“Google” not a generic term for “search”
Folks, Google has sold out to the man. Jumped the shark. Lost it completely.
Google posted this patronizing reminder to the official Google Blog today reminding us when it’s appropriate to use the term “google”. An excerpt:
Usage: ‘Google’ as verb referring to searching for information via any conduit other than Google.
Example: “I googled him on Yahoo and he seems pretty interesting.”
Our lawyers say: Bad. Very, very bad. You can only “Google” on the Google search engine. If you absolutely must use one of our competitors, please feel free to “search” on Yahoo or any other search engine.
You gotta admire the chutzpah of Google’s lawyers, telling us in the blogging community loyal enough to actually read the Google Blog, how we should or shouldn’t use their word. It’s very Business Marketing 1.0… Not exactly what I’d expect from Google.
Am I the only one that gets the feeling that Google’s days of warm-and-fuzzies are gone?
Are they upset with their own success? Do they actually feel threatened by Yahoo? Did a bunch of crusty old men in suits put them up to it?
Language is dynamic, and people will use whatever is most meaningful to them. If people say “google” when they really mean “search”, well boo-effin-hoo. That’s the unfortunate burden the market leader has to carry on their shoulders. Get over it, and please, please don’t get the lawyers involved. That’s soooooo not cool.
In case you haven’t figured it out already, brand loyalty and brand integrity doesn’t come from carefully enforced “usage standards” anymore. This is the 21st century, not the 20th. Customers want to feel good about a brand from the inside out. You don’t get that from insulting and alienating your audience, Google.
(The irony of all this, of course, is that the point of Google’s post was meant to help support their brand. Talk about shooting themselves in the foot.)
Update: Apparently the blogging community is going nutso against Google over this.
My favorite blog title so far:
Google can go shove their lexicographical ‘advice’ up their ass
For more, check out the massive list of trackbacks on Google’s post.
6 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Yup, I think it was bad move!!!
From what I understand, they are concerned with it becoming a vernacular term and losing it as a brand name. See also:
http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/864.html
@Erik
Yeah, it’s pretty clear what they are trying to do, but it’s very un-Google, to say the least.
Not focusing on this kind of thing worked pretty well for Google… why start with the pettiness now?
I don’t know if I would call it not focusing on it, I think it was more of not realizing there was an issue at all. It is very un-google though.
Hey google needs a Kleanex, whoops I mean tissue.
Do you think Kleenex® cares when we say “Pass me a Kleenex.” while pointing to a box of Royale? I think not. Does Band-Aid® give a hoot when we claim to be slapping one on our boo-boo when the box was clearly labelled Elastoplast®? Not bloody likely. One would think Google would be flattered that they’ve become a household name. Or perhaps we’re over-analyzing and the whole post is just dripping with sarcasm. Things that make you go hmmmmmm…