Larry Page & Mark Zuckerberg. (Image originally atlanticwire.com)

Every time you go online you are entering a war zone. It might not feel like it, but there is an almighty battle taking place between two superpowers and you are caught in the crossfire.

Welcome to the war for web supremacy. The super powers, if you haven’t already guessed, are the search behemoth Google and social heavyweight champion Facebook. The prize is you and your data.

Sure, there are other combatants in this war; Twitter, Apple, Bing, LinkedIn…even Yahoo!, but they are merely involved in skirmishes and are open to being co-opted into alliances with the main players. Amazon currently appears to be Switzerland (more about them another time).

The nature of systems like the web is that monopolies emerge. We have a dominant search engine in Google, a dominant online encyclopedia in Wikipedia, a dominant retailer in Amazon, a dominant auction site in eBay, and now we have a dominant social network in Facebook. That’s normal and has been happening in business for centuries.

But what happens when two different monopolies decide to battle for a middle ground? That’s where it gets interesting, and that whats happening now. Facebook and Google share common goals but differing philosophies.

Facebook is trying to create its own version of the Web, where you never really have to go anywhere else. They want everything to happen and stay on Facebook.

Google want to control the flow of information of the Web and how you access that information. They don’t mind as much that you might go elsewhere, just that you get there via one of their properties (and read their ads along the way).

Google has been the dominant force on the Web over the last decade. Search was the Web’s number one function and Google were (and still are) the King’s of search. But then Facebook exploded across the globe as the popularity of social networks grew. Now Facebook is closing in on 1 billion members and presents a serious threat to Google’s existence.

This is why we have seen Google+ launched. Its the search engine giant’s response to Facebook. Its an attempt to merge search and social in a way that will keep Google relevant and massively profitable. Many of the ideas in Google+ are good ones and designed to address some of the frustrations Facebook members express.

Google+ is already closing in on 100 million users after around 7 months of existence and is tipped to reach 400 million users within a year. Its the fastest growing social network in history. Many will argue that this is being driven by the way Google are forcing sign-up through their massive Gmail service, and the number of active users are much lower. Many are also expressing their resentment of such tactics, but all is fair in love and war and when the stakes are this high a little bit of grumbling is a small price to pay.

The latest development for Google+ is to lift the 18+ age restriction and allow teenagers to join, just like Facebook. Except the Google army are promising a “safer” experience for teens than they’ve experienced on other social networks. This move should see further growth of G+.

Google is also now blending social network data into search results. First they had an arrangement with Twitter that was heading in the right direction, but that alliance faltered last year (I suspect they will kiss and make up eventually). Now there is the hamfisted Google+ Your World which blends G+ information into search results, but as many complain, is hardly a reflection of our social “world” at this stage.

A great response to Google+ Your World was the rapid deployment of “Don’t Be Evil” by a handful of Facebook and Twitter engineers which clearly demonstrates how disingenuous Google have been.

Mind you Facebook is fighting just as hard. We have seen plenty of changes to Facebook over the last year or so including the new Ticker / Timeline. Every time Facebook makes major changes or introduces new Terms and Conditions there are groups threatening to boycott it. But we stay and we accept it and move on, and Facebook know this.

Don’t expect Facebook to take the Google+ assault laying down. I almost guarantee that they are busily building their own version of search to fire back at Google. It won’t be just another search engine, it will be a totally new take on search. That will be interesting to see unfold.

The biggest danger is a serious threat to the open and interoperable web we currently enjoy. Facebook see themselves as a platform. Google are heading steadily in the same direction. (Of course Apple has always wanted this and Amazon have been stealthily working towards this…but that’s for another post). The result could require us to move between platforms rather than a seamless web.

So who should you trust? Which side should you back in this war? Its hard to say. Most wars end with winners and losers, or in the business world, leaders and second place. With two giants fighting for the same turf despite vastly differing backgrounds its an unprecedented battle. Ideally, its best if there is no major loser here. The best outcome would be that the major players decide to accept that there’s room for all and work out how to work together. Utopian? Maybe, but its the best chance of us maintaining an open web.

One thing is certain; the future of the web will be shaped by this fight and the strategies the combatants use to win. Search and social now touch on nearly every aspect of the web and in an interconnected modern society we cannot avoid them. Putting all personal preferences and philosophical arguments aside I’d suggest its probably necessary to have a bet each way and make sure you are properly set up with both sides. Its hard to write off either Google or Facebook at the moment. They’ll both be likely to serve you well for quite a while, and if one finally crumbles (which won’t be a sudden thing), you won’t be playing catch up with the winner.

