The dollar menu will be the company’s largest promotion to date and will span hundreds of products and services across thousands of merchants.

The purpose of the promotion is to draw attention to the company’s new Groupon Now service, which allows people to find instant deals to restaurants and other services based on their location.

Groupon’s next biggest rival, LivingSocial, launched a similar service called LivingSocial Instant last month with a similar promotion in its hometown of Washington, D.C. Within a three-hour lunch period, LivingSocial said it sold 27,000 $1 vouchers.

Given that Groupon’s promotion will last for 24 hours and span many more product categories than meals, you’d expect the numbers to be even higher.

The deal will kick off at 6 am CT tomorrow, and the vouchers will be good only for that day. Users can download the Groupon mobile application, or enter a zip code on the Groupon Now landing page to browse offers. On the site, there’s a variety of categories, including “Eat Something,” “Have Fun,” “Go Shopping,” “Exercise,” “See a Show,” “Get Pampered” and more.

Presumably Groupon is footing the bill for this promotion and isn’t expecting retailers and restaurant owners to take the financial hit.

Groupon VP for Mobile Partnerships Michael Shim said at an event on Monday that he expects the service, which went live in Chicago last week, to be a huge source of future offerings. Already, he said, they have had more than 1,000 merchants sign up to offer real-time deals.

“Mobile is huge for Groupon,” he said. “I believe we could see us doing 50 percent of deals sold/purchased in the next couple of years.”

Before the real-time service launched, Groupon’s CEO Andrew Mason told All Things D’s Kara Swisher: “Until now, no one has had the assets to fix a merchant problem that was viciously subject to a chicken-and-egg situation.”

The expectation with instant deals is that merchants and restaurant owners will be able to better manage the flow of patrons, and invite them in for a discount when business is slow, rather than doing a traditional daily deal that attracts visitors at all times of the day and week, no matter what the merchant’s level of need might be.

Photo credit for dollar-menu art: krossbow

The Apple iOS and Google Android smartphone location-tracking kerfuffle. Smarty-pants commentators. KQED’s “Forum” radio show with interviewer Michael Krasny yesterday.

Go!

Yesterday, Microsoft reported third-quarter earnings, which beat Wall Street expectations, but still had some warning signs (PC non-growth!).

Here are the software giant’s results, all duded up with pretty charts and bullet points to pencil out:

SlidesFY11Q3 –

Software giant Microsoft soundly beat Wall Street expectations in its third-quarter earnings released after the market closed today.

Microsoft said it had revenue of $16.43 billion for the quarter ended Mar. 31, 2011, which was up 13 percent from a year ago. Net income was $5.23 billion, or 61 cents per share, a rise of 31 percent and 36 percent, respectively.

Investors were expecting the Redmond, Wash. tech company to have profits of 56 cents per share, up 45 cents per share in the same quarter last year. Revenue was expected to come in at $16.2 billion.

As usual, Microsoft beating of expectations still has not helped its lackluster stock, which is down almost 14 percent year over year.

Its shares are currently down more than two percent in after-hours trading, to $26.09.

That’s due to worries about PC market growth, in the wake of an explosion of tablet and smartphone devices from competitors such as Apple and Google.

Most of Microsoft’s divisions were up in terms of revenue, especially its Xbox, Kinect and Office businesses. That offsetted slowing PC growth, Microsoft said, as well as a 4.5 percent drop in revenue in its flagship Windows and Windows Live division.

BoomTown will be liveblogging the earnings call at 2:30 pm PT.

Until then, here is the official press release:

letterheadFY11Q3 –

Would it surprise you to know that BoomTown doesn’t really care anymore if TechCrunch editor Michael Arrington sidelines as a blogger while he makes investments in tech companies his tech news site covers?

In a post yesterday, titled “An Update to My Investment Policy,” Arrington made his seemingly cogent arguments that plenty of disclosure made it all “fine,” took one of his typical look-at-me swipes at anyone who dared to question this logic (apparently, we’re crappy “direct” competitors, so we haters have no standing to comment!) and presumably went on his merry investing way.

