Bookmarks (124) clear filters

Summary List Placement Before he was Google's CEO, Sundar Pichai was best known for turning Chrome into the world's most popular web browser – but the methods Google used to get ahead of its rivals are currently under scrutiny. This week, the House antitrust subcommittee released the findings of an investigation into anti-competitive practices across Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and Google.  The 449-page document accuses Google of being "an ecosystem of interlocking monopolies" and an "overwhelmingly dominant" online search provider. One of the report's many conclusions is that Google has used its dominance in one market to favor its own products, with its Chrome web browser being one example. The report highlighted how Google began promoting its Chrome browser at the top corner of the Google.com homepage in 2009 in an effort to get Internet Explorer users to switch. It also revealed that not all employees were happy about it. "I find the very, very high-profile promotion of Google Chrome on Google.com quite frankly, startling," read one email between Chrome employees from 2009, which was obtained by the committee and cited in the report. In another piece of correspondence from 2009, Pichai, who was vice president of product development at the time, told employees to "promote through Google.com" and to push users to set Chrome as their default browser. Further documents confirmed that the web promotion performed well for Google at the time, driving "a tremendous number of downloads," according to one email. The report alleges that Google saw the growing importance of Chrome for the company's overall success, with then-CEO Eric Schmidt telling employees that the browser would be a primary portal to cloud services. This was despite Google later telling the Justice Department's Antitrust Division in a 2019 presentation that Chrome was launched "as a defensive move to protect users' access to Google's products," according to the report. In a statement responding to the overall conclusions of the antitrust documents, a Google spokesperson said that Google's products "help millions of Americans." "We compete fairly in a fast-moving and highly competitive industry. We disagree with today's reports, which feature outdated and inaccurate allegations from commercial rivals about Search and other services," they added.SEE ALSO: The Supreme Court heard arguments in the Oracle vs. Google legal battle today, but experts say that it's hard to predict which way the tremendously important case will go Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Epidemiologists debunk 13 coronavirus myths

Summary List Placement The most important legal brawl in technology is finally going before the US Supreme Court. Oracle and Google will face off Wednesday before the Supreme Court, which will decide a landmark patent infringement case that could have far-reaching implications in the way software is developed, integrated and monetized in the tech industry. The Supreme Court marks a significant moment in what has been a decade-long battle between the two parties. A lot is on the line in a case that has the potential to alter the very nature of software development. The case centers on Oracle's allegation that Google stole critical elements of its Java technology to develop its Android operating system. Google has hit back, arguing that Oracle cannot own this type of code — known as APIs, or application programming interfaces — which make it possible for software programs to talk to each other. In fact, this type of code is widely used in the industry for integrating pieces of software and web services.  The Supreme Court's ruling, which is expected early next year, could potentially shake up the tech industry, said Rob Siegel, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist and a management lecturer at the Stanford Graduate School of Business. If Google wins, "the software and tech industry runs as it has for the last three decades," he told Business Insider.  On the other hand, a victory for Oracle could trigger a "mad scramble" as tech companies try to figure out the legal ramifications of using another vendor's API, he said.  "Some companies clarify that their APIs are open and that they won't sue others," Siegel said. "Some companies get aggressive and litigate.  Those that litigate get ostracized after a while as other companies will try to avoid doing business with them and will avoid integrating their software." Google counts several of its peers as allies in this fight: Google's position has been endorsed by other tech giants, led by IBM, Microsoft and RedHat, the open source software behemoth which is now owned by Big Blue. Google also has the support of prominent technology advocacy groups, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Mozilla. "Computer interfaces are not copyrightable. That simple, yet powerful principle has been a cornerstone of technological and economic growth for over sixty years," IBM said in a legal brief. Oracle, for its part, has won support from several prominent tech executives, including Scott McNealy, former CEO of Sun Microsystems, the company that invented Java which Oracle acquired in 2010. Perhaps more importantly, Oracle will argue its case before the Supreme Court with the backing of an important player: the Trump administration.  The Trump endorsement Analyst Rob Enderle of the Enderle Group speculated that politics could play a role in the case. The legal battle is going before the Supreme Court at a time when Oracle founder and chief technology officer Larry Ellison is widely known to enjoy the support of President Donald Trump. This was underscored by Oracle's surprise victory in the TikTok negotiations. "You also have the political element in the court system now, and the administration likes Oracle and doesn't care much for Google and has been willing to apply pressure on the court to protect friends," Enderle told Business Insider. "Given bending to that pressure would reflect poorly on the court, and the court knows this, it makes the outcome kind of a crapshoot.  Given the court's conservative makeup now, Oracle likely has the advantage." The Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to rule in favor of Oracle, but the court chose to take the case anyway. "Ordinarily the views of the Justice Department carry a lot of weight in the Supreme Court,"  Tyler Ochoa, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, who specializes in copyright law and signed a brief in favor of Google, told Business Insider. "So you already have at least four judges that either think the court of appeals was wrong or at least think it's an important issue that they need to resolve." In a brief endorsing Oracle's case, former Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued that Google's "idiosyncratic approach would seem to allow any copyist to carve out the most popular parts of a pre-existing work, on the ground that familiar content is likely to make the second work more commercially appealing to admirers of the first. That result would be antithetical to the purposes of copyright." The passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg may also sway things. "She's been strongly pro-copyright in her opinions in recent years, said Professor Ochoa. Ginsberg, Ochoa believes, would have been "almost a certain" vote for Oracle.  A decade-long battle is heading towards a conclusion Kent Walker, Google's senior vice president for global affairs, maintained this week that the legal battle is affirming the tradition of innovation in the software industry. "We spoke for software developers, computer scientists, businesses and consumers who support software innovation," he said in a statement. "Developers want to create applications that work across platforms, without fearing that companies will misuse copyright law to block interoperability." Oracle reaffirmed its view that Google is guilty of theft. "We made clear that Google's conduct (theft) must be judged under the law as it is, not as Google would like it to be," Oracle Executive Vice President Ken Glueck said in a statement. "Google's self-serving approach to intellectual property is undeniably arrogant." Ultimately, the case's outcome may hinge in no small part on whether the Supreme Court grasp the intricacies involved, and the potential shockwaves through the tech industry. "Software copyrightability is really tricky," said Professor Ochoa. "It's going to help if the Justices really understand the software. Hopefully they're a little tech savvy." Got a tip about Oracle or another tech company? Contact this reporter via email at bpimentel@businessinsider.com, message him on Twitter @benpimentel or send him a secure message through Signal at (510) 731-8429. You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop. Got a tip about Google? Reach out to hlangley@businessinsider.com or message him on Signal or Telegram at (628) 228-1836.  Claim your 20% discount on an annual subscription to BI Prime by clicking here. SEE ALSO: Enterprise tech salaries revealed: How much Oracle, IBM, SAP, Cisco, Dell, VMware, ServiceNow and Workday pay engineers, developers, data scientists and others SEE ALSO: How much product managers are paid at enterprise giants like Oracle, Cisco, VMware, SAP, ServiceNow and Workday — and how the job is evolving Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why some Hong Kong skyscrapers have gaping holes

Summary List PlacementHi! Welcome to the Insider Advertising daily for October 5. Lucia Moses here, filling in for Lauren Johnson. Today's news: Tech chiefs to testify, why Pepsi isn't following Coke into hard seltzer, and Triller user numbers disputed. First: remember to subscribe here to get this newsletter daily. The CEOs of Facebook, Google, and Twitter will all testify before Congress, days before the election, over legal protections for internet companies The heads of Facebook, Google, and Twitter have all agreed to testify before Congress about social media regulation on October 28, just days before the presidential election. Lawmakers plan to question them about concerns over Section 230, which shields social media companies from being held liable for the content of users' posts and gives them authority to develop their own content moderation rules. Its advocates have called the law "the most important law protecting internet speech," but it's increasingly come under fire from both sides of the political aisle — for very different reasons. Read the full story here. PepsiCo's CEO explains why it's shying away from hard seltzer even as Coca-Cola moves into booze Pepsi and Coke have been taking different paths when it comes to selling beverages to pandemic-weary consumers. PepsiCo is focused "100%" on its strategy in energy drinks, CEO Ramon Laguarta said on the company's earnings call Thursday in response to a question about whether it would follow Coca-Cola into hard seltzer. He indicated energy drinks offer more long-term potential while hard seltzer could be shorter-lived. Read the full story here. Insiders say TikTok rival Triller reported monthly active users that were 5 times higher than what some internal metrics showed The short-form-video app Triller, a TikTok rival, touted massive user growth last year that some former employees said they believed was inflated, Dan Whateley reported. Six former employees said the publicly reported monthly active user number was more than five times what they were seeing on some internal metrics. Triller CEO Mike Lu said the former employees were "disseminating inaccurate information" and that it can validate "each and every one" of its reported users. Read the full story here. More stories we're reading: Starbucks has begun rolling out glow-in-the-dark cups for Halloween— and people are already reselling them online (Business Insider) A high-profile engineer left Amazon after filing sexual harassment claims to HR in 2018. Now she's speaking out about what she calls a 'toxic' work culture for women. (Business Insider) 'Ready to spend': Publishers are angling for election-wary advertisers' Facebook budgets (Digiday) How Discord went from gaming and alt-right hub to a sneaker cook group hotbed, where resellers charge fees to share their secrets for cracking the $2 billion resale market (Business Insider) A part-time YouTube creator breaks down how she makes over $1,000 a month making videos about thrift shopping (Business Insider) Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: How the suicide hotline saved my life

