• by Dave Morgan , Featured Contributor, January 3, 2008

In a post on Searchblog three weeks ago, John Battelle characterized Google's launch of a Wikipedia-like service named Knol as Google's attempt to own the "second click" -- the click after the search click, which the company already owns. It's a wonderful characterization. It is wonderful because it captures in a very simple way what is fundamentally different about how Google thinks and how most media companies think. Watch this space carefully. John marks the move as the unveiling of Google as an unambiguous media company. I think that he is right, and that is the first step in a new war -- the fight for the second click. Media companies talk about audiences and engagement. Google talks about clicks.

When you ask Google strategists whether or not it is a media company, they invariably answer no. "We are a technology company," they proclaim. This ignores, of course, that more than 99% of Google's revenue that comes from advertising. When you ask if they compete with media companies like The New York Times and CBS, or information sites like Wikipedia and craigslist or commerce sites like eBay or Amazon, they say "No." They say that they help media companies monetize their audiences. They say they help users find information sites. They say that they help commerce companies cost-effectively find customers.

On all of these counts, they are absolutely right. Of course, what they don't say is that once they have monetized all of the first clicks that they can, they need to start chasing second clicks. They need growth. Wall Street and their stock price demand it; paying off their heavy capital investments demands it. They need more clicks -- many more clicks. It is their sustenance. It is how they survive. If they can't find more in search, or more on contextual network sites, they need to create their own. Plus, the more "second clicks" they own, the more money they can keep -- and the less they have to share.

Google quite correctly points out that it is not a content company. It does not create the underlying content that feeds its searches and powers it AdWords ads or that attracts valuable audiences to the Web sites that power its AdSense ads. No. Google doesn't compete with media companies the way that they understand competition. It does not compete with them head-on. It does not try to beat them in content creation. It does not try to beat them in content packaging (though, with its Google News and its recent attempts to syndicate video content packaged with ads, it is starting to). Rather, Google beats them by owning what makes their content and packaging valuable -- their monetization, which today means clicks and tomorrow will mean everything from post-click transactions to driving brand favorability. If this was World War II, Google would be letting media companies find comfort building their Maginot Lines' slow moving battleships, while it is establishing air superiority and building fast-moving mechanized armor. Media companies fight for content. Google fights for marketing spend. Who will likely own whom in the end? Who will control the money?

How might the fight for the second click play out? I think that there will be several significant events in this battle over the next year or two. They are: