Deconstructing Google's Choking on Anti-Sicko Campaign Invitation

Yesterday I apparently joined many other bloggers in examining a blog entry from "Google's Health Advertising Team." It seems that the collective heat was a bit much for Google management, which had the blogger fall on her sword, saying that the opinion was hers and not Google's. Well, at least that's the simple explanation. Let's do some deconstruction:

Well, I've learned a few things since I posted on Friday. For one thing, even though this is a new blog, we have readers! That's a good thing.

No, you had one person post a note about the entry in a spot or two that get tremendous traffic and activity.

Not so good is that some readers thought the opinion I expressed about the movie Sicko was actually Google's opinion. It's easy to understand why it might have seemed that way, because after all, this is a corporate blog. So that was my mistake -- I understand why it caused some confusion.

A nice try, but corporations don't work this way. This wasn't one person's sole idea. At best, it was representative of an atmosphere in corporate marketing. Of course the company wants to make money - that's why it exists. And if you're in the business of selling ad space, one type of logical customer is a company in an industry taking a beating of bad publicity.

But the more important point, since I doubt that too many people care about my personal opinion, is that advertising is an effective medium for handling challenges that a company or industry might have.

In other words, her previous entry was correct in the first case. If healthcare is getting slammed, it can buy ads and pretend that the issues the movie raises don't exist.

You could even argue that it's especially appropriate for a public policy issue like healthcare.

Because they get really affected by public opinion and they've got gobs of money - and there is that movie that's out. Maybe you've heard of it.

Whether the healthcare industry wants to rebut charges in Mr. Moore's movie, or whether Mr. Moore wants to challenge the healthcare industry,...

Google is happy to sell ads to anyone.

...advertising is a very democratic and effective way to participate in a public dialogue.

If you can afford it - like healthcare.

That is Google's opinion, and it's unrelated to whether we support, oppose or (more likely) don't have an official position on an issue.

Because we want to take whatever money comes out way, unfettered by personal opinion.

That's the real point I was trying to make,...

That is, we want to sell you an ad.

...which was less clear because I offered my personal criticism of the movie.

And if I hadn't, you still would have known what I meant, but no one could have pointed out that our main principle is that contained in our bank accounts. Because if I had really been that out of line with company policy, my backside would be leaving divots from here to San Diego.

I think we all got the point the first time around.

Google Ready to Help Corporations Battle Negative Press

Thanks to a Slashdot.org reader for noticing this blog entry from "Google's Health Advertising Team." It discusses the Michael Moore movie Sicko as an entry into discussing how to use Google to counter the force of negative public attention:

We can place text ads, video ads, and rich media ads in paid search results or in relevant websites within our ever-expanding content network. Whatever the problem, Google can act as a platform for educating the public and promoting your message. We help you connect your company’s assets while helping users find the information they seek.

In other words, we can help you try to keep people from noticing what it is that you're doing wrong. Personally I'd say that for a company to try to pretend that it's not doing something wrong is an evil act. Google's corporate code of conduct says that its "informal corporate motto is 'Don't be evil.'" But they never said anything about advertising it.