Expect to see plenty more changes and new features from Facebook and Google over the coming year. Some will be good, some will be bad, but all will be another shot in the war for web supremacy.

We like to think of ourselves as a progressive, modern, innovative nation here in Australia. We proudly point out examples of Australian ingenuity but in reality these are few and far between. The truth is that, despite our economic prosperity and extremely high standard of living, Australia risks being left behind in the booming digital economy.

Its not that we aren’t an innovative race; there are some extremely talented people dreaming up many amazing ideas, and there is something of a talent rush on Aussie tech entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley at the moment. The problem is that very few of those businesses or digital entrepreneurs will remain in this country unless things change considerably. The talent, the intellectual property and the businesses will move offshore.

The other risk is that, in an increasingly global and digitally connected economy, Australia will find itself being less than competitive due to a sluggishness in adopting new technology. Once again, this rubs against the popular stereotype that we are a nation of early technology adopters. That may be true as consumers, but the corporate world appears to be less enthusiastic about embracing change and technology.

A recent global study by IBM revealed that Australian marketers are lagging significantly in tech and social media. The study showed that Australian marketers still rely heavily on traditional forms of promotion and research and are yet to embrace the more modern techniques of their global counterparts.

At the same time research by GE indicates that Australia is seen as one of the least innovative nations on earth. The GE Innovation Barometer had Australia lagging behind countries like Brazil and Finland by corporate chiefs who were asked which countries were leading the way in technology and business practices.

The question is, why are we lagging behind? Here are 5 reasons I can see:

1. Traditional geographic isolation. Geographically Australia is a long way from the rest of the world, especially the traditional economic powers of Europe and the USA. We’ve managed to go through history doings thing our own way and there was rarely any pressure to adopt new ideas and technology in a hurry. But that was before the rise of the global, connected economy of the last 20 years. These days information and innovation travel fast and the borders of commerce have become blurred. No longer can we afford to be slow on the uptake.

2. Lack of competition. This is probably a symptom of our isolation too, but the reality is that competition isn’t exactly rampant in Australia at the corporate level. We have traditionally been a nation of monopolies and duopolies; Coles & Woolworths, Fairfax and News Ltd,. David Jones & Meyer, Holden and Ford, Qantas and Ansett ..and then Virgin, Telstra and eventually Optus are just some examples. Our retail sector has recently been screaming blue murder with the advent of internet shopping and competitive forces creeping in online. They’ve gouged Australian shoppers for decades and were too slow, lazy or cumbersome to see and react to the threat of the digital economy.

Lack of competition breeds laziness and a lack of innovation. A fast-moving innovator like Ruslan Koglan becomes the automatic enemy of traditional retailers like Gerry Harvey, and in true Australian style the old behemoths will do their best to wipe out upstart competitors and seek government protection against any threats to their previously uncompetitive existence.

3. Government policy. We hear constant debates about protectionism of old industries but very little about fostering innovation in this country. Both sides of politics are to blame. While we have a handful of small innovation funds and grants they mostly seem to exist to tick a box for government. Where is the serious discussion about tax breaks for new industries, or incentives for new breakthroughs? Sadly, while governments pay some lip service to innovation they do very little to foster it culturally, relying more on our ability to live comfortably off resources.

4. We’re too resource rich. Australia’s historic wealth has been based on agriculture and mineral resources. Its provided us with one of the world’s highest standards of living, but it also has led to a complacency that may have dire repercussions in decades to come. What happens when our resources aren’t as valuable or in demand? Why aren’t we reinvesting some of this good fortune in innovation?

Finland, one of the countries we’re said to be lagging behind, is not a resource rich country. Their traditional industry is forestry and related products like matches and paper. But this highly educated nation turned towards technology in the late 1980′s and companies like Nokia became world leaders. They now have a booming tech sector (for a nation of 5 million) and a more diversified economy. My fear is that our wealth and complacency will prevent this from happening in Australia.

