its sandbox could theoretically be disallowed due to age discrimination!

Ihave oft underscored that Google’s exclusionary “sandbox” results in automatic “banning” of perhaps the most relevant Web pages for a given search query, based simply on Googler-derived arbitrary notions of “aging.”

Will Google really change its aging tune, though? As it stands now, the Google sandbox assures all the more need for a new Website to buy AdWords, if it wants any Googlelove!

It is not news that Google SAYS it will be more open to Website "youngsters." SEE: Google’s Matt Cutts SERP quality scoring patent? What it means.

Time will undoubtedly NOT tell,given the more Google "tweaks," the less anyone knows what is really going on in the Google search world.

One thing will always be a given, though:Can't "get in" Google?No problem. Google AdWords will be happyto take your Website, if you bid high enough, that is.

ALSO: Google Universal Search $25,000 query in Jeopardy Google gets defensive, all over the world Google defends $165 million ‘few strings attached’ tax breaks

I analyzed friday YouTube: What MySpace can teach Google about copyrightasking rhetorically: Why isthe top social networking play, MySpace, run by “old media” News Corp. able, and willing, to protect the copyright of the content of others, BUT the top video sharing play, YouTube, run by GOOGLE, insists it is stuck in the copyright protection “tools” mud.

SEE: MySpace polices video copyright: Where is Google YouTube?

The Google YouTube royal management team apparently will say anything, anywhere, disingenuous or not. Not only was the Google YouTube All Things Digital spiel an inaccurate portrayal of their true copyright protection stance, the YouTube EMI joint press statement released almost simulataneously is in contradiction with the Hurley-Schmidt our copyright tools would be to Viacom's rescue, (not so) soon.

While the YouTube EMI Music "milestone partnership" press release is a typical study in unclear, evasive Google YouTube speak, it clearly sugggests YouTube HAScopyright infringement protection tools, contrary to the Schmidt Hurley protestations at All Things Digital,and EMI Music gets them:

EMI Music will use YouTube’s industry-leading content management tools which feature a content identification and reporting system that will help EMI track and monetize its content and compensate its artists. YouTube’s content management tools also give EMI Music the ability to request the removal of EMI’s copyrighted content from YouTube.

What IS the deal then? The YouTube EMI Music deal? In typical Google style of fanfare without the substance, there does not appear to be any specific deal.

As as been the YouTube "partner" modus operandi, Googgle will call the EMI Music shots because YouTube has thefans, all of them. The bottom "milestone" partnership line simply appears to be that EMI agrees to be Google and YouTube fan friendly: EMI Music accordsYouTube its copyright content and agrees not to sue Google.

What does EMI Music get in return? Nothing guaranteed:

EMI Music has agreed to work with YouTube and Google to develop business models in which the YouTube community will be able to access user generated content featuring EMI-owned and copyrighted audio and video works.

Eric Nicoli, CEO of EMI Group, said: “Working with YouTube under this agreement meets EMI’s objectives to offer consumers the best possible entertainment experiences, to create new ways to connect our artists to fans and to enter into innovative business models that will generate revenues for our business and our creators. YouTube has quickly established itself as a stand-out fan favorite because it’s a site that taps into what people want and also consistently delivers a good experience.

And YouTube, Google, EMI Music are to live happily ever after.

What about Viacom's copyright ownership rights? Viacom doesn't "get it," so it doesn't get the "tools," if YouTube actually even has them, or not.

READ MY EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW:Google at Risk: YouTube class action lawsuit changes DMCA copyright game

Following the Google Feedburner deal, "My soul, and ten other things that Google owns," Adam Ostrow notes.

YES, but it isn't Feedburner that tilted the scale. Upon the firstrumors ofGoogle-DoubleClick,Iheadlined "Google (to be) a Monopoly." When the deal was officially announced, I updated my story toheadline: "Google: $3.1 billion cash for Web monopoly!"

