Book Review: Googled, The End of the World as We Know It

I just finished reading Ken Auletta’s new book: Googled, The End of the World as We Know It.

Auletta delivers on many levels with this book.  As a general corporate biography, Auletta was given the kind of access required to compose a compelling story about the development of the business as well as the role various personalities played in the company’s founding and success.  In fact, the access he was given seems extraordinary in an era where famous people are as easily mugged by the media as they are truthfully reported on.  On the flip side of that, the way Auletta takes that access and pens a balanced critique of the people and company position speaks well to his character and ability as a journalist in the face of extraordinary wealth and power.

Definitely, an excellent corporate biography.

But what gives the book, and story, significance isn’t just the extreme success achieved by Google and it’s principals.  It’s the role Google is playing in a larger story about the transition our media industry at large is currently suffering.  These days, there’s quite a bit of blaming going on in old media directed toward Google.  I don’t tend to subscribe to the belief that Google is an evil plotter in the demise of an American Icon industry.  I think content will always have a central role in our culture because we value storytelling as much as any culture ever has, and we value News as a pillar for our Liberal Democracy.  Content will always be King.  However, just as real monarchies in different countries have to justify their role in society from time to time, so does Content need to re-establish it’s role as King in our context.  It’s true to say our modes of distribution are evolving at break neck speeds.  This pace of innovation compels us to wonder whether new forms of content that effectively dis-intermediate the Media Companies will become King.  We’ve been experimenting with user generated content in that regard for some time now.  But it seems to me the experimentation is leading us to conclude once again that some people are awesome story tellers, and the vast majority of us benefit from the consumption of their art.

So I’m not worried about the demise of Media.  We love it and need it too much.  How we pay for it, well, that’s what everyone is really freaking out about.

One of the recurring themes or aspects I picked up on in reading this book had to do with the way Google is perceived.  There’s a chronic question as to whether Google is naive or evil.  The question is typically posed to people in traditional media who believe their livelihood or wealth is affected by Googles presence in the market.  It makes sense for them to believe Google is evil.  According to Auletta, this baffles the people at Google in a way that then lends itself to believing they are not really evil.  Truly evil people know they are evil and are not surprised when others think it as well.  So, the other alternative is that they are naive.  Naive enough not to recognize and understand the way they are perceived by the people they are affecting adversely.  Auletta ascribes this naivete to being a function of an extreme engineer worldview.  Everything is logical; not emotional.  Efficiency matters more than anything else.  So the ability to relate to people that feel harmed by Google eludes the people at Google.

I’ve been in the Valley long enough to know this is not something unique to Google.  So, I’d probably side with the perspective that the folks at Google are maybe guilty of being insensitive over evil.  It seems to me Googlers are probably as good as folks at any other company.  They’re not out to kill anyone, they are just out to make a difference.

Which seems like a rather hohum conclusion…which is not good for blogs.  I know this by looking at the Google Analytics for this blog

So, in the interest of being somewhat controversial, here’s my greatest concern.  I think that the current management of Google is composed of people who really believe the ideals they espouse as corporate values.  At the same time, I see the power Google is accumulating through its position in the industry as the collector of all manner of consumer data.  This power is currently wielded by personalities that seem inclined toward benevolence.  But a company with that kind of power necessarily attracts evil geniuses over time.  My greatest concern will be when the current management team moves on to the next challenge and the personalities vying for control of Google’s assets represent a very different profile than the current personalities do today.  I know if I was an evil genius I could do a lot with the kind of data Google is gathering and controlling right now.