Summary List Placement We're approaching a year since Google declared its plan to acquire wearables company Fitbit for $2.1 billion, and the deal still hasn't closed.  The acquisition has been under intense scrutiny around the world, and right now European regulators are digging deep into the deal. Earlier this week it was reported that the merger could be close to clearing after Google offered some concessions to regulators, but Reuters now reports that rivals say these aren't enough. Google showed us this week that it's still serious about hardware, and it has big ambitions in wearables. It recently snapped up Canadian smartglasses maker North, while acquiring Google could help catch Apple in what is becoming one of the next big tech battlefields. But it's not Fitbit or nothing. Here are some other wearables health companies that Google could try to snap up if its Fitbit deal doesn't succeed (or even if it does), based on expert opinions and Business Insider's own analysis.SEE ALSO: Google's secretive healthcare business wants to organize the world's health information, but insiders describe how turf wars and trust issues are hamstringing the operation Withings French health tech company Withings has had a rocky few years. What began as a single connected body scale turned into an ecosystem of health tech products sold under the Withings brand. In 2016, Nokia acquired the company and rebranded all of its products. Two years later, it sold it back to cofounder Éric Carreel. "I think they would be a great acquisition because they're a much stronger healthcare play, and they get healthcare better than pretty much anyone else," said Anshel Sag, a senior analyst at Moor Insights & Strategy. Withings has a much smaller user base than Fitbit's, which could potentially make it an easier buy. "Withings could be an option but really not on the same level as Fitbit," Creative Strategies analyst Carolina Milanesi told Business Insider. However, Withings will want to tread carefully. "The Nokia acquisition has left a bad taste in their mouth and I think they would want to avoid that at any cost," said George Jijiashvili, a senior analyst covering wearables at Omidia.      Mobvoi Chinese tech company Mobvoi already counts Google as one of its investors, and helped take a version of Google's Wear OS operating system to China (where Google operates in a very limited capacity). Multiple analysts said it would be a no-brainer for Google to acquire them if it weren't for what is currently a heated geopolitical climate between the US and China. "I think they're rather interesting," said Omidia's George Jijiashvili. "They keep bringing out nice Wear OS smartwatches. They're very tightly knit with Google."  The Beijing-based company was even started by ex-Googlers who once told TechCrunch that much of the company's DNA was inspired by their former employer. Fossil's smartwatch business Google and Fossil have had a good thing going. Google provides its Wear OS operating system, and Fossil builds smartwatches for its variety of licence brands such as Michael Kors and Diesel. It's helped Google get its software on more wrists without having to manufacture its own devices, but according to a recent Counterpoint Research report, Fossil only captured 2.1% of global smartwatch shipment revenues. Of course, Google buying all of Fossil would make little business sense, but analysts say the company could feasibly break off Fossil's smartwatch business in an acquisition to give it access to the technology and talent.  In 2019, Google paid Fossil $40 million for an undisclosed new smartwatch technology, so it wouldn't be unprecedented. However, it would likely also require Fossil Group to give up on its smartwatch ambitions for it to happen. "I think Fossil would still be a very good fit," said Moor Insights & Strategy's Sag.   Oura The wearables war won't just be fought on the wrist. Smart ring companies have gained some traction by offering more subtle health trackers. Oura is probably the best-known smart ring maker right now, helped partly by its work in a study this year to detect early symptoms of COVID-19. Smart ring maker Motiv, Oura's biggest rival, was acquired by access security company Proxy earlier this year, and smart rings could be a logical area for Google to pursue. "Oura are gaining traction with the NBA around Covid," said Anshel Sag at Moor Insights & Strategy. "That would be an interesting one." Polar Analysts say Garmin would likely pose a similar antitrust headache were Google to every try to acquire it, but Polar is a similar big name in the fitness wearables space with a smaller user base, meaning Google may be able to snap it up with less trouble. "Because they're smaller scale compared to Fitbit, they would potentially cause less problems with regulators," said Jijiashvili at Omidia. "Polar are releasing new dedicated swimming and running watches here and there, but they don't crop up a lot when it comes to talking about market share. It's low volume, high engagement." Whoop When Google announced its intentions to acquire Fitbit, CB Insights singled out Whoop as one of the wearables startups that could be next in line for acquisition. Whoop's edge is in its recovery tracking, giving users a better picture of how much strain a workout has put on their body, and how much rest they need before getting back on the treadmill. Like Oura, it's found new purpose with the pandemic, rolling out an update to let users more easily keep an eye on their respiratory rate. Its Series D round, raised last year, was actually led by Fitbit investor Foundry Group. Suunto Finnish sports watch maker Suunto is a much smaller company than Fitbit, which would make it easier for Google to clinch a deal. Omidia's Jijiashvili highlighted the company as a potential acquisition target and said it would bring "the hardware angle" Google is after. "Suunto is notorious a private company and I don't know if they'd be up for acquisitions or not," he added. Matrix Industries Matrix Industries is another potential hot acquisition target that was flagged by CB Insights. The Menlo Park, California, startup makes a smartwatch powered by body heat and has garnered a lot of attention for its unique thermoelectric technology. Battery life is a major limitation in consumer wearables right now, and one that companies such as Google and Apple will be looking to do whatever they can to improve. Matrix's edge is that its smartwatch never needs charging, but the unique technology could be attractive beyond the wrist alone. Its smartwatch is also still quite niche, making it perfect for someone like Google to snap it up and make it more mainstream.

Summary List Placement From knock-off Rolex watches to fake pharmaceuticals, Google indexes many websites that sell counterfeit products. In June, the company finally began allowing users to request that sites hosting these fake goods be de-indexed from Google's search results – but Incopro, a brand-reputation consultancy, says Google's system is "extremely problematic" for brands. To report fake goods that appear in Google search results, a brand must fill out a form and submit a URL for the page hosting the counterfeit product. But brands can't submit an entire website for takedown, and therefore must send Google the URL of every individual counterfeit product. "It's like trying to mow a football pitch using a pair of scissors," said Mike Sweeney, director of service delivery and senior legal counsel at Incopro. "It just doesn't stack up for trying to tackle this problem at scale." Incopro, a brand protection software provider, is now putting pressure on Google to change its policy, hosting a webinar on Thursday in which it intends to lay out its findings in the shortcomings of Google's approach to combating counterfeits.  Sweeney said that the counterfeit goods submission system means a brand could feasibly have to submit thousands of individual URLs in order to have those products de-indexed by Google.  In research shared with Business Insider, Incopro said it discovered that a fake watch site, watchreplica.to, had 3,370 individual URLs indexed by Google, with just under 70% of its traffic coming from organic search, it claims. Sweeney said Incopro still welcomed Google's new fake-fighting tool, calling it a "sense of leveling up" from what came before it. "Typically you'd have to resort to sending takedown notices to the people operating the websites. And very often, the notices are either ignored or else are actioned only for the website to appear somewhere else on the internet where the infringement cycle begins all over again," he said. But the new system doesn't go far enough, Incopro says, and creates a potential headache for brands trying to swat down counterfeit products. "This new functionality is very limited in that it anticipates brands or their appointed agents notifying Google of their concerns on an individual URL-by-URL basis, and that's extremely problematic," said Sweeney. A Google spokesperson told Business Insider that the URL-based request system was by design and said that a full-site removal could limit access to legitimate goods. They added that Google has developed ways limit the visibility of websites that are consistently found to be selling counterfeit goods. "Demotion of websites which are unlawful and which serve no legitimate purpose is not an effective solution," said Sweeney. "These are websites which serve no legitimate purpose, which often fund serious, criminal activity and which are self-evidently unlawful.  Still, Google will not remove them." Users also need to create a Google account in order to submit the request, which Incopro is also calling out as a problematic element of Google's takedown system. In a report last year, Incopro found that for certain searches, up to 60% of first-page Google results were directing users to websites selling counterfeit products.SEE ALSO: Sundar Pichai says Google plans to be 'more flexible' with future office requirements, and will consider hybrid models to create better balance for employees Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: A cleaning expert reveals her 3-step method for cleaning your entire home quickly

Summary List Placement The coronavirus pandemic has led to dramatic shifts in shopping behavior as people avoided going to physical stores and began buying more online. That's been a boon for Amazon and delivery platforms like Instacart, which launched a self-serve ad platform in May. But traditional retailers like Walmart, CVS, and Kroger have also intensified the competition for advertising with their own ad sales platforms. While Amazon still rules e-commerce, the pandemic marks the beginning of a long-term change that could threaten its dominance of digital retail advertising. John Lods, CEO of digital media-buying agency Arm Candy, said his clients have been frustrated with Amazon's fees and hold on e-commerce and are eager to try advertising almost anywhere else. Amazon did not respond to a request for comment. Representatives for Walmart, CVS, Kroger, and Instacart declined to comment. Big brands are spending more of their ad budgets on e-commerce sites beyond Amazon Big brands like Hershey and Petco said as they've been moving more of their ad budgets to e-commerce, they're spending on platforms beyond Amazon to see how well they perform and diversify their revenue streams. Petco works with Instacart and Shipt, said Darren MacDonald, chief digital and innovation officer there, while Hershey has moved some money from Amazon to Kroger, Walmart, and Target, said Doug Straton, chief digital officer at Hershey. And Straton said the longer the pandemic continues, the more entrenched the shift to e-commerce will be. "Where e-commerce is now as a percentage of the overall business is where we thought it would be, maybe, in two to three years — and that kind of happened overnight," Straton said. Midsize advertisers that fund the top platforms are also attracted to places like Target and CVS But it's the millions of small and midsize advertisers that power the major digital platforms and that have been quickest to try out these alternatives to Amazon, because they can move faster than the CPG giants, ad execs said. "Smaller players can take advantage of new shopping behaviors," Lods said. "Big brands, however, have to approve budgets almost years in advance." John Smith, head of digital marketing at cell phone accessory maker BGZ Brands, said his company was able to quickly move ad dollars to Target and paid social when Amazon restricted the shipment of nonessential items early in the pandemic. He also said BGZ is particularly interested in CVS' site because people often bought his company's products there before the pandemic. Amazon and traditional advertising stand to lose the most Amazon remains the undisputed e-commerce leader, with its market share estimated to hit 38.7% in 2020. But Walmart's e-commerce market share is growing rapidly. And some agency executives think price and loyalty may lead some shoppers — and, consequently, advertisers — to choose it and other retailers over Amazon. "Look at the price on an Apple laptop from Amazon and Walmart; Walmart is going to win nine out of 10 times," said Sam Huston, chief strategy officer at agency 3Q Digital. Advertisers want more for their money too, and Instacart has been particularly effective in delivering on ad spend, said Craig Atkinson, chief client officer at media-buying agency Tinuiti. Atkinson called the e-commerce explosion "another nail in the coffin" of non-digital advertising and said dozens of his clients, which include Seventh Generation and The Honest Co, are experimenting with the new platforms. Only one client has made a significant shift away from Amazon so far. But, he added: "We've just scratched the surface" of the move toward e-commerce.SEE ALSO: The pandemic has thrown a wrench in plans to save the TV business. Industry insiders lay out what they're doing to fix it Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why Pikes Peak is the most dangerous racetrack in America

Summary List PlacementFacebook was thrust back into the spotlight last week after BuzzFeed News published a leaked memo from a whistleblower who accused the social media network of extensive failures to combat political and electoral misinformation around the world. Amid a steady drumbeat of reports from media and researchers over the past several months, Facebook has repeatedly come under fire for mishandling crises, like its delayed response to threats of violence against anti-racism protesters and an unwillingness or reluctance to enforce its own rules in cases involving high-profile politicians. With each new revelation about Facebook, however, researchers say another tech giant is continuing to dodge scrutiny: Google. "Google is really getting a pass on transparency by just staying under the radar," Laura Edelson, a researcher who studies political ads and misinformation at New York University, told Business Insider. "No one's talking about Google." Google has faced pushback over the years for how its subsidiary YouTube deals with misinformation, hate speech, and radical content posted by users. But when it comes to paid ads across its various products — YouTube, Google search results, Gmail, and ads served on websites across the internet through Google Ads — regulators, journalists, and the public have paid much less attention. While Facebook still faces major backlash over how it moderates content generated by both users and advertisers, some researchers have praised the social network on the latter issue for actions like sharing more detailed data with researchers and widening its net to track "issue" ads. But between Facebook's corrective steps and its initial missteps, researchers worried that it's taken some deserved heat off of Google. "We spend a lot of time talking about Facebook, and a big part of why is that Facebook is doing some things," Edelson said, adding: "Google doesn't make that much stuff transparent, which is part of why no one is talking about Google." "Google owns a larger share of the online advertising market, but has looser standards governing political ads. The company also provides the public with less information about those ads. That means that users may be inundated with manipulative or misleading ads without knowing it," Michael Clauw, a spokesperson for the research group Tech Transparency Project, told Business Insider. (TTP has reportedly received funding from Oracle, a Google competitor). Google disputed those characterizations, with a spokesperson telling Business Insider the company is "deeply committed to delivering the highest standards in transparency, choice and controls in advertising." But multiple researchers said that by narrowly defining political ads, disclosing only basic details about them, and at times, failing to detect political ads or advertisers in the first place, Google may be masking the extent to which Americans are encountering misleading information while using its products in the run-up to the 2020 elections. Tech reigns in the Wild West of digital ads While Facebook has pulled in the majority of digital political ad revenue in the US during this election cycle — nearly 60% as of February, according to eMarketer — Google still captured almost one-fifth of the market, bringing in more than $240 million. By the companies' count, since they launched political ad-tracking archives in May 2018, Facebook says advertisers have spent nearly $1.7 billion, while Google says that number is just shy of $400 million. But researchers and campaign finance experts say those numbers don't paint the full picture of who is spending money to sway voters, nor do the numbers say where and how the companies are spending it, particularly in Google's case. "The main source of the problem is the piecemeal platform-by-platform approach to political ad transparency," Brendan Fischer, director of federal reform at the Campaign Legal Center. "There are no laws requiring that platforms make political ads publicly accessible. It's entirely a self-regulatory effort." Unlike TV and radio ads, which are regulated by the Federal Elections Commission and Federal Communications Commission, internet ad companies operate largely on their own terms. In a 2019 study, researchers concluded that Google and Facebook deliberately undermined the FEC's efforts to regulate digital ads. "Digital advertisements used to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election lacked disclaimers stating who paid for them," the researchers said, arguing it was the result of Google and Facebook putting "profit ahead of the public interest in seeking exemptions from disclaimer requirements, refusing to change the size of their advertisements and downplaying the deceptive potential of political ads." Left to their own devices, tech platforms have come up with wildly different approaches for detecting and determining what counts as a political ad, what advertisers need to disclose, how much to share with researchers and users, and how to enforce those rules. And it has largely fallen to researchers to hold them accountable. Slipping through the cracks One issue researchers raised with Google's approach is its narrow definition of political ads (or election ads, as Google refers to them). Google considers election ads to be anything that mentions federal- or state-level elected officials, candidates, or political parties, as well as state-level ballot measures and initiatives. But researchers say that misses a crucial category of ads: issue ads, which address often highly divisive political and social issues that are frequent targets for bad actors. "The entire category of ads that tend to be misinformation or that are most likely to be misinformation, they specifically exclude," Edelson said. "Many of the ads that were funded by Russia [during the 2016 US elections] didn't mention candidates at all. They instead focused on the divisive, social-political issues," Fischer said. "Those ads would very likely be included in Facebook's archive because Facebook has a broad definition of political ads," he said, adding: "The fact that Facebook does have a broad standard of political ad ... makes it much more possible to do research and oversight of the kinds of communications that are being disseminated to voters." In an effort to combat the micro-targeted ads that got Facebook into hot water, Google did announce in November that it would be "limiting election ads audience targeting to the following general categories: age, gender, and general location (postal code level)." But researchers also pointed to how Google actually implements and enforces the limited restrictions it has imposed, bringing up concerns around the level of detail and searchability of data in its ad archive and the rigor with which it verifies that political advertisers are being properly included. "The Google archive provides only very big ranges of the dollar amounts that are spent on a particular ad," Maggie Christ, a senior researcher at the Campaign Legal Center, told Business Insider. "It makes it difficult, especially if you're trying to match up with what a group is reporting to the FEC," she said. "It might mean that it can all be accounted for on Google, or it might mean that tens of thousands of dollars are unaccounted for and might be running on a completely different platform." Additionally, when Google removes an ad for violating one of its policies or when the advertiser purchases the ad through a third party, researchers can't actually view the ad's content in the archive, making it more challenging to understand how advertisers might be trying to manipulate voters. "Even in the archives, you couldn't go and uncover it and see which candidate that ad might've mentioned and what the content might've been," Christ said. Last year, The Wall Street Journal also reported that the archive was "fraught with errors and delays" and had omitted ads run by the campaigns of former Democratic presidential hopefuls Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders. Google defended its archive and updates it says it has made in recent months, with a spokesperson pointing to how it's "now updated daily with even more information on who purchased the ad, how much they spent, how many people saw it, how they were targeted and in what geographies." Trust that they're verifying Absent any oversight from federal regulators, researchers ultimately must take Google's word that it's effectively enforcing its policies — that its AI systems are catching political ads, that it verifies whether advertisers are who they tell Google they are, or that it's able to detect and remove ads that violate its myriad policies against false claims, clickbait, electoral misinformation, and hacked material. So far, they aren't convinced. "We know at least anecdotally that their enforcement of their existing rules is poor," Edelson said. "We know that they are not doing a great job keeping political ads off of Gmail, but they just said: 'Well, we don't have political ads on Gmail and therefore we don't make political ads on Gmail transparent.'" Wired recently reported that a search marketer in New York, as an experiment, was able to bypass Google's political ad detection systems simply by omitting a candidate's first or last name. When contacted about potential loopholes the marketer had identified, Google still declined to consider the search terms where advertisers wanted the ad to appear. "If you're searching for voting and someone's bidding on those keywords, you might want to see what they're saying ... That's a ripe target for disinformation about voting," Republican digital strategist Eric Wilson told Wired. Alex Stamos, Facebook's former security chief and now a researcher at Stanford, tweeted last week that he and other colleagues had "discovered misleading Google ads being run on important election integrity search terms by the Washington Times." First, we believe that these headlines are not factually supported by the underlying articles and should be disallowed under Google's clickbait policies. Second, an exemption for media companies means these ads are not visible in Google's political ad archive. pic.twitter.com/rxXilR2gqI — Alex Stamos (@alexstamos) September 10, 2020 "First, we believe that these headlines are not factually supported by the underlying articles and should be disallowed under Google's clickbait policies. Second, an exemption for media companies means these ads are not visible in Google's political ad archive," Stamos said. Google Political advertisers — and likely, bad actors — aren't backing down on their use of Google to target Americans ahead of the November elections. President Donald Trump's campaign secured prime ad space on YouTube's homepage in the days before the election for an estimated $1 million per day, despite a history of running ads that violate Google's policies. Google is taking some steps when it comes to products like search results, announcing last week that it can more quickly detect misinformation during breaking news events and will crack down on potentially misleading autocomplete suggestions about voting information and candidates. Still, researchers remain concerned and largely in the dark about how moneyed interests could be paying Google to try to influence its users' political attitudes and behaviors. "Facebook draws a lot of fire for monetizing user data or serving manipulative political communications, but Google often engages in the same practices. In fact, Google has even more data about its users and allows a bigger group of political advertisers to leverage that data. Many users don't realize that they're using Google when they visit a website that serves ads through DoubleClick or contains embedded YouTube videos," Clauw said. "All of those things make Google Ads, the Google Ad space a real black box, so I couldn't even tell you what's harmful there," Edelson said.Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why thoroughbred horse semen is the world's most expensive liquid

Summary List Placement WhereIsMyTransport, the London-based urban mobility startup, has just announced plans to map 30 of the world's largest cities by 2023.  The startup collects local transport data in developing nations where public transport varies from unreliable to non-existent. Many people in these areas depend on private taxi services or friends and relatives to get around — WhereIsMyTransport works with both local authorities and enterprises to standardize and map local transport routes, making them more accessible.  Most recently, WhereIsMyTransport mapped, and now maintains datasets for, public transport networks in Mexico City, Dhaka, and the province of Gauteng in South Africa. These metro areas have a combined population of more than 55 million. The company will collect public transport data in the remaining 27 cities, of which 19 are megacities with populations of more than 10 million. Impressed with the team's decade-in-the-making endeavor, venture partners at both Google and Toytoa Tsusho Corporation approached WhereIsMyTransport last year, and ultimately contributed to the firm's $7.5 million Series A funding round.  In a recent interview with Business Insider, founder Devin de Vries explained what it was like to have such big name investors on board: "I mean, obviously it feels different, right? There's this sense that the stakes are shifted in some way. "But at the same time, I also firmly believe in sticking to your knitting. So whether it's a massive company like Google or a much smaller company, we know what we do: We know our value proposition, and we know where we can really make a difference. "At the end of the day, it comes down an alignment of vision, and we were lucky to find that with both Google and Toyota Tsusho Corporation." Business Insider got an exclusive look at the pitch deck WhereIsMyTransport used to bring investors on board. Check it out below: 

Summary List PlacementSEE ALSO: A government agency subcommittee just warned this week's West Coast wildfires could spark a financial crisis. A top economist thinks the effects could linger for years. Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Here's the shortest route for a road trip across the US to see 50 national landmarks

Summary List PlacementHi! Welcome to the Insider Advertising daily for September 11. I'm Lauren Johnson, a senior advertising reporter at Business Insider. Subscribe here to get this newsletter in your inbox every weekday. Send me feedback or tips at ljohnson@businessinsider.com. First, we're looking for nominations for the rising stars of brand marketing. Submit nominations here by Monday. Today's news: The 10 people transforming advertising and media, QR codes return from the dead, and a look at how Amazon's ad business is poised to grow. 2020 was supposed to be a blockbuster year for media and advertising, but the challenges have only accelerated the industry transformation Business Insider named 100 people transforming business this week — including 10 people from the advertising and media industries like Justin Schuh, Google's director of Chrome engineering, Hulu president Kelly Campbell, and Scott Stuber, head of original films at Netflix. The executives are working to solve big problems like helping marketers navigate the future of ad targeting, streaming, and the rise of direct-to-consumer brands. The list reflects the massive changes that swept across the industry as a result of the coronavirus. Before the pandemic, the ad industry was forecasting a blockbuster 2020 with the Summer Olympics in Tokyo and the US presidential election. Instead, advertisers have slashed spending, which has led to layoffs at ad agencies and media companies. Read the full story here. QR codes are defying skeptics and making a comeback, with big brands including Burger King, CVS, L'Oréal, and Walmart jumping on board QR codes are making a comeback in the pandemic for things like coupons and contactless payments, reports Tanya Dua.  Platforms like Instagram, Snapchat and Pinterest have also rolled out their own versions of QR codes while Chinese apps Tencent and Alibaba are putting standards around the technology. "QR codes allow you to put a digital experience on a physical surface, and become pretty important tools in a world where more consumers are going digital and contactless," said Jason Goldberg, chief commerce strategy officer at Publicis.  Read the full story here. These charts show how Amazon's ad business could surge even higher thanks to its pandemic-fueled rise in grocery and household sales Amazon's ad business has benefitted from the boom of consumer-packaged goods brands selling their products online due to the pandemic. Wall Street firm Jefferies raised its estimates for Amazon's advertising revenue by 2% to $23.5 billion in 2021 and $49 billion in 2025. The firm estimates Amazon could add $12 billion in additional advertising revenue if the company's able to capture just 1% of the total ad and trade spend by CPG companies. Read the full story here. More stories we're reading: Google says it will block autocomplete search suggestions that could sway voters ahead of the US election (Business Insider) Facebook announces a new college-only social network called Facebook Campus, 16 years after launching as a student-only social network (Business Insider) Netflix's CEO says the company wants to build franchises like 'Star Wars' and 'Harry Potter' but has a 'long way to go' (Business Insider) Russian state hackers reportedly tried hacking into a Biden campaign firm (Business Insider) WarnerMedia eyes spring debut for HBO Max's ad-supported tier (Digiday) Megyn Kelly launches into podcasting with new venture (Wall Street Journal) Thanks for reading and see you on Monday! You can reach me in the meantime at ljohnson@businessinsider.com and subscribe to this daily email here. — LaurenJoin the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why electric planes haven't taken off yet

