Normally I would agree with Mr. Bowerbird on this issue of how one gets into the press, from great personal experience. However, in this case I happen to know Brewster Kahle is a master, perhaps even more than a master, at getting press for his projects. I can thus only conclude that Brewster did everything he always did and even more, but that the press just wasn't having any of it. Not to mention that Brewster had the full power of Yahoo, Carnegie Mellon, and who knows how many other libraries with him at the time. Personally, I think the media COULD have made a big deal out of the potential competition, but since Google had been such bad press. . . the idea didn't go over well. Something else about Google's press on this: Why didn't their stock move at all given all that publicity? Go back and look at the graphs from December 14, 2004, and there is no indication of a billion dollars worth of publicity for Google. On Tue, 30 May 2006 Bowerbird@aol.com wrote:
michael said:
I note that the press didn't give Yahoo the time of day when their similar announcements came out about a year later. . .
c'mon, michael, you act like you're a novice when it comes to knowledge about how "the news" is created in the u. s. of a.
the media doesn't just "give" you attention, except superficial treatment if you're some freak; otherwise, you have to buy it.
google went and bought some coverage, and the o.c.a. didn't.
it's as simple as that.
sheesh...
-bowerbird
p.s. the songs you hear on the radio? same thing -- payola.