How does Google do its Marketing?

I have read many articles on how enterprises do Marketing by aid of
Google.
However, how does Google do its Marketing?
Have you seen articles about this?
For example:
Does Google rely on local agent or direct sale to promote its
advertisement?
Dose Google's distribution channel vary in different countries?
How does Google form its brand?
And so on......

On 22 Nov 2005 18:02:42 -0800, "doubleqiu" <doubleqiu (AT) 126 (DOT) com> wrote:

I have read many articles on how enterprises do Marketing by aid of
Google.
However, how does Google do its Marketing?
Have you seen articles about this?
For example:
Does Google rely on local agent or direct sale to promote its
advertisement?
Dose Google's distribution channel vary in different countries?
How does Google form its brand?
And so on......

Erm wasn't there an article on the bbc site about people using the
internet to do their homework?

--
Promotional codes, discounts, money off
http://www.promotionalcode.co.uk/
http://www.moneyoffvouchers.co.uk

Davémon wrote:

doubleqiu wrote:

I have read many articles on how enterprises do Marketing by aid of
Google.
However, how does Google do its Marketing?
Have you seen articles about this?
For example:
Does Google rely on local agent or direct sale to promote its
advertisement?
Dose Google's distribution channel vary in different countries?
How does Google form its brand?
And so on......


Traditional 'marketing' models don't apply. You might get close using
brand, viral marketing, and communication theory, but at the moment
you're trying to apply a completely useless critical framework.

Useless it is, and the marketing aint marketing at all. You and i and
everybody is doing Google's marketing. They don't have to do a thing.
Everybody is speaking, writing about and using Google (well almost
everybody).

By updating their seachengine now and then, they get people worried and
talking about them. By implementing new features, they get attention
etc. etc.

If it's homework, sack your teacher.

Why?

Don't you think that a part of learning is finding things out yourselve
instead of waiting util the teacher is going to tell it to you?

And if it is, the Op was smart enough to find this newsgroup in wich the
question asked fits.



Best.....

Tonnie

--
Webontwerp:
http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/
Korte handleiding zoekmachine optimalisatie / gevonden worden:
http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/gevonden-worden.html

Davémon wrote:

Tonnie wrote:

Davémon wrote:

doubleqiu wrote:

snip

Does Google rely on local agent or direct sale to promote its
advertisement?
Dose Google's distribution channel vary in different countries?
How does Google form its brand?
And so on......


Traditional 'marketing' models don't apply. You might get close using
brand, viral marketing, and communication theory, but at the moment
you're trying to apply a completely useless critical framework.


snip


If it's homework, sack your teacher.



Why?


Because (I assume) the 'marketing' framework has been proposed by the
teacher with which to examine Google. If the teacher isn't aware of the
paradigm shift that's required for a meaningful enquiry into how large
scale commodity brands operate, they ain't worth listening to!

Like if your physics teacher asked you to use a newtonian model of
physics to explain sub-atomic particle movement. It's just plain wrong,
but it's not your fault if you go around asking the wrong questions.

Don't you think that a part of learning is finding things out
yourselve instead of waiting util the teacher is going to tell it to you?


Does it matter if it's some guy on usenet or the teacher telling you?
IMHO neither fall under 'finding out for yourself', it's just asking
different people their opinions.

A part of /teaching/ is arming your students with the ability to ask
meaningful and appropriate questions. Which IMHO the OP has failed to
do. I don't think that is strictly the OP's fault, but rather the fault
of the teacher, so find a better teacher, one who isn't stuck in an
outdated 1950's american capitalist vision of communications and business.

Part of learning is making mistakes, but for you those things don't
matter as it seems. The main thing you like to do is making your point.

Point taken and farewell.




