On Convergence

Transatlantic Misunderstandings: Google loses Belgian Case

A few weeks ago, there was some half-amused excitement in web circles about a conflict between Google and Belgian newspaper publishers. The publishers had accused Google of violating their copyrights by linking to their content from Google News.

Google now actually lost the resulting case in a Brussels court. The company was ordered to remove all Belgian newspaper content from Google News and from its search cache, and in addition to that, Google has to pay a fine of 25,000 Euros per day, totalling several million Euros.

The last part shouldn't be that hard on the rich search engine giant, but understandably Google is a worried afraid that this court decision could set a precedence for similar lawsuits in the rest of Europe. Still, most Americans can hardly believe that a small country like Belgium dares to attack the king of Internet search, and that newspaper publishers would be so stupid to have their sites removed from Google.

In my opinion, this discussion is afflicted by two pretty fundamental misunderstandings:

• First of all, online advertising doesn't have the same importance in continental Europe as in the US or the UK. Therefore, its importance is not the same for newspaper publishers, and the Internet traffic coming from the large search engines is by no means as relevant as it is for an English-language newspaper website. American and British newspapers would be stupid to sue a search engine, since their increasingly important online revenues are largely driven by Google and its competitors. But that's not true for many European countries.

• The economic power of newspaper publishing companies is very different depending on the country's market situation. Google so far experienced most of its legal trouble in francophone countries where newspapers play a comparatively minor role in the national advertising markets. Belgian newspapers get about 23% of the total ad spending in their country, French newspapers only about 17%. That's a far cry from other countries where newspapers are much stronger, such as Switzerland (52% of ad spending for newspapers), Germany (43%) or Sweden (55%). In those countries, newspaper publishers feel a lot more relaxed about search engines, since they know that their strong national newspaper brands can only benefit from Google's traffic. But in the weak newspaper markets, a desperate economic situation seems to lead to desperate legal measures.

Since newspaper publishers of course have major political and social influence in their respective country, Google shouldn't be too optimistic about the outcome of possible further lawsuits of the same kind. But again, not all of Europe is the same. And Google still has time to approach newspaper publishers proactively to strike a deal that works for both sides.

Mobile Media Usage: What Happened to the Digital Revolution?

Currently I take the Boston subway (the T) every morning during rush hour to get to MIT. Over the last few weeks, I counted how many people use which type of media on their daily commute. Obviously, these observations are by no means statistically representative, but still interesting.

On a typical day, about 70 people ride on a subway car. The average media usage is as follows:

• 10 people read a book.
• 2 people read a "normal" newspaper (Boston Globe, New York Times etc.)
• 1 person reads the Wall Street Journal
• 43 people read the free daily commuter newspaper (Metro)
• 7 people listen to their iPod, and most of them read something at the same time. Other types of MP3 players are rare, and very infrequently you see somebody with a -- gasp -- portable CD player.
• 2 people type on their BlackBerry.
• 5 people consume no media at all, not counting the ad displays they're staring at.

Apparently, the free commuter newspaper has a marketshare (including iPod multitaskers) of over 70%. In contrast, the situation for traditional newspapers looks somewhat sad. Maybe people read a "real" newspaper at home, but considering the average age of commuters (about 35) I suspect that traditional newspapers have lost this customer segment.

Not many surprises so far. But here is what I find remarkable:

• 0 people read a e-book
• 0 people consume content on their mobile phone
• 0 people use portable game consoles
• 0 people use a Ultra-mobile PC or something similar

So far, digital media are only present in the form of iPods and a few BlackBerries. Good old print media still dominate the scene.

I just wonder who is actually using all the great convergent gadgets that the electronics industry tries to sell. I can't think of a much better place for this type of gadget than a subway ride, and Boston really isn't a city of luddites, as far as I know.

Probably there a few good reasons for this non-usage:

• Convergence overload: The latest mobile devices are able to do simply everything. And that's too much. Obviously, devices with a clear focus (iPod, BlackBerry) are much more successful.
• Device babysitting: I personally would like to have a mobile blog-reading device that automatically pulls down my favorite feeds every morning. The content simply should be there whenever I want to access it, without the need for any activity on my part and without waiting times. We're far away from this. In most cases, content synchronization is a major pain that only works with frequent user interventions. Again, Apple has demonstrated how to do this in the right (i.e. simple) way.
• Format and DRM chaos: The songs that I bought on iTunes don't play on my Nokia mobile phone. "Blink" is available as an e-book only on MobiPocket, "The World is Flat" only on Adobe Reader. The industry apparently expects me to install three or four competing e-book systems on my various devices, and even then I can't use all content on every device.
• Lack of reliablity: Bad battery life and unstable software are still a problem. The e-book software on my PDA frequently forgets what book I was just reading and where I was in that book. I really wonder if this vendor's emplyees ever use their own product.

The (mobile) digital revolution is still at its very beginning, and it's not moving very fast. And that's mainly the vendors' fault. I think consumers are open for many things, but not willing to put up with all these annoying imperfections.