Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting

We’ve heard from insiders that Google’s PR strategy to the Don’t Be Evil toolbar bombshell– which exposed just how much the search giant is meddling with search results– is just to stay quiet until it blows over. And then press ahead with the “Search-plus-your-world-or-else” strategy.

While much of the press has moved on to newer stories, we’re refusing to fall victim to the ADD news cycle on this one. Even if it tanks our traffic, we are going to keep digging and digging and bitching and bitching until we get an answer from Google over whether or not the promises made back in 2005 have changed today. Sorry, Google, your promise of search impartiality to users made you billions of dollars. You owe them an answer. You are too important to the Web to sweep this under the rug.

Not surprisingly, we’re turning up several little gems of information in the process. Today’s tidbit highlights just how tense the relationships between Twitter and Google– and no doubt Facebook and Google–are becoming as the spat continues.

A well-placed source tells us that Google’s Android team was supposed to meet with Twitter at CES about how to make Twitter work better on Android. Then, the Search Plus Your World controversy began. Eric Schmidt claimed that Google couldn’t index Twitter and Facebook properly because those companies don’t allow Twitter to access their data. Twitter openly refuted this: The reality is Google’s bots hit Twitter hundreds of millions of times per day, sending 1,500 queries per second. Google has those Tweets, whether Twitter likes it or not.

The Google brain trust was so irritated with Twitter’s statements that the Android meeting was abruptly called off, according to a source with knowledge of the situation. There’s still no sign of the meeting being rescheduled.

Once again, the obsession with Google+ appears clouding the company’s stated mission. Android’s whole raison d’être is to be the more open alternative to Apple. Fighting with one of the world’s most important mobile applications to prop up a competitive product is shortsighted at best and blatantly anti-competitive at worst.

Sadly, Google can get away with these kinds of tactics on the search engine more easily, because Google has such a strong entrenched position there. But Android’s hold on the market is far more tenuous. If Google starts alienating core applications, it’ll reflect poorly on Android’s user experience, greatly benefitting the iPhone.

Note to Page: When you make Apple look like the easy and reasonable vendor to deal with, you’ve done something dramatically wrong.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

[...] clearly doesn’t care what I think, but it should pay attention to Sullivan. He’s probably the [...]

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting, PandoDaily [...]

Don't you read Searchengineland.com ... My humble suggestion is that either you come with analysis that is beyond what is already covered or simply stick to journalism and just report about Google-Twitter meeting fail, leaving aside your stupid arguments against Google (Ohh I know, I know, if you don't sensationalize headlines, how will you get guys like me to read and comment on your blog, right?) In India there is a saying "You point at others for a dead fly in their house, when in reality a donkey is rotting under your feet" ... So lets see Twitter cancels deal with Google leaving Google in the lurch. Who should be the victim? FB refuses to share its data with Google, even accuses Google for using its public data... Who should be the victim? So you are saying Google should give preference to two companies that showed them their middle finger!!! Probably even Jesus would not, let alone a for profit organisation... Your arguments are laughable at best This is my first and last comment on this website... Making a promise to myself not to come here again

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting, PandoDaily [...]

A Googler broke Sarah's heart?

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting Dear Google [...]

Nice read. I was thrown off by what you meant here, "Eric Schmidt claimed that Google couldn’t index Twitter and Facebook properly because those companies don’t allow Twitter to access their data. Twitter openly refuted this."Do you mean 'Google' is not allowed to access their data? I retweeted this on Twitter @Midnight_Tryst

1 - great article, and glad you're on it. 2 - "Android’s whole raison d’être is to be the more open alternative to Apple"? Like Google is the big promoter of "openness"? Android's raison d'être is to make sure Apple doesn't get all that mobile ad revenue for itself.

Google isn't the web, why do they get held to a higher standard than anyone else? If Apple did something like this it would be applauded. Hell, you have to submit an application and get approval to get an app on their phone. Yet Google going vertical, and that's really what this is, Google vertically integrating it's sprawling properties and cross-promoting them is somehow evil? Have we not forgotten that these very same companies CHARGE for the privilege of accessing their data? Yet they're upset when Google refuses to display it for free? Sure, if I were them I'd be upset too. Google just turned their business model upside down. Instead of going to Twitter and Facebook and asking how much would it cost to buy...Twitter and Facebook now how to come to Google and ask...how much would it cost us...? And that sums up this dispute. It's not about open data or real and relevant search results, it's about money and which way it should flow.

[...] Still Impartial? Page rage escalates as Google cancels Twitter Android meeting. [...]

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting, pandodaily.com [...]

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting, PandoDaily [...]

[...] Panderiffic. No, really. [...]

Twitter's engineering team can't figure out how to make "Twitter work better on Android" without Google's help? Looking to the side with awkward whistling... ;)

You really don't understand os integration such as Twitter did with Apple. Or you believe the nonsense that all of Android is open source when it isn't.

"You really don’t understand os integration such as Twitter did with Apple. " You really don't know that Android provides a higher integration for third party providers than iOS offers to Twitter. "Or you believe the nonsense that all of Android is open source when it isn’t." And exactly why is not open source?