While I was first irked–because it was an appalling show to many of us cranky standards-insisting whiners–I soon realized Arrington had made a good argument about who he is and, frankly, who he has always been.

In other words, it’s a kind of there-he-goes-again thing, vaguely icky but hardly surprising and completely genuine.

Meanwhile, his new boss, AOL content head Arianna Huffington, pointed me to his post in an email.

When I asked her for an on-the-record comment, as usual, she politely and quickly complied, writing in support of Arrington:

“TechCrunch is committed to transparency. Michael has written about the guidelines he follows–that he rarely writes about companies in which he is an investor, and that, when he does, he clearly discloses this information. The same rules apply when TechCrunch’s writers cover these companies.”

Hold the phone.

Because while I kind of understand where Arrington is coming from, what I don’t understand is how this kind of convenient and on-the-fly rule-making can govern a much larger company whose strongly and repeatedly stated goal by Huffington herself is to create quality journalism.

Since I believed Huffington–whom I like very much as an Internet figure and as a friend–I was confused at what the rules for the whole of AOL content were now.

That’s why I sent her a long new list of questions to answer, which are:

1) What are, if any, the ethical guidelines about making investments for the editorial staff at HuffPo media group properties?

2) Since Arrington now seems to have permission to do so from you, can other editors at AOL properties do the same–that is, make very adjacent investments to what their site covers, as long as they disclose it? For example, can an editor who runs the entertainment site make investments in entertainment companies she/he has coverage responsibility over? (By the way, did you give him permission to make these investments? Did he ask?)

3) Is there anyone who polices what is fair coverage of competitors–i.e. companies competing with companies your editors invest in?

4) If an editor makes investments in a company and someone who works for them writes about that company, does that editor have to recuse himself from the story? Is that even possible?

5) Since you just fired someone for what you called an ethical breach–asking freelancers to work for free and also seemingly defending an attempt to curry favor with an advertiser/client–why is this not an ethical breach?

I had a lot more questions, still unanswered by Huffington, but you can see where this is going.

Simply put, does AOL, which is touting itself as a 21st-century media company, need to have 21st-century rules of the road? Or perhaps not so much?

UPDATE: Now, it is a real clown circus at AOL, with the company declaring that editorial personnel cannot make investments, except Arrington!

“As a rule, in order to avoid conflicts of interests, AOL Huffington Post Media Group editors, writers, and reporters may not have a financial interest in a company or industry that they regularly cover,” AOL said in a statement to Business Insider today, even though I nicely asked for a comment on the issue yesterday. “Arrington operates from a unique position.”

And how! Where do I get such a faboo ethical hall pass from Content Principal Huffington?

I suppose I should go all slouching-towards-Bethlehem here, and wring my hands over this unusual ruling, but what’s the use?

As you might have read: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

How did this all start, especially since I feel like this ridiculous tempest in a Silicon Valley teapot over Arrington’s investment-making might actually be my fault a little bit?

Here’s why:

On Tuesday night around 10 pm (just when I start getting revved up), I wrote a testy email to Arrington’s bosses at AOL–Huffington and CEO Tim Armstrong–as well as the Internet portal’s sharp PR head, asking for a response about what seemed to me to be a glaring conflict of interest at TechCrunch related to new investment activity by Arrington and the site’s coverage of those particular companies he had invested in.

It was all disclosed, of course, but it still felt, as I said, icky.

And, given the recent and loudly stated goal of promoting quality journalism by Huffington–including the recent dismissal of AOL’s Moviefone site editor over what the company considered ethical lapses–it seemed pertinent to ask.

Mostly because I don’t think they actually knew much–if at all–about Arrington’s increasing investing action. Armstrong said as much in an email to me, and Huffington assured me they were going to check it out tout de suite.

But rather than the answer I was waiting on, up popped Arrington’s missive yesterday, which I assume came after his bosses asked for some info on this.