Summary List Placement Waze, the Google-owned navigation app and carpool service, is laying off 30 employees — more than 5% of its total 555 person workforce — and shutting some offices as it reels from the coronavirus, The Verge reported Wednesday. In a memo to employees, CEO Noam Bardin said that travel restrictions in place around the world had led to a "significant drop" in the number of miles people are driving while using the app, trips taken via its carpool service, and ad revenue, according to The Verge. "This has forced us to rethink priorities, and we've decided to focus our resources on product improvements for our users, accelerate our investments in technical infrastructure, and refocus our sales and marketing efforts on a small number of high-value countries," Bardin said, according to The Verge. Waze did not immediately respond to a request for comment on this story.  Bardin reportedly told employees that jobs would be cut across Waze's ad sales, partnerships, and marketing teams, and that the company would be closing sales offices in Singapore, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia, Colombia, Argentina, and Chile. Employees being let go will be "taken care of [financially] through early 2021 and will be eligible for year-end bonuses," as well as continue to receive "as many continued [healthcare] benefits as possible" and assistance finding jobs either at Google or elsewhere, Bardin said, according to The Verge. Waze, which Google purchased in 2013 for $1.2 billion, has been struggling amid the pandemic, saying in an April blog post that miles driven were down 60% globally. The company is far from alone. Other mobility and rideshare services, such as Uber and Lyft have been forced to lay off substantial numbers of employees as remote work policies and shelter-in-place requirements have slowed the number of trips people are taking.Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why Pikes Peak is the most dangerous racetrack in America

Summary List Placement Antitrust seems to be back in fashion as a topic of concern in Washington, DC, particularly after Congress harangued the heads of four leading tech companies earlier this summer about their alleged anticompetitive moves. But any real effort to promote competition and constrain monopolies is going to require a major reassessment — and quite possibly a revamping — of laws, policies, and personnel, said antitrust law expert Gary Reback. Federal judges, under the influence of conservative, pro-market academics, have significantly restricted what counts as anticompetitive behavior. Meanwhile, it's unclear after years of bringing few antitrust cases whether the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have the personnel they need to step up enforcement, Reback said. The next Congress and whichever administration is in office next year are "going to have to figure out almost from scratch how they're going to enforce the antitrust laws," Reback told Business Insider in a recent interview. Antitrust enforcement appears to be coming to a head. Federal enforcement officials and state attorneys general have been investigating four of the tech giants — Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Alphabet — for more than a year. The Department of Justice reportedly is gearing up to file a suit against Alphabet — the parent company of Google — by the end of this month. But US enforcement authorities could run into trouble prosecuting those cases due to a lack of qualified personnel and skeptical federal judges, said Reback, who represents companies that have made antitrust complaints with the FTC about some of the tech giants. The government lacked litigators when it took on Microsoft The personnel problem is not a new one. As far back as the Microsoft trial 20 years ago, it was apparent that the federal government was lacking litigators who could prosecute antitrust cases, said Reback, whose work with companies harmed by the software giant's anticompetitive actions helped prepare the ground for the government's case. The Justice Department tapped an outside litigator — David Bois — to lead its prosecution of the case. Meanwhile, the team of in-house layers the agency assembled to put together the case was based in San Francisco, even though the trial took place in Washington, D.C. "I'm telling you, even back then it was a struggle within the Antitrust Division to find ... a good team to support Bois," Reback said. "You might logically argue," he continued, "'well, weren't there lawyers in Washington in the Justice Department that could have done this?' And the answer is no." The Department of Justice seems to have the ability to conduct a thorough antitrust investigation, Reback said. But it's unclear whether it has the personnel in place to litigate a case against Alphabet or any of the other tech giants, he said. It may well have to bring in outside attorneys, just like it did with the Microsoft case, he said. But personnel isn't the only thing antitrust enforcement officials need to evaluate — and not the only reason why they might conclude they need to hire private attorneys to litigate cases, Reback said. They also need to think long and hard about strategy. Antitrust officials are going to need to convince a skeptical judiciary The federal judiciary, under the influence of pro-laissez faire economists, has constrained the definition of what counts as illegal anticompetitive behavior. Over the last 40 years, judges and federal enforcement officials have largely discarded other competitive concerns and refocused antitrust enforcement on the issue of whether consumers have been harmed by having to pay higher prices. If they're going to be at all successful in taking on the Big Tech companies, antitrust officials are going to have to figure out how to combat that mindset, Reback said. One tactic the heads of the Antitrust Division and the FTC should take is to become "evangelists" to the judiciary about the need to constrain these companies, he said. "Somebody has to try to explain to Republican judges that we're in an unprecedented situation here," Reback said. He continued: "Even if you come from the position that you don't like government intervention in the economy ... we have here a set of circumstances that is different than anything that we've experienced before and that really does need your attention." But that need to convince conservative judges could be another reason for the DoJ to bring in outside litigators. Given the anti-government, anti-regulatory mindset of many federal judges, it's quite possible that a government attorney could make a solid case against one of the Big Tech companies and essentially be ignored because the attorney works for the Justice Department, Reback said. Antitrust officials need to consider "would a judge be more likely o listen to an outside litigator like David Bois representing the government than they would somebody from the DoJ," Reback said. "They shouldn't, but is it likely that they would?" New legislation could be needed Government policymakers are also going to have to figure out whether and what kind of legislation might be needed to redirect the judiciary and better address the anticompetitive actions being taken by the giants in tech and other industries, he said. Even with the way the judiciary has limited the laws, it's still possible even today to go to court and win an antitrust case, he said. But it's difficult, and it's pretty clear to Reback, at least, that legislation is needed to address areas where judges have "gone off the rails" in terms of allowing anti-competitive behavior. What's more debatable is just how much farther legislators should go in trying to curb today's monopolists. For his part, Reback favors legislation such as that put forward by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., that would essentially define a monopoly as a company that has more than 50% share of a particular market and would subject such companies' behavior to greater scrutiny. He's not, however, in favor of legislation that such as that pushed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., that would bar companies from both operating a platform or marketplace and competing against other companies on that same platform. Such a bill would bar Amazon, say, from hosting third-party retailers on its ecommerce site and selling goods on that same site. It might force Amazon to sell or close its marketplace. "I would hate to have to do [Warren's approach], in part because it would cause so much dislocation," he said. Regardless, new legislation is insufficient to curb the abuses of the tech giants, Reback said. Antitrust officials are going to need the right personnel, the right strategy — and the will to pursue cases. "Even if there's from, my perspective, good legislation, by itself, that's not going stop anything. It's not going to change anything," he said. "You will need go into court, and you will need to figure out how to do that." Got a tip about tech? Contact Troy Wolverton via email at twolverton@businessinsider.com, message him on Twitter @troywolv, or send him a secure message through Signal at 415.515.5594. You can also contact Business Insider securely via SecureDrop. Read more about the tech giant's antitrust troubles: 'Fortnite' maker Epic Games just set an antitrust trap for Apple, and Tim Cook walked right into it Big Tech's CEOs wrapped themselves in the flag and warned about China. Here's why their patriotic appeal was meaningless, misleading, and should be ignored. Newly released Steve Jobs emails, included in Congress' antitrust investigation, show how ruthless the Apple founder could be Trump says he'll 'bring fairness' to Big Tech via an executive order if Congress doesn't take action   SEE ALSO: The FTC's latest shot at the tech giants has opened up an unexpected front in the war to constrain Apple, Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Facebook Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why thoroughbred horse semen is the world's most expensive liquid