5. Inherent conservatism. While we see ourselves as a nation of rough and ready risk takers, the truth is that we are highly risk averse. Part of this stems from the aforementioned lack of competition and government policy, but it seems to be prevalent throughout Australian society. Banks are very unlikely to seed new business ideas here due to the risk. Corporate managers are unwilling to try new ideas and technology until it has been proven convincingly elsewhere. Failure is such a black mark in this country that entrepreneurs are less likely to go out on a limb.

The result of this conservatism is a lack of innovation and slow adoption of new technology, as evidenced in the IMB study. The new generation of entrepreneurs who are willing to stick their neck out are more likely to take their ideas overseas, especially to the USA and Silicon Valley the new mecca of entrepreneurial innovation. That’s why US-based tech funds are starting to scout here in Australia. They know the talent is here, and the ideas are being developed, but the risk takers are more likely to feel at home and much more welcome in California.

The result of all of this will be lost opportunities for Australia and a major risk of being left behind in the digital economy.

Almost six out of ten consumers (59 per cent) have stopped engaging with four or more brands as a result of poorly targeted communications, according to research released today by Experian. The report, titled ‘The future of multichannel marketing: marketer and consumer perspectives,’ shines a spotlight on disconnects that exist between marketers and consumers and highlights the opportunities available to marketers to minimise the impact of poorly targeted communications.

The Experian figures show that, as a result of poorly-targeted communications, eight per cent of consumers have stopped engaging with 20 or more brands. A further 27 per cent of Australians have gone as far as creating a separate email address to receive this information to avoid other email accounts from being inundated.

However, marketers are also making strides to change traditional marketing practices demonstrated by a significant 89 per cent of marketers now using a customer segmentation strategy.  In addition, 69 per cent are becoming more selective about the channels they use to engage with customers.  A key challenge identified by half (50 per cent) of Australian marketers lies in cutting through the white-noise to get messages through to the consumer.

It’s clear that many marketers are investing in tools to get the right message to the right audiences at the right time, yet the findings suggest that they may not be applying this strategic segmentation across all marketing disciplines, particularly among newer channels such as social media.

The evolution of social media

The findings show that consumers are least trusting of newer marketing channels such as social media, SMS and LinkedIn for direct communication with brands.  Almost three in 10 (29 per cent) consumers ranked social media as among the three marketing channels they trusted least when receiving information about a brand.  While just four per cent said it was the channel they trusted most.

“The lack of trust we are seeing at this stage in the social media evolution is a natural part of the process for new forms of communication,” comments Matt Glasner, General Manager, Experian Marketing Services.  “Social media is a new and immature market within Australia and there is much that all organisations are still learning about the effective use of this channel and how to deliver value both to customers and the brand.

“The challenges uncovered by the research are similar to the barriers we saw five or so years ago when customers lacked trust in emails and E-DMs.  Yet, for many brands, these are now common place communication channels which are highly valued by customers.”

Consumer attitudes towards marketing channels

A large majority of consumers, 70 per cent, agreed that giveaways or incentives was one of their top three favoured ways for brand engagement, closely followed by direct mail from the brand (60%). Communication via email was named by 46 per cent of consumers as one of their top three ways for brands to engage with them, followed by online and offline advertising as the third most preferred way for brand communication, named by 42 per cent of consumers.

Interestingly, both marketers (91 per cent) and consumers (85 per cent) agree that a company website is the most important source to find out information about a brand or product.  Yet when it comes to social media and print there are differences. Consumers value print media (70 per cent) and direct mail from a brand (60%) more highly than social media. This is in contrast to marketers who see print media as one of the least important sources of information (28 per cent).

Investment in the future

Over the next 12 months, 58 per cent of marketers plan to increase their investment in social media advertising and channel development. This is followed by email marketing (52 per cent), online advertising (47 per cent), apps (41 per cent) and events (41 per cent). Despite the increased focus on digital, the more traditional channels still have an important role to play, with 36 per cent of marketers planning to increase their spend on print ads. Similarly in TV and radio, 28 per cent plan to increase spend and 52 per cent will keep to the same budget.

Matt Glasner, General Manager of Experian Marketing Services comments: “Marketers are working hard to ensure their messages are heard.  However, our research highlights that there is still a huge opportunity for marketers to further understand how and when consumers want to engage across all channels, including social media.

“Information overload is a challenge for the industry. As we move deeper into an era of multichannel marketing, marketers need to be more selective in their communications and deliver them in a way that is personally relevant to the audiences they are targeting.

