I like my grift stories in the movies or on The Sopranos. No one likes grift when it happens to them.
"Grift". According to Dictionary.com:
1. Money made dishonestly, as in a swindle.A "grifter"?
2. A swindle or confidence game.
A person who swindles you by means of deception or fraud [synonyms: swindler, chiseller, chiseler, gouger, scammer, sharper, sharpie, sharpy].What if Google -- Emperor of All Things Searched Online -- controlled your search results based on what they wanted you to see? What if search results were based not on effectively linking content with keywords and meta-tags but, rather, based on the amount of money directly paid to Google in advertising? The more grift received, the higher the ranking. No grift received? Well, sorry Charlie, no access to your site today.
It's sort of like getting neighborhood protection from the gang doing the beatdowns.
Bubbling under the surface of media trend watching is something of great importance. Learn this phrase because it is suddenly becoming a hot one: "Net Neutrality". In February, there were Senate hearings about the concern. Up until recently, the Internet/World Wide Web has always been "net neutral", meaning what you see is what everyone sees, provided it is legal. Everyone has the same access to information and sites on the web within the rules of law. When someone in New York City searches for Jointblog, the Google result is the same as in Bloomington, Illinois. The reason for this is the principle of net neutrality...a requirement for all telecommunications (which the Internet had always included).
However, as the Internet has shifted away from dial-up phone (TeleCom) access to broadband/cable access, the TeleCom controls are weakening as they apply less and less.
It's Wild Wild West territory for broadband providers, with no laws maintaining "net neutrality". In other words, "net discrimination" is not only possible...it is likely due to the nature of capitalism. The market will fill the void of demand unless the law regulates, limits or outright bans it.
The strongest application of Google's mandate of "Do Not Evil" is maintaining and protecting "net neutrality". If they ever infringed on it, the concept of the Internet would be greatly damaged, perhaps even irreparably. Imagine if Google decided to begin silencing its critics because of its control and power, eliminating sites one by one until only the adoring masses are left? Without net neutrality, it's possible.
For 15 years, the Internet has been a public trust, much like a utility. It gives people access to a vital resources -- information. Just as the water company or the electric company give access to other vital public resources.
Let's make sure as we rev up access to the Internet through broadband, we don't lose the natural power of the Internet which exists because of net neutrality. If we let the broadband grifters to take control, expect a revolt. Because when the grifter is exposed, it is never a pretty ending.
How does Bill Gates feel about "Net Neutrality"? Click here
Net neutrality Vs. Net neutering, click here
RealAudio video from February 7, 2006 US Senate Commitee hearing on Net Neutrality, click here
posted by Chris Kennedy @ Monday, March 20, 2006,
- At 10:12 PM, paulaner01 said...
Rev up the broadband is right - just don't think that regulation is the way to do it! And if Google pulls a stunt like that, I'll go use another search engine. Wouldn't you? It might be everybody's favorite, but we could learn to use another one if Google doesn't meet our standards anymore. As always, the customer is king.