I reported the Feedburner acquisition yesterday: Google gets Feedburner and in the Web’s private business.

It actually has been aGoogley given for some time that Googleis determined to CONTROL (NOT ORGANIZE)ALL the world's information, and profit from all the world's advertising.

So what? Would sum up the world's reaction.

I opined earlier this week (before Google Gears):Why Google is more dangerous than Microsoft, underscoring that Googlehas learned a thing or two from Microsoft, NOT in a good way.

I wrote:

Microsoft’s “Evil Empire” financial success was derived fromcunning ecosystem manipulation and brutal industry intimidationaimed solely atcreating and extending Microsoft monopoly pricing power.

What really sealedMicrosoft’s monopoly fate, however, was a no holds barred, take no prisoners modus operandi.Thanks to Bill Gates’ dogged persistenceand shrewd maneuvering, Microsoft achievedthe industry domination he sought, no matter who or what tried to crossMicrosoft en route to unrivaled economicpower and world glory.

Today’s technology power house,”Do No Evil” Google, is no different, in desire or effect. In fact, Google power is even more insidious, because Google has the “consumer” on it side.

Just one day after I pitted Google's intentions against those of Microsoft, Google announced Google Gears: The world then immediately came tumbling down, overwhelmingly against Microsoft and near unamimously cheering for Google.

I (no surprise to readers of this Digital Markets Blog) had a different take on things.

SEE: Google Gears: NOT a Microsoft killer

What gives now, post Feedburner?

Ostrow starts out appropriately noting "are there any parts of our online lives that don’t reside somewhere within the Googleplex?" So what though, it seems from the Mashable post.

Ostrow goes onto point out a few Google services he uses, and that's that. Ostrow provides neither Google outrage, nor Googley cheer; In fact, he doesn't offer any conclusion or summation whatsoever.

What are we to conclude then? Google owns our souls, and that is a good thing?

Seemingly. The first commenter to the post, Kevin Keating, cheeringly affirms:

Sounds good to me! I also tell Google where I want to go on the internet, and let them remember where I’ve been so I don’t have to. And I’m more than okay will ALL of this because what’s private to me is and will always be private. And that, my friend, is the secret love I harbor for…

Oh, I totally almost gave it away.

WELCOME, MY FRIENDS, TO THE GOOGLE WORLD, WHERETHE "FRIENDLY" MONOPOLIST RULES (in a notsofriendly fashion).

SEE: Google security alert: Universal Search scarier than Google Maps

GOOGLE SECURITY ALERT: Ongoing user tracking by Google Search is WAY SCARIER (to put it in the vernacular) than Google's new mapping service, "Street View" which, in fact, does not represent a new product at all, it is a knock-off of "Block View" by Amazon's A9,which did the exact same thing years ago.

BUT, if AP headlines thatGoogle is "icky" than it must be so? After all, AP claims it isthe "backbone of the world's information system, the largest and oldest news organization in the world."

It isnot surprising that AP would headline withthe Google "ick" factor," despitethat its editorial policyis to be "the essential global news network, providing distinctive news services of the highest quality, reliability and objectivity with reports that are accurate, balanced and informed."

Maybe, butsensational headlines sell, or in the AP case, garner attention.

But AP is simply "reporting the facts," the company would undoubtedly retort, asthe headline"quotes" a targeted interviewee,Kevin Bankston,Electronic Frontier Foundation, who apparently said"There is a certain 'ick' factor here."

By choosing to make that emotive word from a single source, an advocate for a particular position to boot, its headline, AP nonetheless goes the tabloid route, and seems to take a side, as well.

AP also writes:

Google is hoping to elicit "oohs and ahhs" with Street View, which was introduced on its maps for the San Francisco Bay area, New York, Las Vegas, Denver and Miami earlier this week.

While the emotive "oohs and ahhs" are in quotes, AP does not reference who or what is being quoted, if anyone or anything in fact is the source ofAP's noted "oohs and ahhs."

