Blogs and Stories
Google's Velvet Rope
Paul Sakuma / AP Photo
Rather than make its new telephone service available to the masses, Google Voice will be invitation only. Douglas Rushkoff asks if you block them, will they come?
Ubiquity ain't what it used to be.
For Google, the problem with being a free, abundant, and rather infinite set of services is that it's hard to create much of a stir about anything. There are so many major software service options under the "more" menu on the Gmail page that they've had to go and add a final item called "even more." Blogger, Calendar, Docs, Earth, Health, YouTube, Chrome—it's all there, all the time, for everyone.
While that may be great for a 21st-century technology movement dedicated to offering the infinity of the info-sphere to the masses, it's not necessarily great for a 21st-century technology company looking to increase value for its shareholders. To do that, a company needs some mystique, some barriers to entry: a virtual velvet rope that—just like the one used by a nightclub—has less to do with any real threat of overcrowding than the need to create the illusion of exclusivity. If you block them, they will come.
Google gave away everything from search to the Android cellphone platform, and yet they’re now regarded with the same suspicion as Microsoft during the 1990s “browser wars.”
That's why Google has decided to slowly mete out the "invites" to its new Google Voice telephone service. Current users (a select group of people who either have friends at Google or used the original service, Grand Central, before it was acquired) are each being given a few invites over the coming weeks. They may then use them to invite their best or most appreciative friends to use the service. Without an invite, you can't get in. While Google did this before when first launching the Gmail service, invites were so plentiful that they amounted to little more than a formality—or even just a way to slow the creation of spam accounts. This time, it feels much more about exclusivity.
From the desperate onslaught of requests now flooding the Twitterverse, it's a strategy that appears to be working. Bloggers and online columnists are busy holding contests through which their readers can compete for the coveted invites. And of course, the more appetite Google can create in this way, the more buzz, excitement, and brand value they can create for themselves. It is Social Marketing 101: Find a way to get people to spread word of your new product or service, so that you don't have to advertise it yourself. Only in this case, the sinister beauty behind the strategy is to give those crowd-sourced armies of word-of-mouth advertisers something for their trouble—the ability to decide who else gets into the club.
It's hard to get too outraged by this. On the one hand, Google claims it wants to ramp up its new services at a measured pace, to make sure servers don't suddenly get overloaded by millions of users trying to make or receive phone calls through servers and switchers that have only contended with a trickle of activity until now. While I have a hard time bringing myself to believe Google's engineers and server technicians haven't already built a system capable of handling the entire world's telephone needs from the get-go, I can see why they'd act like this, all the same.
Google's technologies are either taken for granted, or attacked as predatory. No sooner do they develop a suite of free cloud computing services that work—such as Google Docs—than they are accused of breaking the software industry's business model. They give away everything from search to the Android cellphone platform, and yet they're now regarded with the same suspicion as Microsoft during the 1990s “browser wars” (another case of a company getting in the most trouble when it tried to give something away).








naw... settle down. they did this with google mail and other services as well, remember? it's an easy IT way of ramping up involvement while building infrastructure and support to handle the volume. take an advil and a nap.
Exactly. That's in the third paragraph, as well as an explanation of why this might be different. I think you'd like this piece.
True. Read whole article first...
You waste my time, and others, by commenting on an article that you DIDN'T READ.
This entire article is completely incorrect. Anyone can request and get an invite. Go to the Google Voice home page and just request one! I got my "invite" in June; my husband got it a week after he requested it. I know no one at Google.
Did it dawn on you that you are the demographic they are seeking? That others will be denied. Because two people requested and received all will?
I'm nobody special and I had no trouble getting an invite as well. perhaps it was based on my use of other google services... regardless, getting behind the velvet rope on this one was really no big deal.
Well, I for one, salivate to the possibilities o making money ridding on their platform and selling my services through their cloud. I can see why there is a "static" charge around open apps whenever they enable us to bypass the big man's expensive infrastucture and compete with them. Love you Google. Only hope you can one day help us bypass the banks.
I certainly don't have an "in" with Google and was not a Grand Central user, but I got my invite about a month ago. I'm not sure how exclusive this really is - could it be that Google has an in with the Daily Beast? Sounds like this article is just trying to create buzz.
Ah yes, the anti-market market. Perfected by Bill Hicks not long ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
OOOOOhhhh, you got an invite!
***backing up so as to give stephschiff room***
Hiya Steph - I've come to recognize your posts.
Hiya Rush - recognize yours as well!
Rdschenkel - the point was that it ISN'T a big deal to get one. I'm not wealthy, have no "in" to anyone in the industry, am not a social network "hub," etc. I can think of no reason I would get one if it isn't easily accessible to everyone.
I thought my post made it pretty clear that I did not find my invitation special - the whole point of my post was that TDB was trying to create buzz and that velvet rope where none exists.
You can request an invite on the Google Voice page. I did it a week ago and was emailed a link to create an account last night.
I suspect that Google's invite program is some sort of social marketing drive.
Depending on where the google voice service is in terms of beta testing and bug fixing, google probably wanted to limit use of the program to those who actively show an interest in it, and are thus more likely to provide feedback to them.
And a week is a decade in Internet years....
I think it's a social marketing drive, too. And really the only kind of marketing they can do if they don't want to resort to ads (which I don't think they should).
Google Wave is even more restricted right now, though the service seems like it would be easier than Voice to support.
The Velvet Rope, from my use of both of these services, has very little to do with marketing and a great deal to do with application maturity. I have tried to use both Google Voice and Wave in my everyday process and neither product is mature enough to be a)reliable and b)without odd non-vital glitchtes. This is the sort of environment that is perfect for beta testers and users - people who are willing to put up with crap in order to experience the possibility rather than the full-fleshed product. Both programs are massive new directions for the company, which brings with it massive hardward and software based overhead. Yes, the velvet rope is there and it absolutely helps google in the market, but it is not artificial and is necessary to avoid having a bumrush of people try these product and pass them off as useless or shoddy because they just aren't done yet.
google is elitist. You cant contact them to save your life. Their search returns incorrect results and I have tried and tried to get them to correct this using their "dont call us will call you" web form. Repeated denials tho the problem still exists.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.