I don't know why people always expect companies to do things the government should do. And when they do things that the government should do, they then say the the company could do more. It's false. The government could do more. And if they're out of money they should tax these companies more then.
If you don't support taxes usually you go live in exile in the middle of nowhere. If you want infrastructure, schools, firemen, police, etc. then you support taxes.
- A pool of $20 million in Google Cloud credits ...
A company that has a Bazillion $ in the bank, has means to really make a difference. This is not.
Edit/Clarification:
The original title was: "$800M funding and grants to support ..". Now they changed it.
I take issue with the claim of providing funding, and all they offer is free ADs. I appreciate that Google is doing _something_. I don't think they have to. I don't think that free ADs is a thing that people need right now.
Why does a company with a Bazillion dollars in the bank need to be a charity? If we agree that's the case, we should tax companies more. If not, what's the problem?
I tend to agree with you (and I'm a Googler), but good luck passing that tax legislation in the next few days. This emergency is now. There will be plenty of time to evaluate the degree to which our country has disabled and defunded government institutions, leaving us vulnerable in this sort of crisis - but first we have to get to the other side of the crisis.
We should acknowledge the fact that these corporations are acting now, while keeping the perspective that the cash they are spending isn't in government coffers to spend on this pandemic in part because of the low corporate taxes.
Companies with a bazillion dollars absolutely don't need to be a charity. But I think there's a moral obligation to support the same people and system that allowed the company to accumulate that wealth.
By no means should any company be required to do this - but I know I'm going to take a close look at who I'm spending my money with when this is all over, and I'll be doing it through the lens of what they have contributed back to the communities that let them thrive in the first place.
With all the negative press on Google, I was expecting this to be a decent PR move.
Reading the announcement is somewhat sobering though.
Most of it (590 million) are ad "credits" or "grants".
Keep in mind that Google ad revenue in 2019 was 134 billion.
> $250 million in ad grants to help the World Health Organization (WHO) and more than 100 government agencies globally provide critical information on how to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and other measures to help local communities.
It seems odd to me that institutions are supposed to resort to advertising to be shown above all the false, misleading and inaccurate information.
Is the WHO supposed to have a marketing team optimizing ad spending on Google during a pandemic to rank higher than inferior sources?
There ought the be ranking mechanisms or other side channels to keep important information on top in case of a crisis.
This is like fixing a leaking pipe by forcing in water from the outside.
Edit: apparently all ads relating to Coronavirus have been blocked. See below.
--- Small beneficial side effect: for Google: this drives up the prices a bit for pharma and other companies trying to profit with Corona related topics.
> $340 million in Google Ads credits available to all SMBs with active accounts over the past year.
This sounds decent at first, but also seems more like a token gift on further thought.
I reckon the goal here is mainly to avoid losing those customers. Many SMBs are closed, struggling, and will reduce expenses where possible. Marketing is often the easiest to cut right away, and many of those might not return anytime soon.
The hardest hit businesses are those that had to close down (restaurants, shops, etc). They won't be spending money now.
While a small, free marketing budget is good to have , it will also help stabilize/raise prizes more quickly once everything opens again.
This way they keep those customers at least somewhat engaged and can also prop up the numbers a bit.
> A $200 million investment fund that will support NGOs and financial institutions around the world to help provide small businesses with access to capital.
This is certainly the most impactful. Assuming 70% of that money reaches businesses, it could amount in 14_000 loans of 10_000 each.
I'd assume those to be loans though, so the fund probably won't be much of a loss in the medium term.
> Is the WHO seriously supposed to have a marketing team optimizing ad spending on Google during a pandemic so they rank higher than some "Coronavirus is a hox" article?
Google recently blocked advertisements around COVID19
and related issues. Would you please at least look it up before making this kind of assumptions?
> Google recently blocked advertisements around COVID19
I hadn't seen that, thanks for pointing it out.
There are still ads for terms like "breathing mask" though, so it could probably be circumvented to some extent. But that's to be expected and probably unavoidable.
Especially in light of these efforts, it still seems weird to me though to encourage institutions to use ads for information.
Trick is, nobody is buying ads at the moment because nobody is spending on advertised products. So demand is way down, which means the value of the ads is also way down. By donating half a billion dollars worth of ads at today's rate, they generate half a billion dollars worth of demand and keep the price pumped up. If the numbers work out the right way, they might even be turning a profit by giving ads away.