Why such universal media concern over Google "Street View," but not regarding the ongoing high risks inherent with daily use of the number one search engine itself?

Because, contrary to the nitty gritty, down and dirty analysis required to flesh out the real personal security risks at Google.com, flashing pretty photos of innocent cats andemploying mass-media friendly "terminology" such as "icky" is easy, and crowd pleasing.

The truth of the security matterthough is that even if Google were to be "shamed" into taking down "Street View" (highly unlikely), the real Google.com security danger would persist, as I persistently report and analyze.

In Google: $3.1 billion DoubleClick date with the FTC?I citeNew York Governor Elliot Spitzer'sConsumer Protection Board (CPB) solicitation of the Federal Trade Commissionto halt the Google DoubleClick merger "until questions are answered about how Google tracks the habits of millions of Internet users."

The CPB also wants to know what will happen once the merger allows Google to collect even more information.

People may not realize it, but Google already collects and retains an enormous amount of personal data about the specific websites and advertisements that are visited by millions of people, said Mindy Bockstein Chairperson and Executive Director of the CPB.

The CPB is urging the FTC to require Google to make full and public disclosure of its current data collection practices and contemplated data collection practices post-merger and establish a publicly disclosed, clear and conspicuous data collection policy, including:

• a plan to protect Google’s database from cyberthieves;
• consumer access to the personally-identifiable information in Google’s database and the ability to delete or edit inaccurate information;
• an opt-out mechanism that would allow an Internet user to prevent Google from tracking and storing information about the websites visited by an individual computer user; and,
• remedies in the event of a data breach or failure to comply with a consumer’s opt-out request.

New York State has its consumer privacy priorities straight and is on the Google case, the real scary Google Search user tracking case.

FOR MORE SEE: Beware: Google’s big, bad privacy risks

Barack Obama on MySpace, the REAL Barack Obama on MySpace, is closing in on 100,000 friends.

(SEEMySpace to 175 million friends: It’s OUR Space, not yours!)

Hillary Clinton officially has 83,715 MySpace friends; Obama bests the front runner with 90,914 official MySpace friends.

Obama is now hoping his friends mean money. The "Official"Barack ObamaMySpace Profile is sporting a handy "Donate Now" call to action:

"Show your support. Donate to the Presidential campaignnow!"

By now, Obama means make a pledge on the spot by entering a dollar amount directly inhis "Donation Badge."

By "pledging" a donation amount, MySpacers are then taken to the BarackObama.com official campaign donation submission form to "make your donation online":

This campaign is about building a different kind of politics. We don't take money from lobbyists or political action committees, and we're going to build a broad base of individual donors to ensure that this campaign answers to no one but the people. That starts with you. Make your donation online using the form below.

The Obama online donation form appears pre-populated with the MySpacers pledged donation amount.

WILL IT WORK? [poll id=102]

More in this Digital Markets Special Series:

Google sweet talks its way to political power Google CEO Schmidt on ‘Personal Democracy’: Up For Sale Reagan, Schwarzenegger win big in Republican debate campaign 2008 Hillary is the new Bill: Clintons plot White House coup, again Hillary Clinton in command for ‘when’ President Google, YouTube target $80 million political ad spend Google wins big as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battle

STAY TUNED TO THIS DIGITAL MARKETS BLOG FOR CONTINUING COVERAGE OF WHAT I AM CALLING “USER GENERATED POLITICS” 2008

What is Facebook up to now? Facebook goes commercial, big time.

Just days ago I undersocred:Why Facebook is scarier than Google. How so? Just read the Facebook Privacy Policy, as I excerpted:

USE OF INFORMATION OBTAINED BY FACEBOOK

By using Facebook, you are consenting to have your personal data transferred to and processed in the United States.