“The big opportunity over the coming year is to apply the clever consumer segmentation that is already being used, to create tailored social media campaigns which talk to the needs of their customers.  This is an important conversation for marketers to get right over the next 12 months which, in turn, will generate greater cut through and start to establish the channel as a truly valued and trusted information source.”

—–

About the findings:
The research is part of an in-depth whitepaper on ‘The future of multichannel marketing’.

Experian Marketing Services commissioned independent research with 330 Australian marketing professionals across the retail, financial services, government, technology, digital and travel industries; and 1,000 consumers across all demographics to develop an industry whitepaper on the current state of play in consumer marketing.

The independent research reveals how well marketers’ and consumers’ interests are aligned. It demonstrates where marketers in Australia are investing their dollars and which channels they value most highly in their communication. From a consumer perspective, it explores how effectively the general Australian population respond to and engage with marketing efforts.

Times have definitely changed. Until recently a new business would measure itself against a series of metrics like foot traffic, advertising reach and frequency, number of phone calls, number of calls or meetings by sales people, presentation to sales ratios, and of course actual sales.

But that was before the web, before Google and before social media networks took off.

In the era of inbound marketing the metrics have totally changed and I am studying them frantically in the wake of our recent NLYZR launch.

One week into my new start-up’s life I am able to track key metrics on an hourly basis to determine what’s working and what’s not. Here are some of the things I’m keeping track of:

• Search rankings for targeted terms (good)

• Followers / Fans / Friends etc for our various social profiles (building)

• Traffic generated from links in social networks (significant)

• Re-Tweets, Shares and Google +1s of our material (reasonable)

• Mentions in other blogs and online journals (good so far)

• Inbound links accumulating for the new website (already quite high)

• Number of visitors daily to new website (growing steadily)

• Number of visitors from various countries (so far its Australia and USA mainly)

• Traffic from search engines (only 8%, but it will grow)

• Referred traffic (42% at this stage)

• Direct traffic (50% but this should drop as a percentage over time)

• Best keywords

• Most popular content

• Time spent on site (2 minutes 43 seconds on average)

We also use more sophisticated data gained from:

• Conversion funnels

• Heat mapping of user behaviour on our new sites

Then we have the all important metrics that go to the bottom line:

• Percentage of visitors using our free tools

• Percentage of visitors visiting our online shop

• Conversion rate on visits to sales

• Actual sales

We can study these collective metrics, fine tune and continually improve. Its fascinating, thrilling and totally addictive. The idea is to learn as we go, improving the business in real-time.

Data has never been more available or useful for new business owners. The days of opening your store, blasting with advertising and hoping for customers are behind us. These new metrics can change the way we operate forever.

What metrics are you following for your business? What new tools do you find invaluable?

Its crucial to be found online in search

As we move from a bricks and mortar economy to one where we are increasingly doing business online the is a growing need for businesses to adapt.

The media this year has been full of doom and gloom about the impact of the digital economy on a beleaguered traditional retail sector. Some of our most famous retailers have been crying foul over purchases made online from foreign websites being GST exempt.

Yet despite the anguish it is surprising to find that very few Australian businesses are taking the appropriate steps to effictively compete online. We have just completed a study of over 6000 websites by NLYZR to determine the standard of website optimization in Australia and the results are telling.

The NLYZR study found that the majority of Australian websites are not up to scratch when it comes to SEO:

• 87% of the sites had substandard SEO

• 29% had no SEO at all

• Only 6% of sites tested were properly optimized

The study looked at over 6000 different websites in a cross section ranging from large publicly listed companies to small businesses and sole traders.

These statistics are alarming and indicate that very few businesses are taking the time to do the one thing that can have the greatest impact on their results – website optimization.

The more we spoke to businesses about their online marketing, we realised that most found search too complicated to understand and solutions too hard to implement. Many found the cost of professional SEO too prohibitive despite the potential benefits of an improved web presence.

Yet I am adamant that the first and most essential challenge for any business wanting to compete online is to be easily found in search for relevant search terms. This alone can make an incredible difference to your business. If Australian businesses are going to embrace the digital age and compete in a global economy they need to get the basics right first.

This is why we decided to develop NLYZR, a website optimization system that anyone could use. Our overriding principle was to keep it simple, clear and easy-to-use. We wanted to give business owners and marketers the information they really need to compete successfully online, even if they weren’t web geeks themselves.

