Publishing Companies Prepare Tablet App Store… notice I did NOT say iPad Store

If you can’t beat ’em… join ’em. Here’s how newspapers and magazines are competing in the eMarket while snubbing Apple’s iPad.

Amplify’d from www.mediabistro.com

Time Inc., Condé Nast, Hearst Corporation, and Meredith Corporation are adding the finishing touches to their tablet app store. Morgan Guenther, the Chief Executive of Next Issue Media (NIM), the new venture owned by the publishing companies, says that it should launch within the next few months.

He says that when the store launches, it will feature at least two titles from each of the companies, and by this summer, every magazine will be available. Guenther also says that News Corporation’s (another owner of NIM) newspapers will be available by then.

For now, the app store will only be available on Android tablets. This is because NIM is the result of publishing houses not wanting other companies (read: Apple) to dictate how their products are distributed.

For NIM, its success comes down to one thing: Will people snub iPads in order to get their favorite magazines on a tablet? Right now Apple has the advantage because the iPad has been out for so long; not to mention the cool factor that comes with the brand.

We’re guessing Apple will win this battle, because being cool is very fun, even if it does mean missing out on tablet versions of O: The Oprah Magazine. Besides, we can probably guess who’ll be on the cover.

Read more at www.mediabistro.com

 

Get Social, or Get Left Behind

Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, the top Silicon Valley VC firm created a new $250 million fund to invest in social applications and services — which mega-investor John Doerr calls the “third wave” of Internet disruption.

Bing Gordon, the former Electronic Arts creative director who is now a KPCB partner, will run the fund. Companies today, he said, need to have a social sensibility at their core. Those that see social as something to be slapped on afterwards will get left behind.

I love my job more and more everyday!!!

Amplify’d from www.fastcompany.com

For many companies, social media is something the marketing department uses to increase their reach. Features like Facebook Connect seem like obligatory add-ons. But part of the company’s core offering? Not so much.

That’s about to change. So says Silicon Valley mega-investor John Doerr, of Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, who today announced a $250 million fund to invest in social applications and services. Companies like Cafebots, a startup Kleiner Perkins invested in earlier this year that helps people manage their online social relationships.

Also investing in the new “sFund” are Amazon, Facebook, and Zynga, whose CEOs appeared with Doerr at an event on the Facebook campus. The three other backers are Comcast, Liberty Media, and Allen & Company. The fund kicks off today and has not made any investments yet.

Doerr said KPCB was motivated to create the fund because it believes there’s a “third wave” of “incredible and disruptive innovation” that is fundamentally changing the nature of the Web right now. The first was the creation of the Internet itself, and the second was the invention of browsers, which made it possible for everyday people to use the Web. Now, Doerr said, the Web is shifting “from an old Internet of documents and sites to a new one that’s all about people and places and relationships.” The sFund’s goal, Doerr said, is not only to invest in companies that are leading the charge into the new era, but also to inspire young entrepreneurs to take the plunge.

Kleiner Perkins, one of Sand Hill Road’s leading venture capital firms, has a history of picking winners like Google, Amazon, and Sun Microsystems, as well as Electronic Arts, Symantec, and Netscape. In 2008, Kleiner Perkins created the $100 million iFund to invest in developers making applications, services, and components for the iPhone and iPad. One of those companies, game developer Ngmoco, just got bought by Japanese mobile gaming giant DeNA Co. for $400 million.

So when Kleiner Perkins–or, in this case, Mark Zuckerberg of sFund partner Facebook–says “every industry is going to get fundamentally rethought and designed around people,” it might be worth taking a listen.

Read more at www.fastcompany.com

Google’s deal with Verizon getting the company closer to world domination!

Regardless of those who said it wouldn’t happen, Google and Verizon are moving forward with their “net neutrality” talks. I’m wondering why more people aren’t up in arms about this deal?

Amplify’d from www.wallstreetjournal.com

SAN FRANCISCO (Dow Jones)–Google Inc. (GOOG) and Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ) on Monday called on legislators to enact laws preventing carriers from blocking websites or selectively delaying access to content common on the Internet today, while leaving the door open for private “specialized networks” down the line.

The proposal by the two companies, in the form of a suggested legislative framework, also said regulators should have authority to stop offenders by imposing penalties of a maximum $2 million on “bad actors.”