In it, he explained his controversial decision to go back into investing again, in what is clearly a more significant manner.

It was a practice he had abandoned years earlier, apparently after being pecked by detractors for it.

But, dear readers, no more! Let Arrington be Arrington!

And that seems to be a talented blogger with a flare for the dramatic, with a clearly sharply-honed news nose and sassy writing skills, but a scribe who much prefers to be a playah than just an observer and chronicler of that play.

And, after more reflection, I thought: Well, maybe it is a better idea for Arrington to go play with all the boys in Silicon Valley, which would probably be more fun than taking flack for lack of traditional journalistic ethics he never ascribed to in the first place.

I once jokingly nicknamed Arrington Yertle the Turtle after the Dr. Seuss book on one dubious king of one small pond in Sala-Ma-Sond, after he went particularly nuts on the topic of news-embargo breaking.

That diatribe on how he saw news rules–which is to say, there aren’t any that bind him–was vintage Arrington, too. And, after reading his latest post, I suddenly realized that it’s pointless to give a turtle a hard time for not being a fish.

But Huffington is another story. She has put herself in word and deed right into the center of the debate on where news is going on the Web, especially after AOL paid $315 million for her Huffington Post news and opinion site.

Huffington has certainly taken a lot of hits over the years as the HuffPo has grown, some deserved, but she has clearly led an impressive effort.

In fact, I think the cute-kitten and celebrity-loving angle played up by her detractors to dismiss her is silliness, because she and the Huffington Post are clearly more than that and are obviously having a major impact on the future direction of content in the digital age.

But that power she has sought also gives her a responsibility to say exactly what that means on a real and granular and consistent level, beyond the platitudes of wanting to make great journalism that she declares all the time now.

In other words, very specifically: What does Arianna Huffington stand for in regards to journalism? What are her rules and standards and codes? And, perhaps more importantly, what does she not stand up for?

These are questions I hope Huffington–who is really good at smacking back at criticism, too (See: the New York Times’ Bill Keller)–will address in one of her patented blog-xplosions and many times over, too.

Until then, here’s a link to my very long and very detailed ethics disclosure on All Things Digital, which is exactly how our little site thinks it should be in the digital age.

In short, besides signing the Dow Jones Code of Conduct–standard at The Wall Street Journal and other DJ publications–all our editorial staff is required to also pen their own in-plain-English personal and detailed account of disclosures that are pertinent to their job.

(You can read an extensive interview with me on the subject, in fact, which was posted here by Two Bananas Marketing, this week.)

My ATD disclosure is probably the most detailed of all of them, since I gay-married Megan Smith a dozen years ago. She later became a VP at Google, which I cover from time to time, especially related to other companies I focus on more, such as Yahoo.

Most of the time, if you care to read my posts on Google, I am probably tougher and snarkier than not, mostly because I know the search giant from its earliest days.

And, even though I once wrote extensively for the Journal about Google since its founding and before Megan arrived there, I thought it wise to lay it all out in detailed detail.

(By the way, if you want to try to tweak me by asking what News Corp.-owned Fox News’ ethics rules are, I don’t know, as ATD belongs to Dow Jones, which has had them forever. I will say, though, that Roger Ailes often freaks me out.)

In any case, as Arrington preaches, the more disclosure the better, and perhaps I should say even more so here, given the current swirl, by noting explicitly that I garner exactly no financial benefits from my relationship with Megan.

That might seem odd, because she certainly earns more. But I don’t know how much nor do I ask, since we have separate bank accounts and she always pays up–well, almost always–when half the bills are due. While it sounds painfully un-romantic, we only spend overall what each of us can afford equally in an exact 50-50 split.

In addition, I also legally signed away all rights to inheritance–although I had no such marriage rights in the first place, being gay–of Megan’s assets, which are in a trust for her relatives and our sons (for when they are too old to have any fun).

More to the point, I believe this makes me the only person to marry an exec at a hot Silicon Valley company with no prospect of any gold-digging.