--
Webontwerp:
http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/
Korte handleiding zoekmachine optimalisatie / gevonden worden:
http://vision2form.nl/webontwerp/gevonden-worden.html

To tell you the truth, in china, which is my country, ALL search
engines more or less reply on local agents. Some search engine, like
3721, which is part of Yahoo China, even cancled online self-help
advertisemt.
Many enterprises, such as shoe manufacturers, do not know how to do
advertisment on Google. In some rural areas the situation may be worse.
So they find local agents to do it. Of course they are a big market.
Google has many powerful competitors, which have advantages in such
distriubution channel in China. Google is now the third largest among
them. It remains to see who will win.
But I would agree that such phenomena would disappear in a few years

Really? self-help adverts being what we might call 'pay for placement'?
Yes. Now if you want to "pay for placement" on 3721, you have to

telephone a local agent and pay them for advertisement placement.

Are the local agents employed by Google? or are they more like the SEO's
we have here, who advocate Google, but aren't paid by them?
They are like retailors. What they sell is advertisement placement on

SEs.One agent would sell products of different SEs to earn more money.
They share profit with SEs.

People no longer say
"search the internet" they say "Google it" ! So they've quite deeply
embedded themselves into the culture.
In China we say " Baidu it!" www.baidu.com is the largest SE in China.

"'Baidu' was inspired by a poem written more than 800 years ago during
the Song Dynasty. The poem compares the search for a retreating beauty
amid chaotic glamour with the search for one's dream while confronted
by life's many obstacles. ".hundreds and thousands of times, for her I
searched in chaos, suddenly, I turned by chance, to where the lights
were waning, and there she stood." Baidu, whose literal meaning is
hundreds of times, represents persistent search for the ideal."(From
Baidu)

China is quite a new market for Google
Yes. Google still has a long way to go. Baidu has made several

advertisements pointing out that technicians in Google do not
understand Chinese Language. However, situation is changing, Google is
hunting for excellent Chinese engineers to solve such prolems. And
Google has made progresses.Everyone is now discussing whether Google
will succeed in China.

Anyway, I will do my best to finish my homework.

Davémon wrote:

Tonnie wrote:

Davémon wrote:

If the teacher isn't aware of the
paradigm shift that's required for a
meaningful enquiry into how large
scale commodity brands operate, they
ain't worth listening to!

Part of learning is making mistakes, but for you
those things don't matter as it seems.

I think you misunderstood me. I believe learning from 'mistakes' is of
critical importance.

Point taken and farewell.

You don't go for the Socratic method then? Oh well.

Actually, Davémon seems weak on the Socratic method.

One method of Socratic teaching is to present the "established" model
*as fact* and then encourage the student to discover how emergent
confditions require emergent models.

I think that any teacher who posed a 1950s-framed question on marketing
strategy with google as the target of the query would be mking a
brilliant move, inducing students to have the courage to break open and
expose a flawed hypothesis in order to encompass emergent real world
data.

I learned this at Shimer College in 1964 -- where, for instance, we were
taught the phlogiston theory as "fact" and were tested on it -- and only
after having learned it thoroughly, were given "new data" -- and had to
discover for ourselves how and why the phlogiston model did not
accurately describe the real world.

It's a scary, open-ended way to teach, and the teacher must, in a sense,
be an actor willing to portray the flawed or outdated hypothesis as
"truth," but the result is well worth the effort in that students who
grasp the principles of the method become fearless thinkers, capable of
examinng not only data but also examinng the hypotheses that underlie
the data and its collection.

--
cat yronwode

http://www.southern-spirits.com
African American Magical History

Davémon wrote:

catherine yronwode wrote:

One method of Socratic teaching is to present the "established"
model *as fact* and then encourage the student to discover how
emergent confditions require emergent models.

Yes, one method.

I think that any teacher who posed a 1950s-framed question on
marketing strategy with google as the target of the query would be
mking a brilliant move, inducing students to have the courage to
break open and expose a flawed hypothesis in order to encompass
emergent real world data.

In this, doubleqiu served as my teacher, and I thank him/her for that.

:-) Good point. because i am not a student of marketing, i did not
follow that at first, but i see what you mean.