I think we are are seeing the first images of how organizations are trying to fight the massive forces of deflation - no one wants to be the first to start cutting prices. You'll see companies giving away or donating more and more of their inventory or product, but I think it's inevitable that prices in certain sectors of the economy will start coming down.
Very magnanimous of big G! Obliging us with virtual trinkets that cost them nothing when most of us be out of jobs soon and a few really unlucky ones may die.
Bet their PR department is made up of lawyers only. Complete lack of empathy and imagination. Full marks for greed and being clever by half.
Let’s see if other companies in valley follow their “lead” in hand waving or actually do something that matters.
I think Google could afford to spend a couple billions more to fund the manufacturing and distribution of masks and ventillators, instead of announcing a support package with the bulk in ad credits.
Also, Google employs some of the best marketers on the planet, they should be showing ads for how to wear masks correctly and for practical safety guidelines, and leverage everything they've learned about human psychology to disperse information that could save lives.
That's what it means to actually want to do something, not just pretend with ad credits that ultimately boost your own business.
Right now I'm getting an ad for Milka chocolate as I watch news videos about the pandemic on YouTube, instead of being offered a chance to learn how to safely disinfect groceries.
Google does not need to give out ad credits to WHO to be able to run public safety ads today across all AdSense sites. They have the money and the talent to spin up a massive public safety campaign within days.
> Direct financial support and expertise to help increase the production capacity for personal protective equipment (PPE) and lifesaving medical devices. We’re working with our longtime supplier and partner Magid Glove & Safety, with the goal of ramping up production of 2-3 million face masks in the coming weeks that will be provided to the CDC Foundation. Additionally, employees from across Alphabet, including Google, Verily and X, are bringing engineering, supply chain and healthcare expertise to facilitate increased production of ventilators, working with equipment manufacturers, distributors and the government in this effort.
Google has announced a $800+ billion support package for small businesses and crisis response, $810 billion of that are ad credits and an investment fund for small businesses. There is certainly more that Google could do to fund the manufacturing and distribution of life-saving equipment, even if they do mention it in the last bullet point, without clarifying the amount of financial support.
> I think Google could afford to spend a couple billions more to fund the manufacturing and distribution of masks and ventillators.
Not couple billions, but still the last bullet point is exactly what you're saying.
> Also, Google employs some of the best marketers on the planet, they should be showing ads for how to wear masks correctly and for practical safety guidelines, and leverage everything they've learned about the human psychology to disperse information that could save lives.
Google seems promoting the following link in their top page (which is perhaps one of the most valuable real estate in the internet).
I think we should stop giving them a pass. If they can spend billions on fines, it's possible that they could afford to spend a comparable amount to help people and save lives. Don't you find it insulting that the bulk of the support package is ad credits?
> Google seems promoting the following link in their top page
Only if you search for coronavirus tips and related terms, that is nowhere near the massive marketing campaign Google could pull off across their network to bring vital information to the public.
“ A $200 million investment fund that will support NGOs and financial institutions around the world to help provide small businesses with access to capital. As one example, we’re working with the Opportunity Finance Network in the U.S. to help fill gaps in financing for people and communities underserved by mainstream financial institutions. This is in addition to the $15 million in cash grants Google.org is already providing to nonprofits to help bridge these gaps for SMBs.”
What does this really mean? Aside from the NGO stuff it sounds like it could just be taking advantage of the downturn to buy businesses?
Readit News
- $250 million in ad grants ...
- $340 million in Google Ads credits ...
- A pool of $20 million in Google Cloud credits ...
A company that has a Bazillion $ in the bank, has means to really make a difference. This is not.
Edit/Clarification:
The original title was: "$800M funding and grants to support ..". Now they changed it.
I take issue with the claim of providing funding, and all they offer is free ADs. I appreciate that Google is doing _something_. I don't think they have to. I don't think that free ADs is a thing that people need right now.
We should acknowledge the fact that these corporations are acting now, while keeping the perspective that the cash they are spending isn't in government coffers to spend on this pandemic in part because of the low corporate taxes.
However, if you come forward and pledge to provide "800 Million funding and grants" and all you get is Google Ad credits, that's disingenuous.
By no means should any company be required to do this - but I know I'm going to take a close look at who I'm spending my money with when this is all over, and I'll be doing it through the lens of what they have contributed back to the communities that let them thrive in the first place.
