<![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, jonathan rosenberg]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, jonathan rosenberg]]> http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/jonathanrosenberg http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/jonathanrosenberg <![CDATA[The Height of Google's Hubris]]> Jonathan Rosenberg, a top executive at Google, has let loose with a 4,492-word treatise on the future quoting presidents and deriding "the faceless scribes of drivel." It is the best window yet into Google's egomania.

In the piece, Rosenberg, who oversees Google's product management, says little that is surprising about Google's strategy:

This means that every fellow citizen of the world will have in his or her pocket the ability to access the world's information. As this happens, search will remain the killer application. For most people, it is the reason they access the Internet: to find answers and solve real problems.

What marks the essay is the pervasive reek of superiority — that Google knows best, and that Googlers can impose their values on the world. Take Rosenberg's discussion of "content," as Googlers are apt to call creative expression in text, video, and images:

Of course, the greatest user experience is pretty useless if there's nothing good to read, a truism that applies not just to newspapers but to the web in general. Just like a newspaper needs great reporters, the web needs experts. When it comes to information, not all of it is created equal and the web's future depends on attracting the best of it. There are millions of people in the world who are truly experts in their fields - scientists, scholars, artists, engineers, architects - but a great majority of them are too busy being experts in their fields to become experts in ours. They have a lot to say but no time to say it.

Systems that facilitate high-quality content creation and editing are crucial for the Internet's continued growth, because without them we will all sink in a cesspool of drivel. We need to make it easier for the experts, journalists, and editors that we actually trust to publish their work under an authorship model that is authenticated and extensible, and then to monetize in a meaningful way. We need to make it easier for a user who sees one piece by an expert he likes to search through that expert's entire body of work. Then our users will be able to benefit from the best of both worlds: thoughtful and spontaneous, long form and short, of the ages and in the moment.

We won't (and shouldn't) try to stop the faceless scribes of drivel, but we can move them to the back row of the arena. As Harry Truman said in 1949, "We are aided by all who want relief from the lies of propaganda - who desire truth and sincerity."

Who doesn't like truth and sincerity? But one of the wonders of the Web is that publishing no longer requires the traditional filters of traditionally determined "experts." Who will Google's algorithms privilege as an expert? The likes of Rosenberg, whose career before Google was marked by the baroque failures of @Home, a broadband service which ended in bankruptcy in 2001, and eWorld, an Apple-owned Internet service provider which shut down in 1996? Or his friends?

The point is that these kind of decisions can't be made by computers. They will be made by humans — in the Googleplex in Mountain View, in London, in Zurich, Sydney, and the rest of Google's lookalike, kindergarten-colored offices around the world. Rosenberg has at last made Google's goal clear: Not just organizing the world's information, but dictating it.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5157039&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Millions of reasons why Google's glad to have Ben Ling back]]> Don't feel too sorry for Ben Ling, the star product marketer who leapt from Google to Facebook back to Google in less than a year. Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg — herself a Google alum — has threatened not to let Ling keep the shares he earned to date. It was a petty move that goes against Valley standards of on how to treat departing employees, not to mention Facebook's own practice in such matters. But it's not like the loss will sting Ling. Google SVP Jonathan Rosenberg, who's said to be a big fan of Ling and recruited him heavily to come back to the search engine, is taking care of Ling with a "multimillion-dollar signing bonus," according to one tipster.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5038430&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[The 10 most terrible tyrants of tech]]> Here's to the screaming ones. The chair-throwers. The death-threat makers. The imperious gazers. The ones who see things differently — and will stare you down until you do, too. They're not fond of rules, especially those outlined by the human-resources department on "treating your employees with respect." And they have no respect for conversational decibel levels. You can cower before them, hide from them, quote them behind their backs, or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they're so damn loud. They've worked at Google. Apple. Microsoft. AOL. They've ruled the industry — or they've failed, loudly. Below, we present you tech's 10 most tempestuous bosses — the ones who scream different. While some see them as sociopaths, Valleywag sees genius.

Apple CEO Steve Jobs: It's worse when he's not yelling
RealNetworks CEO Rob Glaser: Screams to make the pain stop
Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff: Flowers ... and handcuffs
VMware cofounder Diane Greene: Her only mistake was working for another tyrant
Ex-Jobster CEO Jason Goldberg: Hot head, hot lead
Microsoft chairman Bill Gates: Doesn't even love his mother
Ex-AOL sales chief David Colburn: Prepared to get biblical on your ass
TechCrunch editor Michael Arrington: Doesn't discriminate — he holds everyone in contempt
Google SVP Jonathan Rosenberg: He'll yell at Larry and Sergey, too
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer: Would like to "kill" Google and its "pussy" CEO
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5033422&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Google SVP Jonathan Rosenberg]]>
Jonathan Rosenberg: He'll yell at Larry and Sergey, too
Google's Mountain View campus is a happy primary-colored wonderland where no one ever screams or yells. Except for SVP Jonathan Rosenberg. A Google employee tells us that at the Googleplex Rosenberg is known as "a shitkicker" who "likes to crack the whip." Google lore has it that Rosenberg likes to yell so much, he even hollered during his hiring interview, presumably with Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin.

People were like what the fuck is going on in that conference room? And then someone was like someone is interviewing, and it's the interviewee who's doing the yelling. He just literally likes to yell.

His broken volume dial hasn't hurt his career: Rosenberg is one of a handful of execs who's allowed to participate in Google's quarterly earnings calls with Wall Street.

Next: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer: Would like to "kill" Google and its "pussy" CEO

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5035798&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Amid stock downturn, Google's execs its biggest winners]]> Shareholders watched Google shares plummet by nearly $300 since peaking last fall. Those investors will hardly be reassured by the cheery news in Google's newly released annual report and proxy statement. The company did earn $13.29 a share, and Valley job-seekers also benefitted: The company added over 6,000 full time employees to its payroll last year. But who's raking in the cash? Not founders Larry Page or Sergey Brin, who only receive equity as income. CEO Eric Schmidt took home a salary of $480,000, slightly less than last year. CFO George Reyes — whom the company is actively trying to oust from his comfortable perch— took home millions in salary and stock last year, as did senior vice presidents Jonathan Rosenberg, Omid Kordestani and Alan Eustace. Here's how they scored:

  • Omid Kordestani, SVP, Global Business & Sales: The big winner, receiving 25,000 shares of stock valued at $11.2 million and 50,000 options valued at $6.3 million — though the company's shares are currently trading just a few points above the $448 strike price. Kordestani exercised 60,000 shares worth of options last year, worth $32.7 million.
  • Jonathan Rosenberg, SVP, Product Management: $5.8 million in cash and $14 million in stock and options.
  • Alan Eustace, SVP, Engineering: $5.2 million in cash and $14 million in stock and options.
  • George Reyes, retiring CFO: A distant fourth at $5.1 million in cash and $10.5 million in stock and options.

This year, expect more of the same: The company will not change executive compensation programs, after comparing them to market peers. It increased pay and stock packages last year.

The one number that jumped out to me was the amount of bad debt the company wrote down. Doubtful accounts amounted to $46 million, of which the company wrote down $30 million as bad debt, which nearly doubled from 2006. That's less than 1 percent of net profit, but can't be a good trend for a company with a lot of small accounts in a recessionary economy. Google's shareholders are hurting, as are its customers. But its executives? Doing just fine, thank you.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=372064&view=rss&microfeed=true