Good job on calling Google on "promises they made in 2005", i.e, 7 years ago, but ... ... what about the promise you made 2 *weeks* ago ? "We have one goal here at PandoDaily: To be the site-of-record for that startup root-system and everything that springs up from it, cycle-after-cycle". It seems that every other story on this site is about that up and coming startup called Google.

[...] Page Rage Escalates As Google Cancels Twitter Android Meeting We’ve heard from insiders that Google’s PR strategy to the Don’t Be Evil toolbar bombshell– which exposed just how much the search giant is meddling with search results– is just to stay quiet until it blows over. And then press ahead with the“Search-plus-your-world-or-else” strategy. http://pandodaily.com/2012/01/26/page-rage-why-twitter-doesnt-work-better-on-android/ [...]

Twitter could easily get added to Google's index just by removing their "nofollow" tags. Instead they want a bunch of money from Google for the privilege of allowing Google to index them. But really, if Google is PAYING to index you, doesn't that make them LESS impartial? (Finally, please don't wonder whether continuing to post linkbait like this will hurt your traffic; you know it won't.)

The fact of the matter is Google is 100% in the right, and Twitter and Facebook are being whiney babies (as per usual with Twitter it seems). Here are some facts: - Google previously *DID* have a real-time feed from twitter. This is what powered Google Realtime Search, and it worked VERY well. Who canceled this agreement? Twitter. Why? Because they wanted to build their own search platform. That has gone no-where, but meanwhile, Google plowed ahead with their own social network. - "1500 queries per second" is not enough to index Twitter, it is not even a drop in the bucket. Twietter routinely spews of 5000 - 10000 tweets per second. Google needs a *real time feed*, and frankly, it would not be hard for Twitter to provide this - THEY DID IT BEFORE, AND PULLED IT! - The "Don't Be Evil" bookmarklet is a nice distraction, but it is mostly meanigless babble. No one searches Google for someone's twitter page. They search twitter for it. If people are expecting to use Google to search for someone's twitter page and not their Google page, then in my opinion that is saying a lot more about Twitter craptacular search tools than it is about Google's social network.

"Eric Schmidt claimed that Google couldn’t index Twitter and Facebook properly because those companies don’t allow Twitter to access their data." don’t allow Google to access their data

[...] an event at Google with Mayor Ed Lee. (I should note the Googlers were very gracious hosts despite my dog-with-a-bone coverage of the SPYW [...]

Concerning Twitter and Google: https://twitter.com/#!/gvanrossum (creator of Python) "I am no longer using Twitter. Twitter betrayed me. See you on Google+"

I would propose that, although I love Sarah Lacy, she may be pursuing this too strongly. Google has the best of intentions, and most journalists are very quick to rush judgement. Agreements between big companies take time, and the engineer ideology is launch first, iterate later. It's obvious that the mighty Goog is predisposed to it's own homegrown products, but one should note that the results have simply been augmented; it's just the order that's been shuffled around. Nothing is being hidden that was there before; MORE data is now available in search. Have some faith; other network info will make it's way into results, the details just need to be ironed out.

Ummm, isn't rank order on the page *precisely* the key element in the utility of Google Search? Best of intentions? For Google. All companies have their own corporate benefit at the top of their priorities and Google is no different. That is the point. Google is no "better or worse" than other companies in this field (well, OK, its better than Zynga but so is everyone). Google will continue to "innovate" and "tinker" to push the line. It's what I expect them to do. But I do not, for one second, think that new changes are necessarily in *my* best interest. Why the heck should it be? Sometimes our interests will align, but I don't count on it. I am not captive to Google so I can assess the changes as they are rolled out. As long as Google assumes that we are free to go elsewhere, the relationship should work out, user by user.

Actually the page rank of a page is only one of many factors that include where it is in the results. If the page rank was the only measure of a result, then everyone could be Google, because the page rank algorithm is a published and open algorithm.

[...] Lacy of PandoDaily has an interesting report about how Google and Twitter were supposed to meet about Twitter and Android (which could have been [...]

Yea Sarah Lacy keep distorting the facts until you got answer from Google.

Whatever. Frankly, this situation is entirely of your own devising, considering how you pounded Google in the past for not getting social, and claimed that social search was the future. Before Google+ existed, you thought social search was the answer to the spam problem (http://techcrunch.com/2011/02/17/google-social-search/). Now it's the end of the world. It seems that your biggest problem is that Google deigns to compete with Facebook and Twitter, rather than just existing to serve them traffic. Just like MG had no problem with Google until the day they decided to compete with Apple, rather than serving as a dumb data pipe powering maps and search.

totally agree. this and the other polemics amounts to "throwing toys out of the crib." To add: Google is NOT public entity. It's a profit motivated private enterprise. and uniquely to other monopolies... we have a clear choice whether or not to use it. Also how much has the internet world changed between 2005 and 2012? should google keep partying like myspace was dominant and facebook was just for college kids? Why all the concern about google+ all of sudden? Its continuously dismissed as a ghost town, can't compete etc. If Facebook which has an uber-dominant position in social can leverage their massive user base to venture into videos, music, photos, data, etc...why can't Google.use theirs? Also since when did the word Evil equate to taking care of your own? Google spends millions delivering a great number of services free of charge...and the minute they want to grow another part of their business, which techsperts had been slating them for ignoring....suddenly this is evil? Something else is going on here. The news cycle has moved on because its not a big deal and only adds competition. I'm curious what the MG's, Sarah Lacy's motivation is to keep this going?

