When Google launched its latest social networking utility, Google+, in June, and then announced in July that the service had already enrolled 10 million users, I reported that Google+ wasn’t ready for business. Now, four months later, Google has announced the release of Google+ Pages — a way for businesses, brands and organizations to officially use Google+ to connect with consumers — and I’m back to share that Google+ still isn’t ready for businesses.

If there’s one thing Facebook has taught us about the care and feeding of word-of-mouth marketing, it’s that to properly manage a business-related profile on a social utility, the utility has to be easy to use. Moreover, it has to offer a compelling and scalable set of features. Google appears to have missed that memo, as have the droves of experts touting Google+ Pages as the next big thing for marketers and business communicators.

In addition to requiring a Gmail address to set up and access the Google+ platform (seriously, who needs yet another email address to manage?), Google+ Pages falls short in a number of other areas, including:

Page administration: Google doesn’t allow multiple administrators to manage a Page, meaning only one person can manage a business or brand on Google+ (the only workaround for this is to open yet another Gmail account and give that account’s login information to anyone who needs to administer the Page).

Cross-platform integration: In what can only be described as a huge error of omission, Google+ Pages doesn’t integrate with Google’s blogging (Blogger), analytics (Google Analytics) or video sharing (YouTube) platforms. While it stands to reason that future integration of these platforms is on Google’s engineering roadmap, the company remains tightlipped about any such future plans. For users looking for functionality now, these omissions are inexcusable.

Traffic, or lack there of: Google+ doesn’t have the traffic marketers are looking for. When Google+ Pages was announced on Nov. 7, traffic to the plus.google.com domain spiked but has dropped every day since, according to data gathered through Compete.com. In fact, as of this writing, Google+’s reach is .05 percent of total U.S. Internet users online. By comparison, Facebook’s reach is 63 percent.

No promotions or offers: This will likely be the straw that breaks the camel’s back: Google+ Pages contest and promotion policies state you can’t use Google+ Pages for contests, offers, coupons or other promotions (Google’s workaround for this? Display a link on your Google+ Page to a separate site where your promotion is hosted).

Lots of people, agencies, consultants and authors will tell you Google+ Pages is the next big thing in social networking for businesses. Don’t be confused by the rhetoric. What they mean is Google+ is their next big thing, their way to attempt to establish themselves as experts and try to command more of your attention. Compare Google+’s usability and features against Facebook’s and the choice for your business or brand should be clear.

Google is notorious for launching products with skeleton features and adding functionality as an afterthought. But social network users — in this case, those responsible for managing business-aligned marketing and communication strategy and budgets — have a basic set of expectations, which Google+ continues to ignore.

Read more here

Google is opening its social network, Google+, to companies, organizations and brands. With the move, it hopes to create novel kinds of relationships between people and products, while making inroads against Facebook’s own popular corporate pages, partly by using Google search to promote pages.

Companies initially established themselves on Google+ when the service was introduced in late June, but they were kicked off the site as Google tried to build the social network for individuals. Google+ now has over 40 million users, far fewer than the 800 million people using Facebook, but still substantial. Now, apparently, Google hopes to improve the utility and time spent on Google+.

“This is the biggest launch in the 120 days since we started,” said Bradley Horowitz, vice president for products at Google+. “I expect brands will notice this and will build marketing plans around it.”

According to a Google blog post announcing the change, the addition of corporate entities on Google+ “means we can now hang out live with the local bike shop, or discuss our wardrobe with a favorite clothing line, or follow a band on tour.”

It also means that companies can try to develop direct relationships with customers, by seeking their endorsement with a “+1,” Google’s version of Facebook’s “like” button, or by entering a consumer’s Google+ “circle,” a self-managed collection of relationships. Being in a circle would give companies direct access to feedback  or let them engage in video chats with customers.

Companies will also be able to offer consumers different ways to get to their Google+ pages, either through a “badge” on their corporate sites that offer connections to the Google+ page, an invitation to connect to that page, or both the button and the connection link, along with a gallery of people who have given something a “+1.”

Mr. Horowitz predicted that the badge, along with other widgets, would become more popular over time, the way Facebook’s “like” button now populates much of the Internet.

“Over time, I expect ‘+Pepsi’ to emerge on every can, on TV spots and on the Web site and become a cult phenomenon,” Mr. Horowitz said. “Over a couple of quarters, brands will learn to utilize this.”