Facebook may use information in your profile without identifying you as an individual to third parties. We do this for purposes such as aggregating how many people in a network like a band or movie and personalizing advertisements and promotions so that we can provide you Facebook. We believe this benefits you. You can know more about the world around you and, where there are advertisements, they’re more likely to be interesting to you. For example, if you put a favorite movie in your profile, we might serve you an advertisement highlighting a screening of a similar one in your town. But we don’t tell the movie company who you are.

HowFacebook sells its 24 million Facebookersto advertisers:

Marketing to young adults on their own terms is critical for success. Facebook offers relevant and integrated advertising opportunities to engage the tech-savvy youth audience.

While Facebook allows third party companiesto buy targeted access to individual Facebookers, Facebook believes all is "relevant and integrated" advertising good because "we don't tell the (X) companywho you are."

Perhaps not, but Facebook may very well tell companies everything you do and everything about you!

Do Facebookers really welcome ads served just for them? We may soon find out. Facebook has entered the for-fee, sponsored polling business.

READ REST OF STORY BELOW IMAGE

An easy way to get quick answers to your questions. Allows you to ask detailed questions, target them to specific user segments and receive real-time responses. You can target Facebook users based on gender, age, school, location, or profile keyword.

The poll will display in users' News Feed.

In other words, if any corporation, organization or individual wants to "poll" people who describe themselves as "sex maniac," Facebook Polls is the direct product for them, all it takes is $5 to start. From there, the Facebook Polling sky is the limit:

Facebook charges you based on the number of responses you indicate that you need, multiplied by the amount that you indicate that you're willing to pay per response. The more you pat per response, the faster Facebook delivers complete results.

Does Facebook stand behind its "fast" results? NO:

We do not give refunds for any reason. This includes, but is not limited to, polls we removed for any reason, polls we removed at your request, or if the site was down for some or all of the time that your poll was supposed to run.

Facebook will not verify the accuracy nor the statistical significance of response data.

Is the vaunted Facebook "Social Graph"now very business rules anti-social?

ALSO: MySpace: 179 million times more open than Facebook Who needs Facebook? Students fight back Facebook vs. Craigslist? NO magic formula in online classifieds Craigslist vs. Facebook? Why Craigslist wins, big time

Marc Benioff, CEO, affirms "It's good to be with Google," as cited by MarketWatch.

How good is the multitude of"stuff" that Google offers? Google mapping services is looking Googley good, to Benioff.

How good will Google and Salesforce.com be together? There is already Google love going on at Salesforce.com.

Salesforce.comruns adedicated "Salesforce for Google AdWords" blog in conjunction with its "Salesforce for Google AdWords" initiative:

Create ads on Google, Track leads in Salesforce, Measure ROI.

Salesforce for Google AdWords debuted last year, designed as a for fee program,based notably on technology obtained with the Salesforce acquisition of Kieden Corporation, a third party search marketing company.

In April, Google announced a direct AdWords reseller arrangement with Intel, as I analyze in Google piggybacks on Intel: What about Intuit?. The Intuit-Google AdWords resale deal in QuickBooks, announced last year, has not met with any apparent success.

What if Salesforce.com were to now push Google Apps Premiere, however, rather than just AdWords? The Salesforce.comdirect enterprise salesforce may be looking good, to Google Enterprise.

Benioff also underscores "providing a product that integrates Google services has long been something customers ask for." What particular Salesforce.com product, integrating which specific Google services?

Suspense is good, as Salesforce.com wants to assure alltune in Tuesdayfor the latest "groundbreaking" Google alliance news.

ALSO: Google Gears: NOT a Microsoft killer Google Office vs. Microsoft? Maybe

Google is now the proud owner of Feedburner,a "leading provider of Web feed distribution and management tools," at a rumored acquisition price of $100 million.

Worried yet about Google Big Brother peering into your online business?

Google Analytics: Should Google be minding YOUR Web business? I undercored last month: Is it really prudent for Web sites to open their back office to Google? Should Google really know how its AdWords customers are investing in online advertising with Google competitors?

Google enthuses over its newly Googley Feeburner: "we constantly aim to give AdWords advertisers broader distribution to an even wider audience of users."