Thus, I clearly would make the worst investor ever–not that I ever invest in tech or plan to while I am a reporter covering the sector.

Thank god, I suppose, that Michael Arrington is there to take up the slack.

This last installment in the excellent “Harry Potter” movie series looks like it is going to be the best–at least from the special effects bursting out of this new trailer.

It seems that no innovative digital wizardry was left on the drawing board, from giant flame monsters to sparkly explosions to a lovely delicate floating flower.

Ah, magic.

Enjoy:

April showers bring…well, a bad month for the still-young stock of online content maker Demand Media.

After a successful IPO in January, shares of the Santa Monica, Calif., company had stayed largely in the mid-$20 range, including a high of $27.38.

That is, until this month, when gloom in the form of algorithm changes at Google–with the seemingly dulcet code name of “Panda” and designed to weed out poorly made content–appeared to hit SEO-heavy Demand hard.

At first, the updates by the search giant seemed not to effect Demand as much as other sites. But more recent tweaks have caused traffic to its flagship site, eHow.com, to be much more negatively impacted.

And–presumably due to its search advertising-heavy business model–that worry then caused the stock to plummet from above $24 in the beginning of April to yesterday’s close of just above $15.

Since Demand went public, its shares are now down almost 34 percent.

You can see the situation pretty clearly in this Demand stock chart below (click on the image to make it larger):

Of course, this might all be needless panic on the part of Wall Street investors, but the drop has been all too real.

Not surprisingly, Demand acknowledged the dip, but also countered some third-party reports that were more dire.

It tried to staunch that worry on April 18, with a press release and blog post by its Media and Operations EVP Larry Fitzgibbon, which read in part:

…Google recently made significant search algorithm changes in an update dubbed Panda that has rolled out in various capacities from late February thru mid-April. With respect to Panda’s mid-April update, some of our properties saw Google search referrals move up while other properties, including our largest property eHow.com, saw these referrals go down.

As I said in my prior post, we generally do not comment or speculate on changes by major search engines, as these changes can happen nearly daily. However, recent third-party reports attempting to estimate the impact to our search driven traffic, including one projecting a 2/3rds decline in eHow.com traffic, are so significantly overstated that we decided to comment. As discussed in our press release issued today, we currently expect that in Q2 2011 our owned and operated Content & Media properties will generate year-over-year page view growth comparable to or greater than the year-over-year page view growth reported for Q2 2010. We have also reaffirmed our calendar year 2011 financial guidance in this press release.

That’s why it will be interesting to see what Demand execs will say on its first-quarter earnings call next Thursday, May 5, to explain how it will cope with Panda and–more importantly–what it plans to do to minimize the skadoosh impact on its business and share price.

Earlier this week, BoomTown took the All Things Digital minivan for a spin down to see the new Silicon Valley digs of AOL.

The Palo Alto, Calif., office is helmed by former Yahoo exec Brad “Peanut Butter Manifesto” Garlinghouse, who also turned out to be a very entertaining tour guide.

While there, I also interviewed AOL CEO Tim Armstrong, who was visiting from New York, about his dogged efforts to focus the long-struggling company on premium content and advertising. So far, Wall Street investors are not biting, knocking AOL stock down 29 percent year over year.

Still, AOL continues to plug away, and the cool HQ in tech’s heartland is one manifestation of that, so here’s the video tour:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110427/video-aols-stock-might-be-cold-but-its-new-silicon-valley-hq-is-pretty-cool/feed/ 2 http://allthingsd.com/20110427/viral-video-another-earth-another-life/ http://allthingsd.com/20110427/viral-video-another-earth-another-life/#comments Wed, 27 Apr 2011 07:37:35 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=43162

For anyone who loves the idea of a doppelgänger–someone out there who is you except different–this trailer for much-anticipated indie film, “Another Earth,” is for you.

It’s about astrophysics and accidents and aliens and alienation, on the occasion of the “discovery of a duplicate planet in the solar system.”

Deep stuff!