I hope I'm not the only one.
Deleted Comment
Reading the announcement is somewhat sobering though.
Most of it (590 million) are ad "credits" or "grants". Keep in mind that Google ad revenue in 2019 was 134 billion.
> $250 million in ad grants to help the World Health Organization (WHO) and more than 100 government agencies globally provide critical information on how to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and other measures to help local communities.
It seems odd to me that institutions are supposed to resort to advertising to be shown above all the false, misleading and inaccurate information.
Is the WHO supposed to have a marketing team optimizing ad spending on Google during a pandemic to rank higher than inferior sources?
There ought the be ranking mechanisms or other side channels to keep important information on top in case of a crisis.
This is like fixing a leaking pipe by forcing in water from the outside.
Edit: apparently all ads relating to Coronavirus have been blocked. See below.
--- Small beneficial side effect: for Google: this drives up the prices a bit for pharma and other companies trying to profit with Corona related topics.
> $340 million in Google Ads credits available to all SMBs with active accounts over the past year.
This sounds decent at first, but also seems more like a token gift on further thought.
I reckon the goal here is mainly to avoid losing those customers. Many SMBs are closed, struggling, and will reduce expenses where possible. Marketing is often the easiest to cut right away, and many of those might not return anytime soon.
The hardest hit businesses are those that had to close down (restaurants, shops, etc). They won't be spending money now.
While a small, free marketing budget is good to have , it will also help stabilize/raise prizes more quickly once everything opens again.
This way they keep those customers at least somewhat engaged and can also prop up the numbers a bit.
> A $200 million investment fund that will support NGOs and financial institutions around the world to help provide small businesses with access to capital.
This is certainly the most impactful. Assuming 70% of that money reaches businesses, it could amount in 14_000 loans of 10_000 each.
I'd assume those to be loans though, so the fund probably won't be much of a loss in the medium term.
Google recently blocked advertisements around COVID19 and related issues. Would you please at least look it up before making this kind of assumptions?
https://www.blog.google/inside-google/company-announcements/...
I hadn't seen that, thanks for pointing it out.
There are still ads for terms like "breathing mask" though, so it could probably be circumvented to some extent. But that's to be expected and probably unavoidable.
Especially in light of these efforts, it still seems weird to me though to encourage institutions to use ads for information.
Fine. I offer free ads for 3 months worth 1B$ in my website, can I use it now for PR as well?:-)
Dead Comment
Also, Google employs some of the best marketers on the planet, they should be showing ads for how to wear masks correctly and for practical safety guidelines, and leverage everything they've learned about human psychology to disperse information that could save lives.
That's what it means to actually want to do something, not just pretend with ad credits that ultimately boost your own business.
Right now I'm getting an ad for Milka chocolate as I watch news videos about the pandemic on YouTube, instead of being offered a chance to learn how to safely disinfect groceries.
Google does not need to give out ad credits to WHO to be able to run public safety ads today across all AdSense sites. They have the money and the talent to spin up a massive public safety campaign within days.
> Direct financial support and expertise to help increase the production capacity for personal protective equipment (PPE) and lifesaving medical devices. We’re working with our longtime supplier and partner Magid Glove & Safety, with the goal of ramping up production of 2-3 million face masks in the coming weeks that will be provided to the CDC Foundation. Additionally, employees from across Alphabet, including Google, Verily and X, are bringing engineering, supply chain and healthcare expertise to facilitate increased production of ventilators, working with equipment manufacturers, distributors and the government in this effort.
Not couple billions, but still the last bullet point is exactly what you're saying.
> Also, Google employs some of the best marketers on the planet, they should be showing ads for how to wear masks correctly and for practical safety guidelines, and leverage everything they've learned about the human psychology to disperse information that could save lives.
Google seems promoting the following link in their top page (which is perhaps one of the most valuable real estate in the internet).
https://www.google.com/search?q=coronavirus+tips&fbx=dothefi...
I think we should stop giving them a pass. If they can spend billions on fines, it's possible that they could afford to spend a comparable amount to help people and save lives. Don't you find it insulting that the bulk of the support package is ad credits?
> Google seems promoting the following link in their top page
Only if you search for coronavirus tips and related terms, that is nowhere near the massive marketing campaign Google could pull off across their network to bring vital information to the public.
What does this really mean? Aside from the NGO stuff it sounds like it could just be taking advantage of the downturn to buy businesses?