Dick Costolo, Feedburner CEO and estatic new Googler, weighs in on why Google is keen on Feedburner:

1. Google's competencies and focus around publisher analytics, distribution, and monetization map perfectly to our suite of services.
2. Publishers want a single dashboard and single source for the metrics that give them feedback about the value of their content and its impact on their business. By combining our market leading feed metrics with Google's market leading site and marketing analytics, publishers now get a comprehensive, 360-degree view of their audience. This 'total perspective' has long been a goal of ours, and we think our combined analytics offering is going to provide publishers with previously undiscovered insights and opportunities.
3. The measurement of awareness advertising is evolving from unique impressions to audience engagement. By providing our hundreds of thousands of publishers with Google's world-class advertising marketplace and metrics, we can provide far more value to publishers and begin to deliver this next step in ROI measurement to advertisers.

Data, data and more business proprietary data, moving over to Google's worldwide server farms for perpetual "safekeeping."

What is to become of this latest big batch of confidential information on the businesses of others that Google acquires in acquiring Feedburner?

Feedburner is a website operated by Google Inc., Feedburner states. As such, the Google Privacy Policy rules. NOT a very reassuring state of affairs!

SEE BEWARE: GOOGLE'S BIG, BAD PRIVACY RISKS

SEE: Google CEO tows Google line at D5

Think Schmidts' recent "Big Brother" musings reflect a Googledisregard for the privacy of others? Schmidt's condescending retort to Viacom illustrates a Google rules belief, no matter who or what tries to spoil the Google free content party.

Why is fearless Google and its fearless leaderso smug? Why not!

After all, if the leading search engine need merely announce a quarter baked "open" software effort designed purely to fosterits worldwide dominance--Google Gears--to receive near unanimous acclaim, as well ascheers for the end of its nemesis, Microsoft, why wouldn't it truly believe it IS King of the World, and act accordingly.

What is Google's YouTube "tools" problem?

Is Google not the "best" engineering run company in the world? Is Google not staffed by better than rocket scientists?

Why isthe top social networking play, MySpace, run by "old media" News Corp. able, and willing, to protect the copyright of the content of others, BUT the top video sharing play, YouTube, run by GOOGLE, insists it is stuck in the copyright protection "tools" mud.

SEE: MySpace polices video copyright: Where is Google YouTube?

If Google can not muster the brain power or technology to implement existing, readily availablecopyright protection screening processes, such as MySpace has done, why should anyone have any confidence in Google's technological capabilities in any software endeavor, such as Google Apps.

The truthof the matter, of course, is that Google can dothe right copyright thing, if it wanted to, but it doesn't have any intention of doing right by content owners.

Why does Googlecontinue to sing thetools are on their way song? Because it is Google doing the singing, and any Google song is music to the world's ears.

ALSO: Why Google is more dangerous than Microsoft Why Google is more dangerous than Microsoft

For serious analytical debate over what a Google world really implies for the world's citizens? NO.

Remember when Google CEO Eric Schmidt sent "Big Brother"shockwaves throughout the blogosphere? It seems likeyesterday (it almost was).

Schmidt's reveries of anot quite real super personalized Google searchyielded the likes of: "Does Eric Schmidt want to sniff the armpits of my mind?" courtesy of AndrewKeen.

YES, the "elevated" headline is offeredfrom the very Keen that rallies against "amateur hour," at least in plugginghis new book.

The latest Google privacy "flap"to gain big (not so serious) press is over Google Street View, the Amazon A9 "Block View" knock off.

SEE: Did Google really trump Amazon?

Whatissue is of primordial concern now?

"For Mary Kalin-Casey, it was never about her cat," the New York Times assures us, under the posed photo of the proud owner of "Monty."

The NYT professionaly produced photo of (not the real) record is a large, smashing close-up portrait of Kalin-Casy snuggling cat Monty by a sunfilled window overlooking a serene looking homeown American street.

The accusatory Google Street View "evidence," on the other hand isdark and ominous. So dark,infact that nothing is discernable, certainly notthe "indictment" worthy"zoom" of "Monty, her cat, sitting on a perch in the living room window of her second-floor apartment," that the NYT writes of.

Perhaps that is why Kalin-Casy actually made her case to the sometimes "blog of record," BoingBoing, rather than the touted "newspaper of record."

TheGoogle reaction? As I predicted upon the launch of Google's "Street View", the Google position is the samethat Amazon's A9 "Block View" position was:

It allows users to request that a photo be removed for privacy reasons, but the company had received few such requests.

Talk of smelly armpits and cuddly cats may befun, for some.

The REAL Google big, bad privacy RISKS, however, are alive and well and impacting the world and its citizens 24/7, as I have been documenting and analyzing in depth.

CONCERNED ABOUT THE REAL GOOGLE PRIVACY RISKS? READ ON:

Google: $3.1 billion DoubleClick date with the FTC? Why Facebook is scarier than Google Google plays mind games with personal search Why Google CEO is ‘harmless’ Beware: Google is NOT your privacy friend Google zeal breeds more identity theft risks Google user data cloud: Do you trust it? Google vs. Google on privacy, or not Google plots server farm land grab in Europe Google, YouTube double down on user tracking: DoubleClick next up Google scary now? Personal Health Records, sponsored by Google, nextand Google Analytics: Should Google be minding YOUR Web business?

Does that mean then that Microsoft is en route to being "flattened" by Google.

Moreover, does Gears magically stamp Google as developers' best friend versus the supposedly perennialbad boy Microsoft?

Google would have the world believe in Googley who needs Microsoft super powers, and it overwhelming does.

Google Gears churns toward Microsoft

Not only is Google strengthening its presence in the developer community, it is pleasing many different factions by releasing Gears as open-source software, rather than proprietary. Microsoft has been criticized for locking developers into its Windows operating system and other Microsoft software.

And for consumers and corporations, Google Gears knocks down a perceived barrier in competing with desktop applications. While users of Microsoft applications, such as the popular Office suite, can work in the software and access data stored on their computer at any time, Google's Web-based applications, such as Gmail, require a user to be connected to the Internet. That will change now that Gears has arrived.

Google, the open source poster child? Not so fast.

Eben Moglen, chairman of the Software Freedom Law Center was not convinced last week and it is unlikely that one announcement abouta strategic Google move with an end-game to bolster Google’s own fortunes will spur him to see the Google light.

SEE: Does Google play fair in Open Source?

Google to the consumer and corporate rescue? Already? Hardly.

Google Gears circa June 2007 is a work in (slow) progress "early-access developers’ release," disclaimed by Google itself as "not yet intended for use by real users in production applications," let alone consumers or corporations!

Google isapparently pre-ordained to rule over Microsoft. Stephen Arnold, for one,will not deny the "Google legacy," at Microsoft's expense:

Gears ratchets the collar Google has around Microsoft's throat. Each innovation takes some of the oxygen away from the behemoth in Redmond. If Google exerts more pressure, Microsoft might become more confused.

Microsoft dazed, confused and gasping for air? Google wishes.

What big bad Google innovation is there that has escaped Microsoft?

Google is the undisputed leader in search and search advertising, for now. BUT the search game is the only one Google is winning, despite its endless efforts to diversify.

What's more, Microsoft trumps Google on the serious acquisitions front: aQuantive, TellMe, Massive...

The world may be routing for Google to outgun Microsoft, but "Redmond" is growing its anti-Mountain View search and advertisingammunitionAND maneuvering on with legacy gains from long won victories on the software battlefield.

SEE: Why Google is more dangerous than Microsoft

ALSO: How Microsoft beats Google in ad agency battle Google: Tough love for Microsoft Google vs. Symantec, McAfee? Not exactly Google’s love hate relationship with the desktop