The policy framework marks a joint effort by the companies to move the discussion over “net neutrality” forward as well as head off more rigorous restrictions imposed by regulators. While Verizon agreed to the basic principles. , it left room to offer new “differentiated online services,” ranging from health-care services to entertainment, which broadband providers could charge for.

The agreed principles also don’t apply to the wireless broadband market, in part because the mobile marketplace is more competitive and changing rapidly.

Google Chief Executive Eric Schmidt, in noting that carriers and Internet companies depend on each other, said the agreement was designed to strike a balance over the thorny issue of network neutrality.

Read more at www.wallstreetjournal.com

Google is back in the world domination game! The Google, Verizon deal could change net neutrality

In a move that would give the mega giant tech company a major lead over… well… everybody… there is a deal on the table between Google and Verizon Communications regarding so-called network neutrality rules. The rules dictate how broadband providers treat Internet traffic flowing over their lines. If this deal goes through, it would give Google a major push to the head of the class, speeding of delivery of their content to customers at a faster rate.

It is not the specific Google/Verizon deal that could cause the problem. Instead, it’s the fact that if the deal goes through, it would grant privilege to other big, powerful, giant companies to pay to have their content show up at a faster rate on the Internet. The offerings of small businesses would get lost and now the integrity of free enterprise on the Internet will be challenged.

According the the Associated Press, a deal could be announced within days.

Google, Verizon deal could change net neutrality

Laptop displays Google logo Laptop displays Google logo

(Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images)

A deal between Google and Verizon could set the stage for big companies to pay for the privilege of speeding up delivery of their own content to consumers.

An interview with Marketplace’s Mitchell Hartman on the impact of “net neutrality.”

Listen to this Story

TEXT OF INTERVIEW

Bill Radke: There’s a deal reportedly in the works between Google and Verizon that could upset the apple cart of what’s known as “net neutrality.” This is the idea that all Internet content- from YouTube videos to eBay listings to this show’s podcast get treated the same by Internet Service Providers. These are the telephone and cable companies that control the pipelines of the Web. The agreement between Google and Verizon could set the stage for big companies to pay for the privilege of speeding up delivery of their own content to consumers. Marketplace’s Mitchell Hartman is here to help us bushwhack through the weeds of “net neutrality.” Good morning, Mitchell.

Mitchell Hartman: Good morning, Bill.

Radke: What might a deal between Verizon and Google mean?

Hartman: Well right now, the cable and telephone companies don’t speed up or slow down the flow of information to our computers, depending on what website it’s coming from. But think about it: someone who downloads tons of TV shows or YouTube videos, that uses up a lot of bandwidth. Companies like Verizon would like to charge more for that — let Google, for instance, which owns YouTube, pay to give priority to YouTube videos priority getting to our computers. And we might end up paying part of that bill with tiered pricing for Internet just like we now have for premium cable. Reports are sketchy on this deal — reports in Bloomberg and the New York Times — neither company is commenting, and we don’t know how it might affect smart phones.

Radke: And what is the problem with letting the Internet evolve in that direction?

Hartman: Well, you know if some big company, Google or Amazon or eBay, gets to buy access to the fast lane, somebody else’s content is going to be left in the slow lane. Somebody who isn’t paying millions of dollars to Verizon or AT&T or Comcast — a library, struggling online magazines, whatever. So to consumer and open-Internet advocates, these kinds of deals are basically the death knell of “net neutrality.” Now the FCC is trying to work out regulations to keep the playing field of the Internet somewhat level going forward, but it probably doesn’t have the legal authority to do that right now.

Radke: OK, Marketplace’s Mitchell Hartman. Mitchell, thanks.

Hartman: You’re welcome.

Links

  • FCC to vote on regulating broadband
    The Federal Communication Commission is likely to vote today to go ahead and seek public comment on three different plans to regulate broadband. Steve Chiotakis learns more about net neutrality from analyst Rob Enderle.
  • FCC votes for net neutrality rules
    Today the Federal Communications Commission voted to stop Internet service providers like Verizon and AT&T from tampering with Web traffic and picking favorites. Steve Henn reports.

