• by Joe Marchese , October 14, 2008

Here is a statement that's not hard to make: I couldn't possibly disagree with Google CEO Eric Schmidt. In a piece last week in Ad Age, Nat Ives quoted Schmidt saying, "Brands are the solution, not the problem.... Brands are how you sort out the cesspool." What Schmidt is saying is that brands can play a major role in improving the content of the Internet by supporting quality content.

My question is, what is Google doing to help? Google made performance marketing relevant and provided the ROI measurement needed to make direct marketing on the Internet a value-add -- but can it do the same for the other 90% of marketing budgets that are not direct response? If brands are willing to dive into the cesspool of the Internet, can Google help them sort through the mess to find the quality content worthy of support, which will provide lift for their marketing objectives.

I have been telling anyone who would listen that current methods of marketing, as well as how that marketing is measured, are strangling the Internet's potential for marketers and platforms, and even ruining peoples' online experience. It was back in May that another Google thought leader, Avinash Kaushik, Google's analytics evangelist, first sounded the call that Web publishers need to step up to attract better marketers, as I wrote about in "Why Web Sites And Online Marketing Suck." So what has changed since then?

Are there new delivery or measurement methods provided to brands that allow them to enter digital media in a scalable manner? Most importantly, has a system been established by Google, or anyone else, that aligns the goals of brand advertisers and Web publishers? Scott Karp over at Publishing 2.0 makes very clear the lack of alignment in advertising in social media, perhaps the ideal place for brands to make an impact, in his post, "Why Isn't Facebook Making More Money? (Hint: Advertiser Value and User Value Are Not Aligned)"

Marketers can do a lot to help the process of aligning their goals with Web publishers (social or otherwise), simply by not being lazy in their approach to marketing online. It will be good for the Internet as a medium, and it will be good for marketers' bottom lines. Specifically, marketers can stop trying to apply standard reach and frequency metrics to the Internet, which leads to more crap on the Internet. Also, they should definitely stop thinking about the click as the end-all, which leads to more misalignment of goals.

It will take more work, but if marketers can demonstrate what is truly of value for their brands, Google and others can build better solutions aligning people, publishers and brands. As long as marketers are lazy, the Internet will continue to be full of crap that delivers the lowest common denominator of value: unqualified impressions.