I also have learned something from this exchange: i did not know
until i looked it up that the spontaneous popularity of a new social
item could be recast in terms of *marketing* -- such as "buzz
marketing."

I happen to think that one cannot actually sustain "buzz" on an
unworthy product, and thus it is actually not a significant
marketing strategy in general, only in particular instances where an
item attracts "evangelists" -- and i say this even while i admit to
consciously helping to build "buzz" around products i personally
admire, including google, for which i have evangelized rather
overtly.

Sociological side note on my google evangelism:

It turns out that i am the author of 504 usenet articles mentioning
google.

The first time i gave a public endorsement in which i ranked google
above other search engines was on January 13, 2000. Here is the
exact quote: "By the way, i currently recommend google.com as the
best search engine (after years of promoting and using altavista)."

By June 28, 2000 i mentioned in usenet that "The top search engine
sending people to our site is google.com" -- which, as you might
imagine, gave me even more incentive to keep up the "buzz" about
google's greatness, since it was now feeding us more traffic than
the other SEs were.

So what had begun in January 2000 as my admiration for a clean,
clutter-free, fast-loading SE had, within 6 months, turned into a
co-evolutionary burst of symbiosis, in which google favoured my site
and i returned the favour by promoting google's efficiency through
public acclaim.

Had Yahoo, AOL, or MSN produced results that favoured my site, i
might have recommended them to the public, but they did not and do
not, and so i tend to downplay their existence.

It is important to note that no actual money or recompense in kind
has changed hands between myself and any search engine company -- i
refuse to pay to be listed or to receive high rankings -- so my
relationship with google is strictly one of voluntary evangelism
with reciprocated benefits -- symbiosis, in other words.

Note that Tonnies responce was not to defend the 'teacher', nor to
attack my hypothesis, but to take offense, make personal attacks and
withdraw from the debate.

With such behaviour, there is no learning, for anyone.

Yes, i noticed that. Such stuff is dross.

snip nice example of socratic irony


The technique of socratic irony you've described (where the teacher is
forced to use a false hypothesis) is only really relevant if one
participant in the discorse (a teacher) needs to have their authority
questioned in order for the actual learning to take place.

I disagree. The technique i described can be used by preference, not
out of necessity, if one wishes to educate students to question
authority, In the case i cited it is not used "in order for the
actual learning to take place" but in order to bring about what
might be called "meta-learning" -- learning ABOUT learning.

Where all participants are equal (for example usenet) aren't all
theories open for equal treatment in discourse? To do so we should
question all of theories as equally (in)valid, until sufficient
reasoning emerges.

This is a great idea, and in my experience it works well as long as
personality issues are excluded -- hence the emphasis in aise on
tests and the stating of actual URLs for personal inspection.

It's a scary, open-ended way to teach, and the teacher must, in a
sense, be an actor willing to portray the flawed or outdated
hypothesis as "truth," but the result is well worth the effort in
that students who grasp the principles of the method become fearless
thinkers, capable of examinng not only data but also examinng the
hypotheses that underlie the data and its collection.

Whether the hypothesis is true or not doesn't matter, its the quality
of the reasoning and debate of in attack or defense of the hypothesis
which is important.

While what you say may be true about Socratic debate in general, i
think that in aise the issue is more narrowly defined, for without
some sort of ultimate decision-making (not to mention consensus)
about any given SE hypothesis, we merely have debate for the sake of
debate -- which is fun, but not of practical concern in a group like
aise, where distinct practical goals are always placed nakedly on
the table (viz. attracting more traffic, getting to #1 for selected
serps, achieving good ROI, etc.).

So, am I weak on socratic method, or are you being too narrow in your
definition?

I was not trying to delimit a definition of Socratic debate or
Socratic teaching methods, but i will admit to giving an example
that was narrowly focussed.

or is this way OT?

That too. But i enjoyed it, so it has some value.

Cordially,

cat yronwode

Lucky W Amulet Archive -------- http://www.luckymojo.com/luckyw.html