24 ms·

Facebook bans Adsense in all applications, driving Google out of Facebook.com

356 points by ignifero 16y ago

foobarbazetc 16y ago
All Google have to do is agree to these terms: http://developers.facebook.com/ad_provider_terms/ http://developers.facebook.com/ad_provider_terms/ Should be a piece of cake. :)
- ignifero 16y ago
  quote: "... upon request, the Advertising Provider agrees to provide Facebook the names of and contact information for any employees and/or contractors " may not be so easy
  - joelhaasnoot 16y ago
    Facebook and Google just need to talk. Might be a holler over the fence, but their rift is spreading far and wide. Yes, they are both growing powers on the internet, but for the sake of users and developers alike they need to settle some of their differences. I wouldn't be surprised if this 'contract' move was partly inspired to be able to block Adsense. If so, this is one of the oldest tricks in the book: forcing everyone to agree to something Google can't. Or it was the legal department going overboard.
    - ignifero 16y ago
      I hope so :)
    - rbarooah 16y ago
      I don't think it would be good for developers for Google and Facebook to settle their differences. The last thing we need is the internet in the hands of a giant cartel.
  - dctoedt 16y ago
    > "... upon request, the Advertising Provider agrees to provide Facebook the names of and contact information for any employees and/or contractors " I didn't see anything prohibiting Facebook from selling that information to headhunters, er, recruiting firms.
  - nostrademons 16y ago
    I have the suspicion that FaceBook already has the names and contact information for the vast majority of Google employees and/or contractors.
  - ajtaylor 16y ago
    I'm pretty sure the parent was being sarcastic. :)
- zem 16y ago
  i'm amazed anyone agreed to those terms. i'd be worried that they were so pathetic a company that they couldn't gain business any other way - not exactly confidence-inspiring.
phoboslab 16y ago
So, who has any experience with one of the allowed Ad Providers[1]? I visited a couple of sites from that list, but most of them don't offer _any_ information of what their rates are, how you get paid (per impression vs. per click) or what their ads look like (I don't want overly distracting, blinking ad banners). That is, without signing up first. Finding a good ad provider seems to be exceedingly difficult :/ [1] http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/ http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/
- ignifero 16y ago
  Rockyou ads seems to be the least awful option, but their cpms are less than half as good as adsense
- encoderer 16y ago
  Interesting to me that none of the premier CPA networks made the list. It's completely true that most of these networks run offers that are the 2nd tier "enlargement" and "weight loss" fare -- that sort of thing is probably 75% of their available offers and 99% of their revenue. But a good pub on a top CPA network can make a lot more money than a good pub using Adsense.
  - lftl 16y ago
    I'm interested in looking at some CPA networks for an upcoming project. Would you mind listing who you consider the top CPA networks?
    - AlexC04 16y ago
      Adzoogle, Neverblue - but they'll deny your application if you don't have serious publishing experience. I'm making an assumption that if you don't even know their names you're not going to have enough experience to get approved. Your best bet for finding someone who is big enough to have offers, but not so that they turn people down. Try Commission Junction for a proper 'place CPA banner Ad' type setup. They'll (probably) have you. Once you're reliably making a few hundred to a few thousand a month, then you'll be able to waltz in to Adzoogle and any other affiliate network you want. As it turns out though, a lot of the smaller 'niche markets' are as good or better than the big guys. Maybe sign up for offervault to get the names networks you want to apply to based on the offers that they carry.
ScottWhigham 16y ago
Wait - I must be the only one who doesn't "get it": what does AdSense have to do with Facebook? Can someone explain how AdSense and Facebook advertising worked before The List?
- ignifero 16y ago
  People who make facebook apps can put ad banners in them. Even zynga used to have them some time ago.
- swombat 16y ago
  You could have AdSense ads in your Facebook apps. Now you can't.
- ScottWhigham 16y ago
  Thanks!