Summary List Placement In June, Google CEO Sundar Pichai made a set of commitments to improve diversity and equity across the company, which included promises to boost underrepresented groups in leadership roles and address problems in hiring and retention. Nothing was said on how much would apply to other "bet" companies, many of which operate largely independent of the Google mothership, but LinkedIn data reveals that many of them have been on a hiring spree to appoint new diversity leaders. Business Insider spotted that self-driving car company Waymo and AI research body DeepMind have both posted advertisements for diversity and inclusion leads in the last few weeks. Verily, one of Alphabet's life sciences companies, has also recently been on the hunt for a diversity strategy and program lead. In June, a Google senior recruitment specialist moved over to Loon with the new title of 'Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Program Manager,' according to LinkedIn data. Around the same time, Alphabet moonshot division X  moved its 'Head of EID talent acquisition' into a new diversity lead position, as announced by X "captain" Astro Teller in a blog post. Google publishes data on its diversity figures each year. Its 2020 report reflected incremental progress, with women representing only 32% of the workforce (up from 31.6% a year before) and the number of black employees making up 3.7% of its 100,00-plus employees – up from 3.3% the year prior. However, these reports don't include data for the other "bets," which are largely treated and run like individual companies. But the run of new diversity leads across these Alphabet companies reflect how these problems don't stop at Google. Earlier this year, Alphabet's life science company Verily made a controversial move to suspend employee spot bonuses and redirect the money into diversity programs instead.  The decision led to backlash from employees, some of which co-signed a letter to management asking why the diversity programs weren't being invested "in their own right." "Given the differences in maturity and biz development that each Bet is at, no one Bet is alike in their equity, inclusion, diversity (EID) journey," said Salima Bhimani, chief equity and inclusion strategist for Alphabet's other bets, in an emailed statement to Business Insider. "Part of our work together over the last 3 years has been for the Bets to engage in thoughtful dialogue about how to do EID work and for them to lay the foundations for EID in their orgs." She added that "many established EID roles and teams early on, while others are now at the stage of their foundation build, where they are ready for EID leads, who will not come in starting from scratch."Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Epidemiologists debunk 13 coronavirus myths

Google is one of the most desireable places to work, regularly topping Glassdoor's "Best Places to Work" list. When considering who to bring on, the company looks for someone who has these four traits and weighs them equally: mastery of the actual role, cognitive ability (how smart you are), Googleyness, and leadership ability (even if you're not applying for a managerial role). Because many of the leadership traits Google looks for are the same as the Googleyness traits, Googleyness really accounts for a lot more than one-fourth of your score as a potential hire. Display Googleyness into your interview process by staying positive, highlighting ways you took an unconventional route, and being honest and asking for help when you need it. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. Want to land a job at Google? A lot of people do. The tech giant is a highly desirable workplace, with average salaries of more than $116,00 according to the compensation site PayScale, along with annual bonuses and signing bonuses in some cases. Then there are the company's legendary perks, which included things like lavish food and free massages before the pandemic struck. More recently, Google gave its employees who work remotely $1,000 each to spend on their home offices. No wonder the company regularly makes it onto lists of the best places to work--it's number 11 in Glassdoor's ranking this year. And the company is constantly filling both technical and non-technical jobs all across the United States and around the world. What does it take to get hired at Google? You need to be skilled at the job you're applying for, but that only counts for 25% of the company's hiring decision, according to Jose Pinero, a career coach who helps job seekers land jobs at Google and other tech giants. Twenty-five percent is based on general cognitive ability--in other words, how smart you are--and another 25% is based on what they call "Googleyness," or whether your personality is a good fit for Google. A final 25% is based on an assessment of your leadership abilities, even if you're not applying for a managerial role. But since many of the leadership traits Google looks for are the same as the Googleyness traits, Googleyness really accounts for a lot more than one-fourth of your score as a potential hire. In a video at the Life at Google YouTube channel, Brinleigh Murphy-Reuter, a business recruiter at Google, describes Googleyness as "comfort with ambiguity, bias to action and a collaborative nature." That's not a lot go go on, but fortunately Jeff H. Sipe, an interview coach at Practice Interviews and a former recruiter who spent five years hiring people for Google provides a lot more detail in a video of his own. Sipe identifies 21 qualities that make up Googleyness, including positivity, humility, friendliness, playfulness, being a life-long learner, having a high EQ (emotional intelligence), courtesy, and valuing yourself and others.  So how do you display these desired traits during the interview process?  1. Be nice to everyone and stay positive. Remember that all your interactions, including with cafeteria employees and receptionists (if the interview is on site), may be included in your evaluation. So will your answers to questions that may seem like small talk, such as "How are you doing?" or "Did you have a good weekend?" Pinero says.  You will likely be faced with questions designed to elicit negativity, such as, "Tell me about a time you encountered a problem?" or "What do you dislike about having a manager?" he adds.  Don't take the bait--keep your answer upbeat. "They are testing your Googleyness," he says. "Will you speak negatively about your former manager or blame other people?" Doing either will raise a red flag at a Google interview.  2. Highlight anything unusual about your career.  Google is looking for people who follow an unusual path, Sipe says, so left turns in your career that you might normally downplay can actually help you. For example, did you quit a high-level job at a large company to launch a startup that failed? "Good!" he says. "That is a Googleyness item because Google will understand that first of all, you're not risk-averse, and secondly, you probably learned a ton." You can also get Googleyness points if, for instance, you had to drop out of high school, but got your GED and then learned coding on your own. 3. Show comfort with ambiguity. "Googleyness is really about embracing and finding joy in and appreciating the unknown," Sipe says in his video. "The interviews will challenge your ability to problem-solve with limited information." With that in mind, he says, "It's going to really, really show up if you don't show frustration, if you continue to work through and problem-solve." You can also display your comfort with ambiguity when the interview doesn't go as planned, for instance if you're moved from one conference room to another or if your video interview runs into technical difficulties, or if your interviewer is late. "When candidates got shifted around and had to move around during their interview days and they didn't let it bother them, it really, really showed up positively in the feedback," Sipe notes. 4. Don't pretend you know more than you do. Ask for help instead. Transparency is part of Googleyness, so this is the wrong time to fake it till you make it. "To pretend you know something you don't is a red flag. It's essentially inflating your experience or knowledge," says Grechen Jacobi, head of career services at Flatiron School, which teaches people to code and helps them land jobs at tech companies, including Google.  "It's really important, if you're going to pass the Googleyness test, when you don't know something, don't say nothing," she says. For instance, if confronted with a coding language you don't know, say something like, "I'm not deep on that but I know about this, is it similar?" she advises. "Ask clarifying questions. Ask for help. They'll probably help you." If you really want to shine, win extra points by following up later about whatever it was, she advises. "To show you're curious, go do a bit of research. Build something with it or write a blog post about what you've learned and then send it to your interviewer. Say, 'I was curious about that thing we talked about and I wanted to show this to you.'" Keep in mind that the purpose of the interview is not for you to have all the right answers, it's for you to demonstrate how you handle situations where you don't, she and other experts agree. So, even if you're frustrated, stay positive, talk through your thinking as you try to solve the problem, and just do your best. Remember that Google is looking to hire lifelong learners, not know-it-alls. "They want to help you," Jacobi says. "They're interviewing you because they want to find a great teammate."Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: A cleaning expert reveals her 3-step method for cleaning your entire home quickly

