So, Time has named YouTube one of the biggest tech failures of the last decade. Apparently this is based on the popular, though widely disputed (this comment on Alley Insider knocks down the conventional wisdom very convincingly, for example) calculations out there of their finances. I have to side with New Tee Vee on this one.

Calling them a failure at this point is just absurd. Anyone that knows anything about tech knows that Google and YouTube are trying an insane amount of different things right now to get monetization where it needs to be. Efforts are being made. Have the fruits been borne yet? No – at least as far as we know, but, then, what do we know until a quarterly report? But to say something like “There is a fairly good chance that the search company will never get a return on that investment” as the basis for failure, at this point, is absurd. I love that the journalist won’t even put there money where their mouth is and say “there’s no chance.” And yet they’ve already been branded as a failure.

If there’s a “fairly good” chance Googe WON’T get a return on their investment, logically there’s also a fairly good chance that they WILL. So simple semantics dictate that it’s not a failure YET. May it be in the future? Sure. But who would you believe more on that front? A journalist or, you know, the people that cracked the previously impossible goal of monetizing search, turning a loss leader into a massive profit center (i.e. GOOGLE).

I also have to laugh about how Google is a failure for a mere $1.6B, while it still maintains a dominant position, whereas Yahoo’s FIVE BILLION DOLLAR purchase of Broadcast.com wasn’t a failure. Perhaps they’re just leaving it out on a technicality since the deal was announced 10 years and one month ago and so it’s not in the last decade. I somehow doubt that’s the reason, though.

I honestly don’t understand why people write things like this. My mantra of “assume positive intent” is severely challenged in situations like this. But nor am I conspiracy theorist. Nor do I like to assume people are just dumb.

So what does that leave as an explanation?