In addition, the companies on Google+ will be able to see  analytics that help them identify people by things like age, geography or how frequently they visit the Google+ page.

Relationships with Facebook have proved to be valuable marketing and awareness tools for companies with pages on that social network. Ninety-six of the top 100 brands have Facebook pages. The fast-food purveyor McDonald’s, for example, has over 11 million “likes” and 1.6 million visits to its page. Overall, about 100 million online stories, pictures and other things are “liked” by Facebook users daily.

While Facebook enjoys a huge lead over Google+, Google hopes to gain an edge over Facebook with a feature in its popular search engine, “Direct Connect.” Using this feature, Google+ members can search for the Google+ pages of movies, bands or companies, then add these things to their collection of relationships on Google+. The system, which requires the corporate entity to register itself with Google+, is also intended to prevent the creation of counterfeit corporate pages.

Read more here

This Halloween, Dr. Mark McAlister DDS and his orthodontics team are bringing the spooky festivities into the office by wearing colorful outfits for their patients. Dr. Mark takes pride in keeping the atmosphere young, fun, and lively for all of the children and young adults who visit his office. By doing so, he is reminding kids and adults alike to take care of their investment in their dental work by keeping their teeth clean over this sugar-filled holiday.

After Halloween, many kids tend to find themselves consuming endless piles of candy in a short period of time. Candy, especially in large amounts, can be detrimental to a mouth filled with braces. Dr.Mac wants his patients to enjoy the festivities and he understands that people will ultimately indulge in their trick-or-treating candy. While it may be impossible for some to avoid candy altogether, it is important to know the risks that can result from binging on candy.
Orthodontist, Mark K. McAlister’s tip is short and simple: do not over-eat on Halloween candy!
Most candy is almost entirely sugar and, therefore, can lead to rotting teeth and cavities. Some of the most dangerous candies are those that are extremely hard or sticky. The hard candies are known to break braces or, even worse, to break teeth. On the other hand, sticky candies can bend, break, and destroy the wires holding the braces together.

While the most health-concerned people say to stay away from any and all candy, Dr. Mark McAlister understands that Halloween is a special day that only comes once a year. Dr. Mac’s office strongly suggests that parents of children with braces (and without) be aware of the types of candy, as well as the quantities each child has. Halloween is a fun and exciting holiday and Mark knows that braces do not have to ruin the excitement.

Mark McAlister DDS

Mark McAlister is a Phoenix, AZ based orthodontist who specializes in braces, early orthodontic treatment, and invisalign. His patients are mainly anyone 8 years old to adults. Dr.Mark’s practice is child friendly and equipped with the most updated technology. They also offer early morning and later afternoon appointments for extra convenience.

More information can be found online at http://phoenixbraces.net/

Just last week, Google changed access to information about searchers leaving their website after a search. Searchers who are logged into their Google accounts no longer automatically pass along the term with which they searched – with one important exception. But this exception is enough to make some observers question Google’s motives.

I’ll state right up front that both the technological and (for lack of a better term) political issues on this topic are a little confusing. I read both of Danny Sullivan’s excellent explanations of the issue, and I’m still not quite sure what to make of it. So let’s take this apart piece by piece.

We’ll start with the initial news point. Last week, Google changed the way it handled search results to make them more private, at least in theory. Those who search Google and are logged into Google.com via a secure connection now get their search results encrypted. Searchers won’t notice a difference, but the websites they visit will. If a secure visitor clicks through to a website that is not secure, that website will not receive any information as to what search term the visitor used.

This means that webmasters and SEOs get less information to play with. It’s harder to build a proper campaign when you don’t know what terms visitors use to find your website. Worse, what if one of these secure visitors buys something? You might want to optimize for that term, but you can’t, because you don’t know what it is!

Don’t panic; you’re not losing quite as much information as you think. According to Matt Cutts, only a very small percentage of Google users (in the single digits) actually use SSL when performing searches. That may sound low to you, but Sullivan said the figures he’s seeing for both Search Engine Land and his own blog bear this out. For one day for SEL in Google Analytics, he noted that 381 keyword-related visits had the search terms stripped out of them – out of nearly 15,000 keyword-related visits. That’s a loss of less than three percent of the data.