We have taken two years to develop and refine the system, using the invaluable data gleaned from our initial Free Web NLYZR to determine what was needed. Our series of Alpha and Beta tests this year have returned some amazing results for those involved.

• Richard Windeyer, a mortgage broker, saw his traffic increase 256% within one month and go from nowhere to the first page of Google search results. Subsequently his inquiry rate has more than doubled.

• Hadley Cycles, an established retailer, are now ranked first for all their target search terms and have had an amazing trading period despite a sluggish economy and cold, wet winter.

• Leading national advertising agency, George Patterson | Y&R recently started using NLYZR for one of their digital clients, and the impact of the NLYZR recommendations was immediate. The client was completely blown away by the result and the agency is now ready to roll NLYZR out for other clients.

My team and I are extremely proud to be launching NLYZR. It’s our first real web start-up, built from scratch with all of our thinking there for all to see. It’s deliberately simple and easy to use, which we felt was crucial to its success.

But mostly we are proud because we honestly believe that being found online is so important and clearly has been too hard to address for too many businesses. NLYZR is here to address that glaring issue quickly and affordably, and hopefully help many more businesses be able to compete online and take their services to the world.

In what is known as the ‘Oscars of Radio’, the 1233 Breakfast team – Aaron Kearney, Karen Shrosbery along with station manager Phil Ashley-Brown, has been nominated for the Andrew’s Journey series.

The story of Andrew Hall, a young man from Hawks Nest who became a paraplegic after falling from a balcony on Australia Day last year, Andrew’s Journey is a finalist in the world’s best human relations story category.

Presenter Aaron Kearney, Executive Producer Phil Ashley-Brown and Producer Karen Shrosbery have all been invited to attend the gala ceremony in New York in June 2011.

For 54 years the New York Festivals® Radio Awards has recognized the World’s Best Radio ProgramsTM

Each year they receive entries from radio stations, networks and independent producers from over 30 countries. International radio experts from stations and companies donate their time to the judging process. The GrandJury® is comprised of top level industry professionals from 5 continents and over 25 countries.

Congratulations to the whole 1233 Newcastle team for this recognition.

John Laws has plugged the golden microphone back in at 2SM

While digital radio continues to make inroads into the media landscape, in a stroke of retro genius Bill Caralis has lured possibly Australia’s most analogue announcer back on air. John Laws plugged his golden microphone in today at 2SM’s Sydney studios to begin broadcasting to the Supernetwork stations after 2 years in retirement.

It’s strange marriage that just might work. Certainly Laws has nothing to lose in this comeback. 2SM isn’t currently surveyed in Sydney after last being measured at a sub-1% audience, so it will be a long time before anyone can actually determine whether he’s pulling an audience. If they decide to re-join the ratings race any increase will be seen as a victory…and surely they can rate more than “margin of error” with Laws on the roster.

The bigger win will be across Caralis’s regional AM network where ratings have slipped in the morning shift over the last two years. There’s a strong chance the return of Laws will produce a lift in ratings, even if the average audience will as old as the man himself (75).

However you suspect this game isn’t about ratings, but rather network sponsorship deals. And Laws has always been good for sponsors. Supernetwork sales teams should be rubbing their hands together for a while now as they bask in the warm glow of the golden mic.

Exactly four years ago my team and I launched a new online magazine for our local region called Hunter’s Best. It had a lot of big ideas, some of which were totally wrong, and proved to be a bit ahead of its time. While we enjoyed a certain amount of success, it wasn’t a sustainable model and we eventually let it whither and die.

However, in the back of our minds, we knew that one day we’d revisit the idea. Today is that day.

Welcome to Urban Insider – an insider’s guide to the city (of Newcastle and surrounding region).

Here you’ll find a much more polished version of our original idea whose time has finally come.

Urban Insider showcases the region and aims to unearth many of the the talented people living here; musicians, bloggers, writers, photographers, designers and more. Not only can you see what is going on, but meet the people who are making it happen – both the contributors and their subjects. Its an outlet for ‘citizen journalism and citizen reporting’.

Urban Insider is a genuine attempt to help identify and promote the emerging talent in this vibrant region.

And while my team and I are the publishers and editors, this is not about Sticky. We’re looking for contributors from all walks of life to get involved, pitch us ideas and get published on Urban Insider. It should be a great way to help build your profile and hopefully drive some traffic to your own sites.

