-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin I agree, publishers only gave up leverage to AMP because they dgaf, but that doesn't make it any less fundamentally dangerous. New relevant entrants to any web space must now face more technical lift and a longer runway to adoption.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -1 🙁
-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin At some point why aren't you just firing all your biz side people and running your site on Blogger? Its insidiousness comes from stopping our capacity to innovate at things we don't even know are possibilities.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin Worse, it robs the readers in the marketplace of the capacity to differentiate on publishers who do care enough and invest in trying to create solutions. When we give up our autonomy to Google in one ways, others follow, that's also a lesson we in media have failed to learn.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -4 🙁
-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin It's even worse because the problems were always fundamentally Google's fault. They control the largest ad server, the largest ad network. They could have solved this issue in a way that preserved the autonomy of the web and made their products better. They chose not to.On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin Which means this isn't a competitive move, it's a monopolizing one. Which makes it even more dangerous.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁
-
palewire pilhofer donohoe ryansholin Google created the problems you describe. They still haven't actually fixed them. They've just used them as leverage to dictate policy at the open web.Permalink On twitter.com
Mood -2 🙁