Also, if you maintain SSL on your website, Google will still pass along to you the search terms secure visitors used. Sullivan notes that this is a crucial point. “Encryption – providing a secure website – doesn’t block referrers if someone goes from one secure website to another.” As he sums it up, for a visitor searching from a connection that is not secure, Google passes the search term to both secure and not secure sites. For a secure visitor, Google passes only to secure sites. So a secure visitor would not pass their search term to a site that is not secure.

That’s true except in one important situation. It’s this exception that’s making Sullivan and others suspect Google’s motives. And the odd point is that it’s all but buried in Google’s blog post announcing the changes it’s made to improve the security and privacy of search. At the end of the third paragraph of the post, Google tells its users that “If you choose to click on an ad appearing on our search results page, your browser will continue to send the relevant query over the network to enable advertisers to measure the effectiveness of their campaigns and to improve the ads and offers they present to you.”

You read that right. It doesn’t matter if you’re using a secure connection; advertisers will STILL see the search term that brought you to their web page. Why is this a problem? Web publishers tend to use AdSense rather than AdWords if they use anything with Google, and very few of them use secure servers. They need information on who is finding their website via which search terms just as much as advertisers do. It’s as if Google is saying “we’re protecting our users’ privacy, but you can peek if you pay us.”

Except it’s even more complicated than that. Sullivan argues that Google doesn’t really consider this referrer information private. He points to an incident in 2009,  “when Google made a change to its search results that broke referrers from being passed. Publishers were upset, and Google restored referrers.” Even more recently, Sullivan continued, when search rival DuckDuckGo challenged Google on privacy issues, Google head of web spam Matt Cutts denied referrers were a privacy issue. “Referrers are a part of the way th web has worked since before Google existed. They’re a browser-level feature more than something related to specific websites,” Sullivan quotes Cutts as saying.

It seems very much as if Google is trying to have it both ways, and turn an extra profit besides. As Sullivan explains, if you know the search term someone  used to get to your website, “you can then target them in various ways across the web with ads  you believe reflect that search interest…This is called ‘retargeting,’ and  Google’s a leading provider of retargeted ads. When you cut the referrers out, except for your own advertisers, Google makes it harder for its competitors to offer retargeting services.” It also means that only Google advertisers can do keyword-level conversion tracking. This kind of tracking gives you a better idea of the value of certain search terms, so you can change your SEO approach to suit.

Many Google users may not care about these issues, but it smacks of hypocrisy on Google’s part. As Sullivan explains, “if Google thinks this needs to be done for privacy reasons, then it need to block referrers for everyone and not still allow them to work for advertisers…If blocking referrers isn’t a privacy issue, then Google needs to provide referrer data to all publishers, not just those who advertise.”

Read more here

If you figured that Google could do better when they unveiled their Music Beta service in May, well, it looks like Google agreed with you. Rumors started circulating on Friday that the search engine plans a much more complete music streaming and downloading service, to compete with both Amazon’s service and Apple iTunes.

A number of sources have been quoting “leaks from music companies” as saying that Google has been in active negotiations with the four major music production firms. Supposedly, only the smallest of these, EMI Group, has inked a deal with the search company. Some observers believe that Google will launch their service in a matter of weeks even if they EMI Group as their only partner initially.

The New York Times notes that Google most likely plans to link it to Music Beta, the company’s existing cloudservice. For those of you not familiar with it, Music Beta lets users create a music locker of sorts in the cloud that can hold up to 20,000 songs. Users can then stream these tunes to their mobile phones and other devices.

Potential piracy stands as one of the obstacles Google needs to overcome to convince music companies to sign on. The Times quoted one senior music company executive as saying that “We want to make sure the locker doesn’t become a bastion of piracy.” Without the help of the major music companies, Google’s new service could become much less convenient than either Amazon’s or Apple’s.

Someone using a cloud-based music service needs to get their music in the cloud – that is, onto the remote servers. Uploading an entire music collection over the Internet from one computer onto remote servers can take many hours or even days. During this time, the personal system’s performance might be affected. If, however, the music service holds licensing agreements with the major music companies, there’s no uploading required; the user can simply tap into the central repository of music already on the remote servers to listen to copies of the tunes they own. That makes the service much less of a hassle for the user; it’s less time- and resource-consuming to get started. This is one reason it’s so important to Google to get those deals in place.

