
Fark NotNewsletter: Google farked us over - ccarter84
http://www.fark.com/comments/blog673/Fark-NotNewsletter-Google-farked-us-over
======
TeMPOraL
It's free market, isn't it? Take it or leave it - nobody forces you to use
Google ad network. ;). /s

At this point I'm convinced that nothing but regulation can make those big
companies - on which our digital lives are more and more dependent - to
provide even a modicum of customer support. Right now they don't care, because
they simply _don 't have to_ \- a HN headline every other week doesn't create
measurable losses, because users don't have comparable alternatives (and the
Internet, paradoxically, has _very_ short memory). On the other hand, having
customer support costs real money...

EDIT: Added a sarcasm tag next to the winkie, just in case someone mistakes my
comment for a defense of Google.

~~~
cpayne
I never really understand why comments like this get downvoted.

There seems to be love for the free market. That is until the free market goes
against what I want. Then the free market sucks!

What if FARK was another type of business. Say it is the corner 7-11[1]. They
have been there for 18 years, and their major source of customers was the big
factory next door.

Factory decides to either move / redesign / whatever, where the customers are
no longer available.

The store makes a big noise - would anyone care?

[1] in this example, I mean any sort of "corner store". 20 years ago we'd call
them milk bars, but now I'm showing my age...

~~~
trprog
>That is until the free market goes against what I want. Then the free market
sucks!

I'm not sure anyone is saying that the free market sucks. People are saying
that there is no free market in some sectors and that, in the absence of a
reasonably efficient free market, the least worst alternative is regulation.

~~~
ue_
I think it sucks, but that's because I'm a Communist.

~~~
trprog
heh, fair point. Command economy advocates aside nobody is saying the free
market sucks :)

------
bluetwo
Google lost a lawsuit in Germany a few years ago. Evidently German law says
that if a customer reaches out to a corporation, that corporation must have a
human respond.

It's not good enough (as google argued) to use an email auto-responder.

Not the best summaries but here is more information:

[http://www.vzbv.de/sites/default/files/downloads/google-
vzbv...](http://www.vzbv.de/sites/default/files/downloads/google-vzbv-press-
release-2013-11-19.pdf)
[http://www.computerworld.com/article/2497169/search/consumer...](http://www.computerworld.com/article/2497169/search/consumer-
service-lawsuit-looms-for-google-in-germany.html)

~~~
dqv
>This doesn't mean that every incoming email should now be checked and
processed individually by a Google employee, the court said. But the company
has to provide the possibility for users to contact it via email, it said. It
was left up to Google how to deal with future incoming email.

In other words, they must not send an auto-reply to users saying the email is
not monitored, but it is basically okay that they don't monitor it.

[1] [http://www.itworld.com/article/2694219/it-
management/german-...](http://www.itworld.com/article/2694219/it-
management/german-court-requires-google-to-stop-ignoring-customer-emails.html)
[2]
[http://www.cgerli.org/fileadmin/user_upload/interne_Dokument...](http://www.cgerli.org/fileadmin/user_upload/interne_Dokumente/Legislation/Telemedia_Act__TMA_.pdf)

------
a3n
Google has long since passed the point of critical mass and a self-sustaining
reaction. These days an individual publisher needs Google much more than
Google needs an individual publisher. So why should Google spend resources on
customer care when, as years of HN and other sites' threads demonstrate, it
doesn't matter? The individual publisher can be relied on to claw at the rock
at his own expense to attempt resolution.

Google is doing very well, and lack of support hasn't harmed them. It's not
just that customer care is done algorithmically; my guess is that the meta-
decision on whether or how much customer care is needed is also algorithmic.

~~~
cobbzilla
The funny thing is, for ad networks like Google, the publisher is _not_ the
customer. There is no incentive to treat them well. The customer is where the
revenue comes from: the advertisers. For Google, publishers are just "supply".
And there is a glut of supply.

~~~
a3n
Ah. Not being a publisher, it hadn't occurred to me that they're a product
just like us.

Always follow the money.

------
tomcam
I have complex feelings about this. As a libertarian type I say one forces you
to use Google (yes, I know they're by far the most effective ad network). I
don't feel like their natural monopoly in search has hurt me much. Normally I
would not see any reason for the US to get involved in GOOG's business.

On the other hand, I have seen Google do its very best to pervert the free
market. Their name appears well over 300 times in the Obama White House
guestbook and they support tons of liberal causes while slipping into bed with
the three-lettered branches of federal government whenever it suits them.
Diversity is every bit as important as Google preaches it. So where are their
Filipinos, Samoans, Latinos, African Americans, and other persons of color?

Their contempt for paying customers like Fark is legendary. I have heard many,
many stories like Fark's over the years. I personally know people put out of
business this way. And I suspect Google puts their political thumb on many
search results.

Because of this detestable level of hypocrisy, I say regulate the hell out
them. Unlike Lavabit, they welcomed the government with open arms in lobbying
efforts, committed gross violations of their customers' privacy, and have
chosen to sequester tens of billions of dollars in taxes over three continents
in a way that small businesses like mine never could.

Google loves the Feds so much? Throw them to the antitrust wolves.

