Google earlier this year stopped requiring publishers to use AMP in order to score Top Story placements. “All those years, all those Googlers, devs, & SEOs defending AMP… And this is just the tip of the iceberg,” wrote SparkToro founder Rand Fishkin on Twitter, sparking a thread of outrage and disgust over the allegations.
The complaint, however, claims the speed benefits are both exaggerated and manipulated due to Google’s alleged throttling of non-AMP pages. Using AMP wreaks havoc on internal analytics, too, since it makes it very difficult to track users migrating across a site’s AMP and non-AMP pages. The tradeoff meant improved user experience on mobile and a greater likelihood of showing up in Top Stories, a placement that can yield significant traffic. AMP requires us to create versions of our content on servers we do not own using templates we have limited control over. The premise itself goes against publisher instincts. The complaint is not wrong that publishers have held a love/hate relationship with AMP. Google also denied this, pointing to a January blog post where it said, “Engineers at Google designed AMP in partnership with publishers and other tech companies to help webpages load faster and improve the user experience on mobile devices-not to harm header bidding.”Ī damning indictment of AMP. Google then used its power in the search market to effectively force publishers into using AMP,” the complaint alleges. “To respond to the threat of header bidding, Google created Accelerated Mobile Pages (“AMP”), a framework for developing mobile web pages, and made AMP essentially incompatible with JavaScript and header bidding. However, header bidding requires publishers to place JavaScript on their pages to trigger the auction, and AMP pages do not support that JavaScript. Publishers generally like header bidding because of its potential for higher revenue and transparency. It’s a method meant to sidestep Google’s “waterfall” approach to bidding, which often favors Google’s ad servers. At the center of the issue is header bidding, an advertising practice where publishers can place their ad inventory on numerous ad exchanges at once.
“We will strongly defend ourselves from baseless claims in court.” There is vigorous competition in online advertising, which has reduced ad tech fees, and expanded options for publishers and advertisers,” she said. “In reality, our advertising technologies help websites and apps fund their content, and enable small businesses to reach customers around the world. Google spokeswoman Allie Bodack, however, called the lawsuit “riddled with inaccuracies,” in an emailed statement to Search Engine Land. However, a ruling by a Manhattan judge forced the release of the mostly unredacted version on Friday. The lawsuit, which cites internal Google documents, was originally filed on Sept. Internally, Google employees grappled with ‘how to justify making something slower,'” according to the complaint. “‘Header Bidding can often increase latency of web pages and create security flaws when executed incorrectly,’ Google falsely claimed. “Throttling non-AMP ads slows down header bidding, which Google then uses to denigrate header bidding for being too slow,” it reads. The complaint, which is led by the State of Texas on behalf of 16 mostly Republican states, goes so far as to allege Google even throttled the load speed of pages not using AMP in order to give a “nice comparative boost” to AMP. Newly unredacted complaints against Google allege that the search giant’s Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP), which the company claimed would “dramatically improve” mobile web performance when it launched in 2015, was in fact a scheme to coerce publishers into using the format in order to limit advertising dollars not spent on its own ad exchanges.
0 kommentar(er)
