Wow, a lot in the feeds today. What I found particularly worthy:
Digesting Google’s PPA ads, from TechCrunch. I am still digesting. This is good analysis. I am ambivalent about the new text link ad unit, so is Mike. “They’ve crossed a hazy ethical line here” he says. The NYT covers it but does not dwell on the link ad unit.
Yahoo, Google Revs are similiar from SEW. Yahoo is in no way out of this game. It’s two ends to the middle, CPA/C to CPM.
Scoble continues to beat on his old employer’s search results.
Kedrosky is a robot spammer, Google says! Slow down, Paul!
is Web 2.0 Over? from Venturebeat. Analysis of venture funding.
Google unveils the Plus Box. Click on the “plus sign” and you get more data. Innaresting.
The Kinderstart case is dismissed, Matt reports. Earlier coverage.
Where the ad growth is, from Lost Remote. Er…surprised?
Clarification from Google on net neutrality via GigaOm. This is not an easy issue to clarify…
Digg on Google clarifying its plan with phones. No hardware, folks.
3 thoughts on “Worth the Read”
Google can not convince the public that it feels secure about this decision when the blogger can not even be allowed to take comments.
It becomes just a mere PR piece, when the public can not debate the merits on the Blog that is reporting the story.
This type of pre censorship does no one any good, and reflects VERY badly on Google’s Legal team.
Contoversial and frank comments by SearchEnginesWeb have also been steadily removed over the past year. Possibly, Google’s Lawyers feel comments will be used by litigants in lawsuits against them. But you don’t run away from public perceptions – you debate intelligently!
It is kind of like this: For web publishers, first we have the Google Adsense “I’ll give you the unspecified rev share / don’t worry your little head approach.” Now even more of the risk is shifted on to the publishers with the new CPA model… Someone stand up and scream already!
Why can’t Google, with its legions of smart people, figure out how to give advertisers the pricing flexibility they want (CPM, CPC, CPA) while **at the same time** giving publishers pricing control (CPM). Let Google figure out the math.
We’ve offered this “name your price” model to publishers with great success and I fail to see, given an alternative like this, why any publisher would rather do Google’s grunt work.
Your article is one of the most classical style, when I read once, I have been deeply in love with them, you look forward to more perfect work.