~~~
jimmywanger
> Filipinos, Samoans, Latinos, African Americans, and other persons of color?

Plenty of non-white people working at Google. What does this ethnic diversity
have to do with your little free market rant?

~~~
tomcam
> your little free market rant

Great way to contribute to the conversation!

~~~
adtac
Great way to not answer his question.

~~~
tomcam
Name-calling indicated no civil discourse would occur

------
jrnichols
We always try to tell people to not put all their eggs in one basket. The
problem here is that there is almost no other basket besides Google anymore.
Or the ones that are there, are not even close because of Google's power over
the online advertising industry.

I think that it's becoming the same way with email. and i'm worried that it's
that way with what small businesses. The default for so many is "oh, just use
Google Apps." What's the alternative? It's usually just Microsoft.

------
hebleb
Woah, Fark still exists and looks almost exactly how I remember it 15 years
ago

~~~
empath75
oh, hey, new strongbad email!

~~~
djsumdog
Oh hey, new Maddox!

------
ksk
I think this is from the culture at Google. To be clear, I think its perfectly
fine to use AI or whatever other innovation - if it works. But to me, so many
of their projects seem to be perpetually stuck in alpha/beta release mode and
never seem to have all the features and polish to handle all the edge cases
(which would require a TON more work).

------
dplgk
> Due to the way Fark was built, we are invisible to both SEO and Social Media
> traffic.

What does this mean? Clearly, they can't block anyone from sharing fark links
on facebook and also, this:
[https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Afark.com](https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Afark.com)

~~~
sparkzilla
While fark.com may rank well, as a news aggregator the individual pages inside
the site don't rank well. My site suffers the same problem: despite having
thousands of pages of content, they all sit at the bottom of Google's results.
So now I don't even bother to try to rank on Google and just use traffic from
social media instead.

~~~
jandrese
Why would Google want to have an aggregator rank high on their search results?
They are the middlemen of online news. It seems much better to have the actual
article come first so you don't have to click through the link in the header
to get to the content you care about.

~~~
sparkzilla
Yes, that's the reason, and that's why it's a challenge for anyone trying to
promote a news aggregator using Google search.

------
gdulli
Hubris combined with the amount of power Google has is a recipe for disaster.

------
wnevets
Isn't there enough competition within the ad industry to just switch to a
different provider?

~~~
unknownsavage
Nope. There really isn't, or if there is, it's niche dependent. To diversify
away from Google, I've tried other ad providers and struggled to make 20% as
much...

~~~
vdnkh
Header bidding will begin to cut into Google when it becomes more widespread.

[https://adexchanger.com/the-sell-sider/the-strategic-
implica...](https://adexchanger.com/the-sell-sider/the-strategic-implications-
of-header-bidding/)

~~~
owebmaster
And then Google will start to treat publishers better.

------
newscracker
It's disturbing that many companies don't have humans to respond soon enough
or don't have humans to reach out to at all. Machines can learn and get better
at analyzing and classifying information, but it'll be a long time before a
machine can pick up the phone to answer a customer's call with a proper
conversation (with understanding and decisions based on arguments) or truly
read and understand an email conversation back and forth and understand the
entire context and allow for exceptions and more "appropriate" decisions like
humans could (depending on the situation and the background).

~~~
CamelCaseName
Why is it disturbing? Many products bring in very little revenue per user.
It's unfair to require a support system when the expense can easily far
outweigh the revenue, especially when answers are often easy to find online.

------
winteriscoming
Not related to the topic at hand, but I wish this site had an About page. I
read this whole article and felt the author was very passionate about the
online community he hosts, so I thought maybe I could hang around there a bit,
but couldn't find out what Fark is about. I don't mean to be negative by the
way, in fact I liked the way the author is passionate about the site.

~~~
dblohm7
It does: [http://www.fark.com/farq/](http://www.fark.com/farq/)

------
orionblastar
Who decides what is bannable images and what are not?

Do they use machine learning or people? Does someone just flag it or
something? Was Fark given the chance to remove the link or file an appeal?

~~~
CamperBob2
Read the article.

------
lightedman
I don't know if I can applaud any harder given the way Fark treated its
userbase around the whole SJW/GamerGate beginnings. Karma is one trifling
bastard.

------
SippinLean
>Our ads were turned off for almost five weeks - completely and totally their
mistake

Who is running your campaigns that they can be disabled for more than a month
without anyone noticing?!

~~~
mrtron
They mean Google disabled the ad serving on their site, not ad campaigns.
Despite rapid followups by fark, Google's process to resume took that long.