- g_island 16y ago
  Any idea roughly how much revenue loss this represents for AdSense?
swombat 16y ago
Somehow people are surprised that Facebook (a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising and is competing for "Top internet dog" spot) and Google (a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising and is competing for "Top internet dog" spot) are not in harmonious agreement when it comes to having each other's ads on their properties. Seems pretty predictable to me. Facebook will do whatever it needs to win the battle. My commentary here: http://swombat.com/2011/3/5/facebook-predictably-bans-adsense-applications http://swombat.com/2011/3/5/facebook-predictably-bans-adsens...
- joelhaasnoot 16y ago
  If Facebook is "a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising", and Google is stealing their revenue according to them, they need to work on their Ad Platform. As a small startup, we did some ads on Facebook with 500,000 displays but only 13 or so clicks (but then again, the ads were cheap to run). Nobody cares about Facebook ads and no one clicks on them, I know I very rarely do.
  - swombat 16y ago
    I'm sure that's true and they're no doubt aware of it. But just because your revenue model needs work doesn't mean you should leave the door wide open to your largest competitor to steal your customers who are building apps on your very own platform! Facebook's move makes perfect sense. I'm surprised they didn't do it sooner.
    - AlexC04 16y ago
      Maybe they should start making their own adsense then. Allow publishers to put ad units on their own websites out in the wild. The ads would be of various standard banner sizes Placed via iFrame so they were contextually relevant to the page you were on, but also socially tied back to the person doing the viewing - cookie tracking the user. Self management system through facebook gets an option for placement on the "extended network" I bet facebook clickrates would go WAY up because the ads would be everywhere. What's even better is people who get "BANNED FROM ADSENSE" would have a real viable alternative. It's not a small task - but - seems the way to go. Facebook Adsense
DuncanIdaho 16y ago
The game is on! Please place your bets! So now we see who is the real powerhouse and if the Facebook is the Google killer hype lives up to its expectations. I place my bet on Google, I also see in my crystal ball that Zuckenberg is going to do something so stupid and greedy that he will shadow Rupert Murdoch. And I also divine that this will happen in next 5 years. By 2016 you will see headlines: Facebook is dead, Larry Page reads obituary. Stock options worthless.
- cabalamat 16y ago
  > I place my bet on Google, I also see in my crystal ball that Zuckenberg is going to do something so stupid and greedy that he will shadow Rupert Murdoch. While I don't think fb will die soon, of the two companies I'd say Google has the far higher staying power (and is more ethical)
  - dstein 16y ago
    Google has the far higher staying power Make no mistake, Google is scared stupid. They know their core business is in the crosshairs of both Facebook and Apple. They won't go down without a fight, but that Google is reaching out in every possible direction clearly shows that they know they need to move fast to avoid the situation Microsoft is now in (irrelevancy).
    - xenophanes 16y ago
      apple has search and mass market ads in their crosshairs...?
      - dstein 16y ago
        Apple definitely wants a piece of the mobile advertising market otherwise they wouldn't have created the iAd network. And I speculate Apple will drop Google from the Safari search box at some point and replace it with a custom location & context aware "mobile search" engine.
- 16y ago
spyrosk 16y ago
I wonder what would happen if google dropped facebook from their search results in retaliation. At least for tech-savvy users it won't pose a problem, but for the rest it will cause major problems (e.g. the RWW article). Will it be legal though?
- swombat 16y ago
  Google can't do that. They'd get sued under anti-trust laws for serious money. Edit: Seriously. Tweaking your search algorithms to the detriment of some providers and to the benefit of others is one thing (that Google does now, and which they won't be sued for). Deliberately removing a direct competitor with as high a profile (and deep pockets) as Facebook is a different kettle of fish. Google owns 84% of the search market globally (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/search-engine-market-share.aspx?qprid=4 http://marketshare.hitslink.com/search-engine-market-share.a...). That is considered a monopoly as far as Anti-Trust laws are concerned.