Some of the initial contributors featured on Urban Insider are Gerry Bobson, Melissa Priest, Kaitlyn Green, Helen Henry, and Doug Hall. You too can join the team.

We’ve invested a considerable amount of time and our own resources to deliver something we hope many local and visitors can use, enjoy and participate in.

So…..

Pitch us your ideas

Provide comments and feedback

Help fill in the information gaps in each section

Tell your friends

Follow us on Twitter

Become a Facebook Friend

Subscribe to the RSS

Post your #urbaninsiderpic for us to share with the world

Write thoughtful (non-negative) opinion pieces on how to improve the region

Share. Urban Insider is for all us.

the 5-star Oracle Resort

This is a test post for research into search results around apartments for lease at The Oracle Resort on the Gold Coast for holidays.

The Oracle is an ultra modern resort at Broadbeach on Queensland’s famous Gold Coast. These luxury apartments on total ocean front are contained in two spectacular waterfront towers, far removed from the streets below yet central to all the excitement and glamour of Australia’s favourite beachside escape.

Leasing an apartment at the beautiful Oracle Resort is as easy as contacting us via email or completing the enquiry form on this site.

Book your luxury escape now in an apartment at the amazing Oracle Resort and enjoy the sights and scenes of Australia’s famous Gold Coast on your next holiday.

One of the most revealing discussions at the Web 2.0 Summit in San Francisco this year was with Ariel Emanuel, the CEO of William Morris Endeavor agency and inspiration for Ari Gold in the TV show Entourage. At first I was confused as to why a super-agent from Hollywood was being interviewed at the world’s pre-eminent web-tech conference, but it didn’t take long for the penny to drop.

Lloyd!!! What's a Twitter?

We have heard the old web cliche that “content is king” for years now, and of course there is a lot of truth in it. An iPod is not much use without the music that can be easily stored on it, and most of the successful apps and devices we love to use require a steady stream of great content to make them appealing to us.

And of course, Ari Emanuel knows this. He’s been telling the traditional media for years that content is king and, via his stable of stars, has been able to supply a considerable amount of that content to them.

But in 2010, the playing field looks much different to a decade ago. Piracy has become a massive issue for the entertainment industry in the last ten years. The number of potential distribution platforms has also exploded. Now an artist, and agent, must consider a plethora of options rather than the traditional few.

Both Hollywood and the music industry have had an uneasy relationship with Silicon Valley. The web has been viewed as both the villain and the saviour as digital files enable easy and instant distribution and sharing of content.

Emanuel has witnessed the music industry brought to its knees during the Napster era then desperately strike deals with the likes of Apple to maintain a share of the game via iTunes and other digital stores. He claims that “Apple built a great business for Apple”, but that the music industry failed to build a good business in the new digital economy.

It seems that Emanuel is determined not to make the same mistakes. That is why he now regularly travel to San Francisco and Silicon Valley. The old content king knows he must deal with new distribution tsars in order to secure a future for his clients and himself.

One of his telling quotes was: “Hollywood’s job is to figure out how to create the market for content – or we’ll be just like the music business.”

“I have never cared what something costs; I care what it’s worth,” Emanuel said.

Another pearl came in his description of the nature of Hollywood negotiations: “Fair is where we end up,” he said of the brutality that goes on at the bargaining table.

Citing the ongoing standoff between Google TV and the broadcasters, Emanuel said he had no qualms about turning away from the usual buyers like Fox Broadcasting  simply because the highest bidder lay outside Hollywood. “If it’s worth more to Google TV than it is for Fox, than I’m going to Google TV,” he said.

A big part of Emanuel’s digital strategy is monetizing the social graph. He discussed the notion of yielding revenues from the interactions between talent and fans outside the usual distribution channels. He even teased some of the kinds of things he is working on in that regard, from negotiations with LinkedIn to use it as a programming platform for his agency’s author clients to crowd-financing a movie on Facebook.

It was an extraordinarily revealing interview about the transitioning media marketplace.

In 2010 one of Hollywood’s biggest players isn’t just negotiating with the big movie studios and television networks, he’s talking with Google, Twitter, Apple, Netflix, Linked and, of course, Facebook.

You can view the entire 46 minute interview here. It gets heated around mid-way through as Emanuel fires up about piracy.