Tech giants like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft have come to dominate the global economy thanks, in some part, to their marketing efforts. Amazon overtook Procter & Gamble to become the world's top advertiser in early 2020, and tech companies are top destinations for marketing talent at a time when ad agencies have shed thousands of jobs. Business Insider analyzed the US Office of Foreign Labor Certification's most recent quarterly disclosure data for the largest tech names to reveal what they pay employees in their marketing departments. Salaries vary widely. Amazon paid a marketing specialist $95,000, and Apple paid a creative director $300,000. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. Technology giants like Facebook, Google, Amazon, Uber, and Airbnb have only increased their dominance in recent years thanks to their ability to change consumer behaviors and, in some cases, create entirely new industries. One thing all these names have in common is a heavy reliance on marketing. Amazon overtook Procter & Gamble to become the world's top advertiser in early 2020. Consequently, tech companies are top destinations for marketing talent at a time when ad agencies have shed thousands of jobs. And while they offer competitive pay, with an account manager at Twitter making around the same amount as an Omnicom employee in a similar role, the lack of $550,000 account lead or $880,000 chief creative officer jobs hints at a new sort of ad economy in which the traditional players no longer serve as gatekeepers. These companies have not been immune to the effects of the coronavirus. Airbnb and Uber took major hits as travel declined, and Google will see its ad revenue decline for the first time ever. Yet they continue to dominate their respective industries and some — like Amazon and Microsoft — look to emerge even stronger and employ more people than before the pandemic. The biggest tech companies also hire considerably more international talent than those in many other industries due to both their size and their need for people with unique skills. All are required to file paperwork for each visa-holding employee, including his or her title and salary, with the federal government. The US Department of Labor's Office of Foreign Labor Certification releases this information every quarter. The Department of Labor uses these numbers, which include "prevailing wages," or the minimum companies are required to pay for the jobs in question, to protect US employees' wages and prevent educated immigrant labor from being exploited. Business Insider chose some of the most recognizable and influential tech companies by ad spend, revenue, and market share and analyzed the latest available data on permanent green cards and temporary H-1B, H1B1, and E-3 visas to compile a portrait of what they pay employees in marketing roles. These numbers don't include every type of visa or any form of compensation beyond base salary. Spokespeople for all the companies included in this story either declined to comment or did not respond to related requests. Airbnb paid a global search engine marketing lead $250,000 Airbnb's business was decimated by the pandemic as travel came to an abrupt halt around the world, and in March the company suspended all marketing expenses as part of an attempt to save $800 million. But the company still filed for its IPO in August after raising an additional $2 billion as the short-term rental market began to rebound, though its estimated valuation dropped from $26 billion to $18 billion.  And while the company rarely runs big-budget broadcast ad campaigns, The Information reported in late 2019 that its marketing and sales budget had increased significantly in anticipation of going public, even as its losses doubled in the first quarter of that year. Airbnb is still one of the hottest companies in the world, and it continues to pay marketing executives very well more than two years after the departure of its former CMO Jonathan Mildenhall, who has not yet been replaced.  Some current salaries: Growth marketing manager, marketing technology: $150,000 Creative director, growth and traffic: $215,000 Global search engine marketing lead: $250,000 Director, marketing financial planning and analysis: $280,000 Amazon paid a creative services specialist $118,500 Amazon was well positioned to benefit from the pandemic. The company's year-over-year profits doubled in the second quarter thanks to consumers shopping from home and stocking up on essential products, though it also said it would spend $4 billion on what CEO Jeff Bezos described as coronavirus-related expenses. As a result of this boom, Bezos' personal net worth has also doubled to more than $200 billion. Bezos said Amazon created 125,000 full-time jobs from March to July. Most were for warehouse workers, and a majority of the 5,700 visas Amazon received in the most recent quarter went to engineers and developers.  But Amazon also became the largest advertiser in the world earlier this year and hired abroad for some top marketing jobs. These salaries offer a glimpse into the growing influence of disparate products such as Amazon's creative services team, its ad sales platform, and its gaming service Twitch: Senior product marketing manager, Twitch Prime Live: $91,100 Marketing specialist: $95,000 Ads account manager: $100,000 Creative services specialist: $118,500 Performance marketing sales analyst: $128,800 Marketing specialist: $134,400 Ad sales representative: $141,930 Manager, ads account management: $143,300 Senior marketing and field enablement operations manager: $185,000 Apple paid a creative director $300,000 Unlike most brands, Apple has its own dedicated ad agency in Omnicom's TBWA\Media Arts Lab, which handles most of its advertising. The company regularly gets attention for its cinematic campaigns, but stopped disclosing its ad budget to investors in 2016 and dramatically decreased digital marketing spend in 2019. Still, a number of the more than 3,500 visas that Apple received in the most recent quarter were for marketing jobs, from in-house creative directors and designers to content and communications managers. The company also recently expanded its search ad service beyond the App Store, and its revenue increased slightly in the first quarter of 2020 thanks to the enduring popularity of the iPhone despite significant setbacks in both supply chain and consumer demand. These are salaries and salary ranges within Apple's marketing department: Junior art director: $92,000 Associate creative director, design: $152,800 UX designer: $162,000 Marcom art director: $170,000 Public relations manager: $174,000 Brand content manager: $175,000 Producer, director: $202,600 Art director: $176,600 to $229,300 Marketing manager: $240,000 Associate creative director: $252,000 Design director: $290,000 Creative director: $300,000 Ad platform sales director: $202,600 to $324,200 Facebook paid a Latin America agency director $330,000 Facebook's marketing team is in flux with its CMO Antonio Lucio stepping down, but it still remains one of the biggest tech marketers.  Of the nearly 5,000 visas Facebook received in the most recent quarter, dozens were for jobs related to creative services, ad agency relations, and monetization of Facebook's various products. While it wasn't always a big spender, Facebook has considerably increased its ad investment over the years to rebuild consumer trust after a spate of controversies regarding privacy and misinformation on the platform. The company spent $9.8 billion on marketing and sales in 2019 versus $7.8 billion in 2018, per its 2019 annual report, and even ran its first Super Bowl commercial this year. Here's a selection from the approved visa applications that Facebook made on behalf of its marketing team: Marketing manager: $123,000 SMB marketing manager: $128,152 Creative strategist: $133,902 Communications planning manager: $138,354 Growth marketing analyst: $146,000 Marketing researcher: $154,000 Partnerships marketing communications manager: $164,322 Product marketing manager, gaming monetization: $174,000 Marketing science partner: $195,000 Creative strategist: $180,000 to $200,000 Product marketing lead: $203,102 Team lead, partner management: $197,434 to $217,434 Marketing research manager: $230,318 to $250,318 Agency director, Latin America: $330,000 Google paid a director of product marketing $315,000 In a stark illustration of  the pandemic's effects on the business world, eMarketer predicted that Google's US ad revenue would drop by about 5.3% in 2020, its first-ever annual decline. CEO Sundar Pichai told investors on the company's first quarter earnings call that business had already started to slow, and in an April memo to employees he said Google would reduce hiring in many areas for the remainder of the year, including "non business essential marketing and travel." Yet the company will remain the single largest player in the digital ad world, and it also received more visas in the most recent quarter than any other company on this list at nearly 11,000, quite a few of which were for international talent in marketing roles.  These are salaries and ranges from across the company's marketing division: Associate product marketing manager: $101,000 Marketing associate: $104,000 Marketing events manager: $123,900 Product marketing manager: $133,000 Marketing analyst: $144,000 Agency business development lead: $150,000 Marketing and analytics lead: $156,000 Product marketing manager: $164,000 Creative technologist: $191,000 Account marketing manager: $201,000 Creative lead: $260,000 Creative director: $290,000 Director, product marketing management: $315,000 LinkedIn paid a product marketing group manager between $186,989 and $238,000 Microsoft acquired the jobs-focused social network in 2016, but it continues to operate nearly independently, as Digiday recently reported. Still, the platform continues to evolve into a robust business with its registered user base growing from 400 million people in December 2016 to 706 million people as of July 2020, and its revenue growing by 10% year-over-year in the most recent quarter.  Here's a range of what it pays its marketers:  Associate digital marketing manager: $109,554 to $116,000 Marketing operations analyst: $135,000 to $150,900 Product marketing manager, field transformation: $102,000 to $159,000 Product marketing manager: $124,315 to $159,000 Senior digital marketing manager: $138,606 to $202,000 Group manager, product marketing: $186,989 to $238,000 Microsoft paid a business development manager $240,000 Microsoft, like Amazon, has proven resilient during the pandemic, thanks in large part to the increased use of Teams and CEO Satya Nadella's focus on its cloud business. Software is still Microsoft's core product, as reflected by the fact that most of the 6,500-plus visas the company received in the last quarter were for programming and engineering jobs. But Microsoft's ad spend has remained more consistent than some of its competitors during the downturn thanks in part to a large campaign promoting Teams — and dozens of the aforementioned visas were for jobs in its vast marketing department. These are salaries and salary ranges for Microsoft marketing positions, which include disparate pay for jobs with similar titles: Product marketing manager: $118,000 Senior marketing communications manager: $125,500 Art director: $130,000 Communications manager: $130,000 Senior graphic designer: $157,000 Account technology strategist: $185,000 Group product marketing manager: $185,955 Channel marketing manager: $188,802 Business strategy manager: $190,000 Product marketing manager: $198,126 Business development manager: $240,000 Twitter paid a senior director of global growth and product marketing $347,000 While Twitter too initially took a hit from the pandemic with the advertising landscape coming under pressure, the company buoyed itself with a surge in users, and more users engaging with its ads in the second quarter of 2020.  Twitter's ad business remains significantly smaller than that of other household tech names, and it received around 360 visas in the most recent quarter. But its marketing team will only have more work on its plate down the line as the company explores a subscription model and additional streams of revenue. Here are some current salaries: Client account manager: $94,806 Lead, marketing manager: $180,000 Communications director: $250,000 Senior director, global growth and product marketing: $347,000 Uber paid a senior marketing manager $185,000 After a major overhaul of its marketing function last year, Uber's marketing team seems to have found its footing under SVP of marketing and public affairs Jill Hazelbaker and her deputies Mike Strickman, who handles growth and performance marketing, and Google vet Thomas Ranese, who leads product and brand marketing. While the company dukes it out with the state of California over a labor law that requires "gig economy" companies to reclassify their workers as actual employees on the one hand, its food delivery business has been booming on the other. Here's a snapshot of how much the ride-hailing company paid for marketing roles: CRM marketing specialist: $90,640 Senior marketing manager: $99,910 Market research manager: $113,531 Product marketing manager: $124,140 Senior performance marketing manager: $135,000 Senior creative operations manager: $155,736 Senior brand manager: $184,600 Senior marketing manager: $185,000 SEE ALSO: DTC salaries revealed: What top brands like Peloton, Wayfair, and Instacart pay marketing employees, from designers to senior managers Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: A cleaning expert reveals her 3-step method for cleaning your entire home quickly