  - gnaritas 16y ago
    A company the size of Google isn't afraid of a lawsuit, nor has it been established that the search market is something those laws apply to; Google has plenty of room to do whatever they want with their search results including banning Facebook. They can say the same thing Facebook did, they're our competitors and they're stealing our customers.
    - jbrechtel 16y ago
      I'd argue that Google would be terribly afraid of a lawsuit that might establish that the search market is something those laws apply to.
    - recoiledsnake 16y ago
      The reason they won't is that so far Google hasn't overtly manipulated results(not in a highly publicized way atleast) and that's why there is a lot of trust on them. Once it's proved that they're doing this, it's legitimacy will go down big time. Bing can trumpet that Google doesn't show any results for THE social networking site etc.
thefreshteapot 16y ago
With the google app store coming into effect with html5 games(and apps), those game creators on fb maybe lured or tempted into trying their games in a new segment. I for one use facebook less and less. Purely as a place to go when I want to communicate with a friend who likes fbmail over email.
TallGuyShort 16y ago
There goes the business plan for the 4 "businesses" so far this year that have asked me to build their website that's going to compete with Facebook. That's a shame. They all seemed so talented. </sarcasm>
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
ddbbcc 16y ago
It is facebook. What would you expect? It is the same thing if Google didn't allowed facebook in their search results. Both "own" a monopoly and shouldn't be allowed to do such things.
- recoiledsnake 16y ago
  It's not the same. Facebook is a social networking site. Google advertises to be a single stop indexer of all web sites.
DanielBMarkham 16y ago
Warning: rant ahead (pet topic) When HTML came out, it was purely academic. People said sure, it's cool, but how could you ever make money from just text with pictures and little links? Now we have the answer: you create content -- text, video, pictures, games, etc -- that actively interacts with the user. Then, if you're smart, you make it so they have to "visit" your site to see this content, and, once there, they can only see whatever you choose. It's called a walled garden. All is beauty and loveliness. As long as you stay within the walls and don't piss off the gardener. But this idea of "visiting" a site is only there because people type some text into a navigation bar and the browser loads material from a certain server. There's no reason or law that says I have to type in an address -- or that once I type in an address I am limited to seeing things from one server only. There's not even a reason I should see the information in some certain format or another. Why not type in "weather" and see various weather forecasts put out by various sources? After all, I want weather, not Joe's weather or Amit's weather. With all due respect to Joe and Amit, weather is weather. Google is already doing this, of course, but only as a gateway. And they've got their own walled garden they're working on. Play by the rules and you'll appear on Google -- exactly where we want and alongside ads we feel are relevant to your page (and ads we make money from) But what if you took the "location" idea completely away from HTML? Then you wouldn't be "visiting" anybody's site, and there wouldn't be any gardens to build. What if you simply interacted semantically with your computer and it gathered information from various sources and condensed it into plain text for you to consume? Gone would be "site stickiness", "addictive gaming", and "landing pages" and all sorts of other nonsense that's grown up around the idea of internet locations. You could still consume multimedia and interactive material, of course, but only under terms you set, not terms the various site owners set. Perhaps you would want no ads, or no hyperlinks, or a time limit each day that would be acceptable for you to play games. This puts the user back in control of their internet activities, the way it should be. It destroys many business models, but the internet is data-based, and it must evolve. I do not want the same internet in 2050 as we have now. It also gets back to the true meaning of HTML -- separating the data from the presentation. The designers of HTML realized that the purpose was structuring the data so that it relevantly linked, not creating a walled amusement park in the form of Facebook. The curating and presentation of data is inherently a personal matter and best not left to others. We either fix this problem or it will continue to get worse, as recent events keep showing.
plusbryan 16y ago
This will not end well.
eddieplan9 16y ago
I know i might get downvoted. But, how is this different from places that show a sign saying "no outside drinks or food"? It's not like fb has a monopoly advantage in anything. On the other hand, google has a near monopoly in online ads. This might be a good thing for smaller ads companies.