The other reason, of course, is that both Amazon and Apple have made license deals with the major music companies, which would give them a strategic advantage over Google if the search giant fails to come to the agreements it needs. This must be particularly frustrating at the Googleplex, as the company is rumored to have been working on a music service like this for more than a year.

Once the service is in place, Google could take it in many directions. For instance, they might add a merchant service similar to YouTube’s new “Merch” service reported by the Daily Mail . They could include the new service as part of an Android update, such as the one named Ice Cream Sandwich scheduled for later this week. It could even become a special feature of Google Plus.

But can Google make a new music service work in the face of such strong competition? Success in one area doesn’t always translate well to other areas, as we’ve seen in the past with a number of Google flops. Motley Fool even lists five reasons they believe the yet-to-be-revealed new music service will flop. The analyst company cites everything from Google not playing nice with the record labels to heavy competition from Amazon and Apple (that shut even Wal-Mart out of the market) to Google’s own lack of patience as reasons the music service will fail. On the other hand, we’ve also seen Google succeed against larger, more entrenched rivals. We’ll have to wait to see how this one plays out.

Read more here

Google recently came out with Offline Google Mail, software that lets you use Gmail while disconnected from the Internet. Messages that you write, delete or move to a folder — or label, as Gmail calls it — get synced with your Gmail account the next time you are online. You can also read messages that had been sent to you before going offline.

Google’s new software for using Gmail without an Internet connection comes across as a throwback to an era when we weren’t connected all the time and on all sorts of devices, from phones to iPads.

These days, if I need to read or write an email when I’m not at a regular computer, I can usually do so on my phone.Wi-Fi is also plentiful — even on planes and trains — when I need to catch up on messaging using my laptop .

But I found myself lacking both options during a recent trip abroad. Fortunately, Google recently came out with Offline Google Mail, software that lets me use Gmail while disconnected. Messages that I write, delete or move to a folder — or label, as Gmail calls it — get synced with my Gmail account the next time I’m online. I can also read messages that had been sent to me before going offline.

As a result, I was generally able to get away with buying a half-hour or an hour of Internet access at a time in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, where “complimentary Internet” is a term foreign to hotels.

I composed emails on a flight to New Zealand and had them sent during a brief layover at the Auckland airport. I read and wrote more emails on the flight back to the U.S. and synced the account once more at my parents’ home in New Jersey. By the time I was back in my apartment in New York, I was caught up on three weeks of email.

The software itself was easy to install and use — once I found it. It requires a Gmail account and won’t work with Yahoo, Hotmail and other Web-based email services.

Also, it works only with Google’s Chrome browser, which means I had to install it on my laptop to start things off. I then had to open the browser and open a new tab to find a link to Google’s Chrome Web Store. After that, I had to find the free Offline Google Mail software among the scores of offerings at the store.

The software is still in a “beta” test mode, a label that Google Inc. sometimes slaps on products for months or years. That’s a way of saying that you may encounter glitches along the way.

Read the full review here

After quietly testing in Brazil, Spanish-speaking Latin America, Spain, and Portugal, Google will roll out a new algorithm globally that gives more weight to landing page quality when it comes to AdWords Quality Score. This means ads with landing pages that Google deems to be most relevant to the query will be able to rank higher for lower cost-per-click bids.

“What we’ve seen is that there are ads available in the auction that are as good a quality as the top ads. But the landing pages — the merchant sites, the advertiser landing pages — are of much higher quality than the ads that we see at the top of our auction,” Jonathan Alferness, director of product management on Google’s ad quality team told me. This, says Alferness, means the user experience isn’t what it could be. Hence the change to give more weight to landing page quality. “In the end, we believe that this will result in better quality experience for the users.”

Landing page quality has long been a factor in Google AdWords, but more as a negative signal. If an advertiser’s landing page was particularly terrible or misleading, advertisers could have their ads rejected or their accounts suspended or revoked — depending on how bad the policy violation was. The new change will assign landing page quality a positive value, incentivizing advertisers to make sure the landing page’s keywords and content are closely aligned with the keywords for which they’re bidding. Ads with high landing page quality will get a “strong boost” upward in the auction, according to Alferness.

Alferness says Google will crawl the landing pages associated with every ad and make a determination as to its quality.

