3 ms·
The problem is that publishers do not have a ton of dev resources. Now there are spending time implementing and fixing AMP pages instead of optimizing their reg
by donohoe 7y ago
The problem is that publishers do not have a ton of dev resources. Now there are spending time implementing and fixing AMP pages instead of optimizing their regular pages.
I would stress that amongst most publishers they are focused on the UX experience now unlike they were a few years back (but yeah, there is no shortage of bad news sites still).
Its a little bit of a bitter pill that Google, responsible for all the ads and ultimately the shitty ad experience, invents a new format to restrict publishes from implementing the shitty ad experience that Google allows, and then gets the publishers to built it.
"AMP for Ads" makes sense. AMP in general does not.
- cameronbrown 7y agoGoogle Ads can be implemented in a reasonable way. It doesn't need to be a horrible experience. Greed has made them integrate 5000 other networks and they're the reason adblock is on the rise. I'd wager display ads would have much better return if they weren't abused for years. That being said, it is the fault of these publishers to under invest in developers. It's like not investing in the printing press.
- donohoe 7y agoTrue, but you have little control over the ads load and what they try do do. Bad actors are usually flagged manually and there are typical a ton of genuine mistakes that happen (someone loads unoptimized images etc) A AMP-like framework would catch that.
- manigandham 7y agoAll of those networks run through Google's ad infrastructure and is allowed and encouraged by Google's ad policies. Publishers have the least control over the ads that run.