Google Insights (http://www.google.com/insights) is reporting that post-inauguration, Barack Obama has surpassed some pretty big names, at least in terms of search volume.

Is this a good time to do some arbitrage for my Amazon affiliate program?  My Google results are only showing two PPC ads, both positive messages and neither peddling either of his books.

Nope, this is a time for renewal (and reconciliation, according to the White House today).  Today is not a day to eek out tiny profits as an invisible middleman.  Today is a day to revel in hopefulness, pride and pray that Mr. Obama can do something to fix this wretched economy before it is too late.

Thought this was worth repeating, in case anyone didn’t hear:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7784908.stm

I guess it is time to finally give Chrome a fair shake, since I can’t stand Firefox.

With things going the way they are, America needs a strong drink. 

As if to respond to grim economic conditions, Google has eased their editorial restrictions once again, this time deciding to allow ads for hard liquor.  Earlier this fall, Google decided that America needed a “light” drink, and decided to permit advertisers pawning beer, wine and champagne.  That was fine then, but that was before we were officially in this recession.

If things get any tougher, you might expect that Google will once again loosen editorial rules to add extra  revenue.  So, what’s next?  Gambling?  Heroin? 

Turns out that even mighty Google isn’t immune to a recession this size. 

Without ever getting much of a chance to gain momentum, Google’s avatar-based social networking environment called Lively will come down December 31st, 2008.  A few months ago, I wrote about Lively and speculated about what it could mean for the future of web navigation (Is Google lively a sign of things to come?).  While avatar-based web navigation may have seemed a little far-fetched, it didn’t seem outside of the realm of possibility.  Perhaps when this economic cloud clears we can once again look into a Virtuosity-style internet future.  I hope so.

Google is also reported to have ceased to continue with some 10,000 contract workers.  Early reports speculate that these primarily include bus drivers and cafeteria workers.  Now, I know food at the Googleplex is good, but could it take 10,000 to prepare and serve it? 

No.  These people were probably part of the layoff, but the majority was likely to have been “talent”.  What this really illustrates is a longstanding issue with American big business.  Companies use contract labor to appear trim in headcount for Wall Street analysts, to avoid paying full-time employee benefits, and to give themselves more flexibility to handle swells.  Yes, using contract labor is unavoidable to an extent.  Profits (and related workload) are tidal— staffing needs change rapidly as the availability of cash changes.  I myself have hired ~100 contract workers over the years for just such reasons.  But, when roughly 30% of your total workforce is temporary, one has to wonder what is going on?

I find it pretty incredible that the top 3 businesses in such a competitive marketplace have such a different approach to selling their products.  Google, Yahoo and Microsoft Live.com peddle more or less the same goods: search ads.  How they get you to that point, however, is very different.

Google decided long ago that the main page of Google.com would feature little more than the search box.  This seems wise, in my opinion.  Google does offer a lot of extranenous features and services, but the bulk of their revenue comes from one thing: search ads.  Why would Google want its users to do anything but to trigger those ads? 

For my screengrab today, Google was featuring Magritte’s birthday.  Classy, and appealing to their user base.

It only took a few years (decades in internet time) for Microsoft to figure out that Google had the right idea, and remove everything else from their site.  This change required (or enabled, depending on your opinion) rebranding MSN to be Live.com (in turn, they improved both their ad matching and ad serving capabilities). 

For my screengrab today, Live.com was featuring London.  I found the page very appealing, and aside from spending extra time on the site not searching, I give Microsoft credit for putting up something with such class:

Then, there is Yahoo.  Now, again and again I remind everyone that I am a diehard Yahoo fan.  I have stuck with them for years and years, and I will stick with them until the bitter end (which, by the looks of things lately might not be that far off).  Yahoo’s site seems to becoming sillier and sillier.

Today’s Yahoo homepage featured a photograph of man stretching to fit his mouth around a hamburger, and his date’s horrified reaction. 

So, here’s what I think.  It isn’t fair to compare these page, and here’s why:

Yahoo isn’t like the other two.  Yahoo is a content site.  I have been saying this for years, and Yahoo’s attempted deal for Google to serve their ads (failed) may be evidence that others are thinking the exact same way.  Yahoo’s value isn’t search.  Their value isn’t serving search ads.  Yahoo’s value is content, page view, readership.  Yahoo needs to refocus on serving effective ads on their content pages.  They should have beat Google to the browser punch, too.  That writing has been on the wall for years and years (think AOL, Prodigy, etc).  Instead of being a good site on the internet, Yahoo had the opportunity to be the “springboard” to the internet for millions of users. 

Now, it may be too late.  I’ll do whatever I can to support you, Yahoo.  But, at some point you are going to have to come to terms with what you are deep inside.  A content site.  With all those geniuses you have on staff, someone’s got to be able to see this and figure out how to monetize it.