“What we always ask our advertisers to focus on is relevance — choose a landing page or site experience that is both relevant to the keywords that you’re targeting and also a good experience for end users,” said Alferness. “This is just continuing to sort of push on those best practices. I gives us the ability to really reward those advertisers that have been doing this, whose landing pages really are some of the best in our systems.”

The change will roll out in the next week or two. Advertisers may see some variations in ad position and keyword Quality Score at first, but things should settle down within a couple of weeks, according to Google.

Read more here

Larry says he hopes everyone is inspired by the past two days (that’s part of what Zeitgeist is about, inspirational panels). Thanks audience for business and partnerships.

Talking about autobiography he was given at 12 about Nicola Tesla. “I thought I wanted to be an inventor when I grew up.” Tesla was like a mad scientist inventor. But once finished reading story, “I basically cried … you could be the world’s greatest inventor but still be a failure.”

Goal since was that companies could do things. “We want to build technology that everyone loves using and really affects everyone.”

Mentions Google just turning 13, how it’s always a debate when exactly that is but “roughly” there. What has Google done that’s worked well? Having a user focus and iterating fast to things successful.

Why search? At Standford, had done some researching on ranking things better. Typed in “university” into search engines at the time, got “random web pages.” Pages that just had the words. When to talked to search engines, asked why they’d do this, got response it was user area.

“That’s why we went on to build a search engine. We realized no one was focused on them.” and says “That’s true of many things in the world.”

Now shifts to talking about Google+ — “super excited.” “We want to build a closer relationship with all of our users.” Want to integrate all their products, making being on the web more like real life.

We also wanted to have an amazing experience for mobile. Using those more like computers now. What’s amazing with Google+ is how there’s automated uploading from your phone, “it’s a totally magical experience” and you can share.

Talking about Will I Am doing a concert Friday on Google+ through a hangout. Says Google+ can be helpful in search. Says repeatedly “really excited” about Google Plus.

Now talking about buying Android when it was little. They had dream would build open source platform that would revolutionize things. “That was crazy.” Had a closet full of phones that didn’t work, but having focus and dedication, were able to get there.

“I see the same movie playing out again and again.” People thought Android was crazy at the time, or things like Chrome, “why do you need another browser” but it’s got 160 million people using (think he said) but it’s growing like crazy. Display, “what are you guys going to do” people would say to Google. But now they’re big — and funding content across the web.

YouTube, which Mark Cuban thinks we shouldn’t have bought, I disagree. Multiplied ad revenue by 3X for past three years (think he said) in a row.

In technology, still early stage, so way overestimate next year and underestimate the next five years.

Tools we use to interact online will be completely different five years from now. Think back five years, we had no social networking tools. Lots of potential to make things more efficient, more enjoyable going forward. Trying hard to build those tools with Google+.

Talking phones now, how they’re as powerful as computers, it knows where you are, it’s always with you, those capabilities will change the world, “and we’ve only just started.” Talking about Google Wallet and how it’s an “amazing experience” for buying and “that’s just the tip of the iceberg” for phones

Google has responsibility to make the world better. That’s why he loves his job, to make the world better.

Invites Eric Schmidt up, who reads a long quote from Cory Booker that I didn’t catch sorry, was getting some publishing stuff fixed here. But we’re moving to Q&A.

Question: More fun last few years for first few years?

Larry: First few years were really stressful. Eric: As opposed to now, he jokes Makes refernence to a near bankruptcy in the past, the cash restriction program, the Crap program he says, when we wouldn’t pay our bills. Larry then says “I think the first few years were really stresssful” and laughs all around. Larry says gotten easier as things have gone along.

Question From John Battelle: What’s the Google brand equally going forward, when it has been search in the past.

Larry: “I think it’s important that people trust the brand, that people know we’re acting in their interests.” Talking on security. “It should stand for a beauty, a technological purity and innovation” and things that are important to people.

Question: Does Motorola represent a new era for Google of greater risk taking and how you’ll absorb it.

Larry: While it’s significant, it’s not doubling our market cap as much as we’d like it to. It’s relatively small in that sense. Company has always wanted to make investments in the future. YouTube he mentions “we’ve always strived to take those kind of risks and recognize those kind of opportunities.” Motorola went all Android before any others so it’s a “very natural partner.”

Question: Talk about technology transfer from patent to creation to business development and more that can be done to release hidden potential in university walls.