Google's product inclusion team works on making the company's products better for more users, but it was born from one of Google's 20% projects. Annie Jean-Baptiste, Google's head of product inclusion, explains how the group came about in a new book. The group has worked on Google products including Pixel smartphones and virtual reality headsets. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. Earlier this year, Google announced it had more than 2,000 employees across the company working on inclusion and diversity in its products. This group of "inclusion champions" was set up to think inclusively about things like gender, age, ethnicity, and disabilities as products are designed. But the group's origin story was born from one of Google's once-ubiquitous "20% projects," where employees dedicate 20% of their time to building something outside of their usual focus. Annie Jean-Baptiste, Google's head of product inclusion, has written about how the project came to be in an upcoming book, "Building For Everyone." In it, she explains how a group of Googlers got together to think about how they could better integrate inclusion in the product design process. "A few of us Googlers decided that the diversity and inclusion conversation could make for an interesting 20 percent project," she wrote. "At the time, when we talked about diversity and inclusion, we were usually discussing culture and representation; we were not discussing these topics in the context of product or business development." The breakthrough moment happened when an engineer named Peter Sherman approached her team. Sherman was working on a camera and a proximity sensor for one of Google's Pixel smartphone cameras, "both of which needed to work well for all users, regardless of skin tone," he wrote in a sidebar in the book. "The development team was very small though, and we had difficulty figuring out how to get the broad coverage we needed to make appropriate tuning decisions and subsequent validation testing," added Sherman. Jean-Baptiste took Sherman's challenge to a diversity summit run by Googlers in 2015, where the problem was discussed. "During that summit, many of the participants voiced first-hand experience with cameras failing to produce pleasing images as a function of skin-tone, but few knew the history of bias in the development of color photography and that we can really improve the experience is we think and develop inclusively," wrote Sherman. "These early discussions with different teams started to spark ideas and light a fire for our team," wrote Jean-Baptiste. Gradually, this evolved into a product inclusion team that would work across all of Google's products. For example, Jean-Baptiste explains how the team helped create Google's Daydream virtual reality headset – a process that involved going beyond thinking about different head sizes and glasses wearers, to factors such as sex and different hair textures. "We began to realize that this idea around intersectional inclusion in products could make a huge impact, so we embarked on a journey to figure it out," she wrote. "Our 20 percent group ultimately evolved into what is now known as product inclusion."SEE ALSO: Google cut more than a dozen jobs in 'people operations' as the company slows hiring, but Google says it's due to 'organizational changes' Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Epidemiologists debunk 13 coronavirus myths

We spoke with Karen DeSalvo, Google's chief health officer, who's in charge of a clinical team at Google making products for clinicians and consumers. She said many of Google Health's coronavirus projects, like tracking and answering people's health-related questions, are part of broader strategy around users' "discover to action pathway."  Google wants to aid people's health-related searches, in other words, whether it's answering a simple question about symptoms or booking a telehealth appointment. Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. It's been 20 months since Google's health efforts got revamped, and nearly a quarter of that time has been spent amid a pandemic. The team started when Dr. David Feinberg, the former CEO of Geisinger Health, joined Google in January 2019. From there, Feinberg as the head of Google Health brought together scientists, engineers, and managers from across Google in an effort to get many of the trillion-dollar company's healthcare projects under the same roof.  When the coronavirus pandemic started rolling across the US in March, the young team had to speed up projects that were only ideas — all while steering real people towards testing sites, hospitals, online appointments, and whatever else they came to Google for.   In the months since, Google Health's projects are taking on a theme that's baked into the team's broader healthcare strategy, Dr. Karen DeSalvo, Google's chief health officer, told Business Insider. Whether it's through YouTube, Maps, Google Assistant, or simply Google.com, the tech giant wants to guide consumers on their healthcare experience wherever and whenever they come into contact with the company. For those that ask Google for local testing sites, in other words, the goal is to actually get them to one. For those looking for doctors, the goal is to set up an appointment. Internally, the team calls it the "discover to action pathway," DeSalvo said.  Read more: We found the 18 leaders at Google who are deciding the future of the tech giant's healthcare business "We want to make sure we're thinking about the kinds of questions people are coming to us with, and how we can help them navigate that experience," she said.  It's a key part of Alphabet's overall goal as well. During Alphabet's earnings in July, CEO Sundar Pichai told investors there's been an enormous effort across search and product teams to provide locally relevant information about coronavirus in more than 70 languages in 200 countries.  "I'm looking at different types of user journeys and making sure each of them is getting deeper and better," Pichai said on the call. "So for example in Google, as people have started coming for more health-related information, how is that experience working?" Read more: 11 tech chiefs, analysts, and bankers in healthcare reveal how Amazon, Microsoft, and Google have used the coronavirus to make new inroads in the $3.6 trillion industry Google is flagging relevant health information based on your search terms DeSalvo said Google is well aware of its responsibility to uplift information that's credible, especially amid a pandemic. Her job is to lead a clinical team at Google Health tasked with making products for clinicians and consumers, she said. As one of Google's top doctors, DeSalvo also advises the rest of the company about health and coronavirus on a case by case basis. Prior to Google, she was New Orleans' health commissioner after Hurricane Katrina and helped the US Department of Health and Human Services respond to Zika and Ebola outbreaks.  "My experiences in public health, and in science and in medicine, are that it's really hard to get the right information to people," she said.  In response to people asking questions about COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, Google Health designed a self-assessment for coronavirus with health agencies around the world. It's triggered by certain search terms, and the results give people an idea of whether they should see a doctor or get tested.  It rolled out a similar screener for mental health in May, as Americans struggled to grapple with their new realities. Thoughts of suicide nearly doubled compared to the year before, and anxiety and depression increased more than fourfold in the last year.   Prompted by soaring demand for telehealth, Google's health unit also sped up development for a "virtual care feature" that launched in April.  If medical professionals are able to do phone or video visits, Google can now say so in a little blurb reading "Get online care" in their normal search results on Google.com and maps. It links to sites like Mount Sinai's telehealth services in New York, which has options for doctors' appointments.  A second aspect of the feature displays names of telehealth companies with links and price information when people search for things like "immediate care" in Search and Maps. That's not available everywhere in the US yet.  Other search upgrades show people active testing sites, credible health information on YouTube, and how to find guidance from their local health department, DeSalvo said. "We're trying to get the world's health information available for consumers where it matters," including for depression, anxiety, diabetes, and coronavirus, she said. Google's work helping people navigate their healthcare is still in its early days DeSalvo cautioned that Google Health's consumer-facing work is still early. For now, the group's machine learning is much farther along, with some devices already being used to make medical diagnoses faster and more accurate.  Another huge coronavirus project has been Google's contract-tracing program with Apple, which isn't related to user searches. Four US states and 16 countries or regions are using it to tell people if they've likely been exposed to coronavirus, according to the company. Ultimately, however, some industry leaders think Google could become a kind of Expedia for doctors' visits, per Business Insider's interviews. One of Google Health's oldest projects helps doctors search medical records, and obviously the tech giant's long history started with a humble search engine.  Read more: The man who helps hospitals and clinics move to Google's cloud shares how the coronavirus pandemic is shaping its healthcare push The larger company has asked Google Health specifically to think through how it can improve the world's health, which involves direct work with consumers — not just the providers who care for them, DeSalvo said. "If we're going to really make a difference in the lives of people's health, we have to do that by addressing not only tools and support for carers, but we have to do that as much as we can directly to consumers and other parts of the system," DeSalvo said.Join the conversation about this story » NOW WATCH: Why Pikes Peak is the most dangerous racetrack in America