Read more at marketplace.publicradio.org

 

 

Google is back in the world domination game! The Google, Verizon deal could change net neutrality

In a move that would give the mega giant tech company a major lead over… well… everybody… there is a deal on the table between Google and Verizon Communications regarding so-called network neutrality rules. The rules dictate how broadband providers treat Internet traffic flowing over their lines. If this deal goes through, it would give Google a major push to the head of the class, speeding of delivery of their content to customers at a faster rate.

It is not the specific Google/Verizon deal that could cause the problem. Instead, it’s the fact that if the deal goes through, it would grant privilege to other big, powerful, giant companies to pay to have their content show up at a faster rate on the Internet. The offerings of small businesses would get lost and now the integrity of free enterprise on the Internet will be challenged.

According the the Associated Press, a deal could be announced within days.

Google, Verizon deal could change net neutrality

Laptop displays Google logo

A deal between Google and Verizon could set the stage for big companies to pay for the privilege of speeding up delivery of their own content to consumers.

Laptop displays Google logo
(Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images)

More on
Internet

Links

  • FCC to vote on regulating broadband
    The Federal Communication Commission is likely to vote today to go ahead and seek public comment on three different plans to regulate broadband. Steve Chiotakis learns more about net neutrality from analyst Rob Enderle.
  • FCC votes for net neutrality rules
    Today the Federal Communications Commission voted to stop Internet service providers like Verizon and AT&T from tampering with Web traffic and picking favorites. Steve Henn reports.

TEXT OF INTERVIEW

Bill Radke: There’s a deal reportedly in the works between Google and Verizon that could upset the apple cart of what’s known as “net neutrality.” This is the idea that all Internet content- from YouTube videos to eBay listings to this show’s podcast get treated the same by Internet Service Providers. These are the telephone and cable companies that control the pipelines of the Web. The agreement between Google and Verizon could set the stage for big companies to pay for the privilege of speeding up delivery of their own content to consumers. Marketplace’s Mitchell Hartman is here to help us bushwhack through the weeds of “net neutrality.” Good morning, Mitchell.

Mitchell Hartman: Good morning, Bill.

Radke: What might a deal between Verizon and Google mean?

Hartman: Well right now, the cable and telephone companies don’t speed up or slow down the flow of information to our computers, depending on what website it’s coming from. But think about it: someone who downloads tons of TV shows or YouTube videos, that uses up a lot of bandwidth. Companies like Verizon would like to charge more for that — let Google, for instance, which owns YouTube, pay to give priority to YouTube videos priority getting to our computers. And we might end up paying part of that bill with tiered pricing for Internet just like we now have for premium cable. Reports are sketchy on this deal — reports in Bloomberg and the New York Times — neither company is commenting, and we don’t know how it might affect smart phones.

Radke: And what is the problem with letting the Internet evolve in that direction?

Hartman: Well, you know if some big company, Google or Amazon or eBay, gets to buy access to the fast lane, somebody else’s content is going to be left in the slow lane. Somebody who isn’t paying millions of dollars to Verizon or AT&T or Comcast — a library, struggling online magazines, whatever. So to consumer and open-Internet advocates, these kinds of deals are basically the death knell of “net neutrality.” Now the FCC is trying to work out regulations to keep the playing field of the Internet somewhat level going forward, but it probably doesn’t have the legal authority to do that right now.

Radke: OK, Marketplace’s Mitchell Hartman. Mitchell, thanks.

Hartman: You’re welcome.

Read more at marketplace.publicradio.org

 

Facebook hated as much as airlines and cable companies and people still won’t bail

Larry Freed, president of ForeSee Results, “our research shows that privacy concerns, frequent changes to the website and commercialization and advertising adversely affect the consumer experience”… uh… ya think. What is amazing is they can offer a bad customer experience and yet still attract MILLIONS of members.

Amplify’d from www.msnbc.msn.com
Facebook hated as much as airlines, cable companies

“Facebook is a phenomenal success, so we were not expecting to see it score so poorly with consumers,” said Larry Freed, president of ForeSee Results, which worked with the University of Michigan on the American Customer Satisfaction Index poll.

Facebook, the most visited site on the Internet, may also be the most despised: A new poll says the site scored 64 on a 100-point scale, which “puts Facebook in the bottom 5 percent” of private sector companies “and in the same range as airlines and cable companies, two perennially low-scoring industries with terrible customer satisfaction,” according to results of a survey released today.

Read more at www.msnbc.msn.com