Here’s the moving movie trailer:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110427/viral-video-another-earth-another-life/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110426/aols-hyperactive-ceo-tim-armstrong-talks-about-whats-next/ http://allthingsd.com/20110426/aols-hyperactive-ceo-tim-armstrong-talks-about-whats-next/#comments Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:37:51 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=43139

AOL CEO Tim Armstrong has certainly had a very busy year, from the continued massive restructuring of the troubled Internet portal to ziggy-zaggy strategic shifts in content and advertising to a series of frenetic acquisitions, capped by the $315 million purchase of the Huffington Post earlier this year.

Also, let’s not forget all those fabulous appearances with the mediagenic Arianna Huffington.

So, it was nice to get Armstrong to calm down for a minute–before he headed off for an off-site in Half Moon Bay, Calif., with his senior staff–and talk about how AOL plans to digest all those things.

That’s especially important, since Wall Street is still wondering about that, too. A lot, in fact, with AOL shares down 29 percent year over year, which is not exactly a shining endorsement by investors of Armstrong’s tenure.

Presumably, he’ll be explaining it all when the company reports its first-quarter earnings in a week, on May 4.

Until then, here’s his video interview with BoomTown:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110426/aols-hyperactive-ceo-tim-armstrong-talks-about-whats-next/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20110426/a-probe-in-your-pocket-heres-apples-steve-jobs-and-googles-andy-rubin-talking-privacy-at-d8-and-dive/ http://allthingsd.com/20110426/a-probe-in-your-pocket-heres-apples-steve-jobs-and-googles-andy-rubin-talking-privacy-at-d8-and-dive/#comments Tue, 26 Apr 2011 15:19:41 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=43052

We’ve done a lot of onstage interviews at our D: All Things Digital conferences with the leaders of tech.

That includes Apple CEO Steve Jobs and Google smartphone kingpin Andy Rubin, both of whom are now dealing with the fallout over a series of reports that iOS and Android smartphones regularly transmit their locations back to both companies.

The privacy implications are obvious.

As Mobilized’s Ina Fried wrote last week:

Questions about what location-based information Android makes use of followed reports that Apple’s iPhone and 3G-equipped iPads are storing a history of location information in an unencrypted database on the device. The Wall Street Journal on Thursday noted that both Android and Apple devices are sending certain location information back to the companies.

In addition to that issue, there are separate issues over the length of time such information is stored, both on the device and by Apple and Google. The iPhone (and 3G-equipped iPads) appear to be storing a long-term directory of where a device has been and keeping that information in an unencrypted database. Google keeps a small cache of such information, to allow mapping and search to work even if a device temporarily loses GPS signal. However, it doesn’t keep a long-term record on the device.

That’s why we cut this video of Jobs and Rubin talking about privacy, specifically and respectively at the eighth D: All Things Digital last summer and at D: Dive Into Mobile in December.

“We take privacy extremely seriously,” said Jobs, who addressed the smartphone location data issue in particular. “A lot of people in [Silicon] Valley think we’re old-fashioned about this.”

And I pressed Rubin on Android being a “probe in your pocket,” and he said its mobile open source operating system did not collect data, although Google services did.

“I think this is a trust and verify,” Rubin noted.

Both Jobs and Rubin make some pretty strong privacy-related statements in these videos, so it will be interesting to see how it all shakes out:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110426/a-probe-in-your-pocket-heres-apples-steve-jobs-and-googles-andy-rubin-talking-privacy-at-d8-and-dive/feed/ 10 http://allthingsd.com/20110426/viral-video-google-inside-out-with-steven-levy/ http://allthingsd.com/20110426/viral-video-google-inside-out-with-steven-levy/#comments Tue, 26 Apr 2011 07:27:14 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=43101 The Churchill Club posted this video of a morning interview session I did with author and journalist Steven Levy last week in Silicon Valley.

Levy talked about his new book, “In the Plex: How Google Thinks, Works, and Shapes Our Lives.”

Here’s his take on the search giant:

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110426/viral-video-google-inside-out-with-steven-levy/feed/ 0