Eric: Stanford did well off Google. Larry: Yes, we gave them a little bit of equity. Says Stanford does well culturally by letting professors go start companies, then come back and teach. When went to start Google, professors could sent them off to business people. That type of culture doesn’t happen many places. On patents, says never sued anyone over them though has been sued many times, but somehow been succcessful.

Question: On how management styles have changed.

Eric: We’re smarter. Things have always been tightly managed, though. We as a management team found a way to manage at scale using data analytics that are the envy of the world. People have to back with data, can just throw random guesses. Larry has particularly good judgement on if someone can enter such an intense environment.

Larry: Recently reorganized to focus on product areas. Any company as it grows, if the company’s not static, you have to reorganized. Looking at our business is pretty complicated, many products he names from YouTube to Android, those are all different. Made sure “we were super focused” on user experience. As more offices in different time zones, had to keep changing how to do meetings.

Eric: When you’re growing as fast as we did, most of our execs were in their 30s. Five years later, they are battle scarred veterans with great experience.

Question: Where will you be in another 13 years or 20 years. Can you even envision?

Eric: Mentions Moore’s law continuing — Larry, “You’ll have a Google in your pocket” Eric: “It’s tantalizing what will be possible”

Larry: In college, auto-driving car seemed impossible but when you have the data, it’s not.

Eric: Our computer drive our cars better than when you’re drunk. That’s our starting point.”

Larry: Going on waste of time, waste of lives due to human driving. Peopel would be doing other things, “watching TV or looking at ads.” Part of our role is to be a catalyst.

Eric: And privilege of Google is profits big enough can do some of these things.

Question: But how set boundaries to not get lost?

Larry: “Most companies don’t add people as they do new things.” so as adding people, adding businesses. Things also have to be significant, not “we’re going to do horoscopes.”

Question: What are you doing to communicate better than you do now?

Larry: We as important people are trying to improve the internet and how it works. Ask anyone about how info propagates, what people should focus on, “I think it could work better than it does now.” Ask any company or politician, they have similar issues about what people should focus on.

Question: If you had to write a get well card to Yahoo, what would that say?

Schmidt: Google should talk about Google, aside from my snide comments about one of our former competitors. But… Yahoo has been a partner and competitor for a long time. “I think they should sort our their leadership issues” and that’s all I’ll say.

Question: Didn’t catch.

Larry: I have been hassling universities that they should be growing more. Serious issue that people need to be excited to be computer scientists, talking with Will I Am about how to make that sexy. Jokes all the naming conventions and jargon not so cool, jokes “I guess it’s all Eric’s fault.”

Eric: Mindless and stupid policy of immigration of people into America needs to be fixed.

Question from Steven Levy: What’s the biggest threat to Google’s success.

Larry: Loudly, “Google.”

Eric: Problem for company of Google’s scale are always internal.

Larry: Yeah, that’s why I said Google [laughs in audience]

Eric: References a memo from Larry and that large companies are their own worst enemy and how Larry is using his unique talents to force resolution.

Larry: There are no companies that have good slow decisions. There are only good companies that have fast decisions.

Missed a response on Motorola.

Question: Biggest Mistakes?

Larry: We initially didn’t get a Yahoo deal on ads way back when. Debated what to do, didn’t have money to do it, “we made a mistake not having a enough capital”

Eric: Hard to pick good years or bad years. “They’re all good.” Always winning somewhere else. “You have to judge in totally” and I would argue that the story in total is good.

Larry: You can’t run backwards in a company.

Question: Really long statement praising Google.

Eric: Thanks. Remembers about how during Vietnam War, information took so long to move around. If you take the vision that Larry laid out, the changes in society in the next 50 years will be equally dramatic. Larry?

Larry: Yeah. We should get people to their planes [to audience laughter].

And that’s it. Speaking of planes, I have to run to one myself. Sorry for the typos.

Postscript:Aside from being very nice dining partners last night, Amir Efrati of the Wall Street Journal and Claire Cain Miller of the New York Times both have formal write-ups of the talk now. The WSJ one is here; the NYT one is here.

Meanwhile, Peter Kafka over at AllThingsD notes the video is now online. That means you can enjoy today’s talk first hand. The video is here and embedded below. Larry’s declaration about Google needing to worry about Google happens at 38 minutes in.

Click here to learn more.