Two things. First, people heavily invested in the Apple world turn the ire on the enemy of the moment, whether it be Microsoft or Adobe or Google. The wars with MS and Adobe seem to have petered out, which is about the time MG started fixating on Google. Second, PD is not really all that different from TC. This is their new Zynga.

“I’m curious … ” You didn't know? It's a constitutional obligation for Americans to complain about things. Gotta do it. We all think about all the great search results we (used to) get from Google, and for FREE! But, as everybody knows, Google's real behind-the-scenes business — how they make their money — is in putting our eyeballs up on the auction block. They use all their services to entice us into giving up our feeble attention spans long enough for somebody to try to make a buck from us. My big gripe is that Google is the ONLY firm auctioning off my attention span; as a monopsonist (the sole buyer) they get to set the payment to me artificially low. This change is further debasing the quid pro quo so I have to spend MORE time looking at their damn “results” to find what I want. Is there a better solution? Not yet. But getting these ideas out into the open might actually result in a more “open” result.

Bravo pando team, you became my daily news start point before techmeme bbc wsj and my nytimes. Keep up the good work

If Twitter and Facebook want their data to be part of Google search, they simply have to provide Google with that real-time data! How hard is it to understand? It's pathetic that Twitter and Facebook think that their real-time data needs to remain proprietary. Those companies consider such value their competitive advantage over Google, if that's the case, there is no reasonable way Google should be able to somehow guess their data and include it in Search. Open the access to your social data or shut up.

Conversely, if Google wants to promote their own social media and I don't want them to, I have three options. 1. Bitch and moan and carry on. 2. Install the Don't Be Evil Toolbar. 3. Quit Google Plus. I've done 2 while I ponder 3. I don't own an Android device so my choices are easier to make. It's perfectly within Google's rights to promote their own services and its perfectly in Twitter's and FaceBook's rights to keep their own data to themselves. Cool thing is the user also gets to choose what to do (unless they have an Android phone).

Google wants to include Twitter and Facebook data in search, but as it is right now, Twitter and Facebook do not want to be a part of Google search. It's that simple. Facebook especially is afraid to let Google somehow sniff their social graph. Something like that. It's pathetic. The facebook social graph is worthless in itself.

Er, you do not have to use any Google services at all on an Android device. You can use any email provider you want, any browser you want, you can remove the Google search widget and add Yahoo! or Bing if you want, you can use another mapping provider, etc etc. This is all standard stuff. iOS and Windows Phone are the locked-down platform that does not let you select other providers for your services, NOT Android. Google does not play that game.

I overstepped the mark by saying you are locked in to Google services if you have an Android phone but would you care to estimate the promotion of Android devices in the wild that have no Google services in use on them? 0.1% perhaps. Whatever, it is minuscule and likely lower than the percentage of jailbroken iPhones.

Either you didn't read the article or you didn't comprehend what you read.

Brines, what you fail to understand is that you can't stop Google from tracking you on an Android device.

Totally false, Google ONLY tracks your position (the only thing Gogole tracks on an Android device) if you OPT IN. He didn't fail to understand nothing, you fail to know facts

Great article! Keep digging, keep us informed. Thank you! =]

Get the pitchforks ready!!!

Do you realize how big of an ass these posts make you look like? No one gives a shit about this but you, Danny Sullivan, Facebook, twitter, and a few android haters (better known as apple boi's). It's time to get the fuck over it!

Guess we won't be seeing many more of your posts here. So sad.

Teenage boys are so obvious.

Like anybody gives "sources" any credibility these days.

You know, Twitter, Facebook (and perhaps Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon) could fight fire with fire: Create and fund a not-for-profit foundation, hire some talented coders into it, and CLONE GOOGLE SEARCH. Disrupt Google's primary income source. The new foundation's mission: index the internet, using the newest, best, and most unbiased search engines, and provide the results to the world, fast, free of charge, free of advertising of any kind, and available to all, forever. That's what it does. That's all it does. It's completely independent of the sponsoring companies. It does search, does it well, and gives it away as a public service. Heck, it could even collaborate with universities to research and test new search algorithms, and sponsor interns with promising ideas. For a few hundred million dollars a year, the "Google problem" is solved. The sponsoring companies have a search source that's high-quality. One that they know won't jerk them around or try to compete with them on their home turf. Plus, the sponsors come off looking like philanthropists.

Google never promised "search impartiality" there is not such thing! (and you spelled it wrong). Claiming the higher ground while you link bait with unconfirmed rumors and sensationalist headlines is just plain hypocrisy. If you are concerned about "fairness" be fair to Google and don't put words in their mouth or report rumors as facts.

I somewhat agree, the reporting on Google has been decidedly one sided (not just from here, but most all media). There is more to the story than the sensational headlines the media is running with, it's a shame they're more worried about traffic than informing their readers.