- bmelton 16y ago
  Eh, the sign isn't "no outside drinks or food" -- it's basically "all outside drinks and food welcomed, except Coke. We friggin hate Coke."
  - jrockway 16y ago
    And would you really be surprised to see a sign like that in Pepsi's cafeteria?
ohashi 16y ago
I see an arbitrage opportunity! Create ad company, get into facebook list, backfill with Google ads.
Slimy 16y ago
More information: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-lists-official-ad-providers-google-microsoft-missing/420 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-lists-official-a...
suitcase 16y ago
I think this is pretty bad form on both sides. On Facebook's part, they shouldn't be using a "certification process" to try and exclude competitors from making money from their app ecosystem. From what I can tell, the developers trying to make a living creating apps and even the Facebook platform itself can ill afford this sort of disruption right now. This sort of action will hurt the developers who invested in your platform the most. On the Google side, they should be thinking about how to structure some sort of revshare agreement to help app developers get back to using Adsense and getting on the list of networks blessed for Connect sites. Concerning arbitrary and unexplained actions, participating in Adsense alone will get you subject to more than a few of them. Consider what will happen to you as a publisher if you share your eCPM or a screenshot of your Adsense account. And the same thing with advertisers when they have their creatives pulled for no apparent reason. In other words, both sides use bully tactics when it suits them, and in this case, a peace treaty would probably be more mutually profitable than a prolonged slugfest. But it's not like corporate egos haven't fueled destructive behavior before...
ryanelkins 16y ago
Google also recently removed Facebook contacts from Android with the Gingerbread 2.3.3 update. Facebook had an exemption up to that point where they played by different rules with regards to how/where contacts are stored when syncing contacts using the Facebook app. It will be interesting to see how this back and forth goes.
moblivu 16y ago
It's simple all the money passes through Google; they don't have any control. Now they want to see or even collect some of that money; they want control. Result, an army of angry developers, Google loses a lot of clients, a war has begun between two of the biggest web companies.
theturtle32 16y ago
You guys realize the linked forum thread is from all the way back in 2008? :-)
- SoftwareMaven 16y ago
  The "drop dead" date for prohibiting AdSense was not in 2008, it was on 2/28/2011.
EGreg 16y ago
The real question is, does this include websites that simply USE facebook APIs? If so, it would be extremely uncompetitive :)
- patja 16y ago
  No it doesn't include them. It only applies to apps on Facebook.com. Also known as canvas apps or iframe apps. Connect apps also known as Facebook for Websites are still free to use AdSense...which is why I converted my app to be a Facebook for Websites app this week.
mkramlich 16y ago
Facebook lets you use the fruit of their labor for free. Then they do something to encourage revenue growth. But you're free to opt out (you don't have to make a Facebook app, or page, or place ads there, etc.) One may not like it but it's well within their rights to do it. Beggars can't be choosers. And vote with your feet. (And believe me I've hated some of Apple's walled garden decisions too, and yes I'm already voting with my feet there: more webapp-centric and, to lesser extent, Android.)
originalgeek 16y ago
Poor Google, using up their favors at the DOJ to go after MPEG-LA, when this is a more direct threat to their business, and also more likely to bear fruit in an antitrust probe.
entrepreneurial 16y ago
If facebook is going to ban google, it should provide its own revenue possibility for its app dev's.
rbanffy 16y ago
Any good experiences with the providers listed? http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/ http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/
csomar 16y ago
Any official announcement? I feel that Google don't like that their ads are displayed the way most of the Facebook app developers do (with many other ads, driving people to click and very low CPC).

356 points by ignifero 16y ago

All Google have to do is agree to these terms: http://developers.facebook.com/ad_provider_terms/ http://developers.facebook.com/ad_provider_terms/ Should be a piece of cake. :)

ignifero 16y ago
quote: "... upon request, the Advertising Provider agrees to provide Facebook the names of and contact information for any employees and/or contractors " may not be so easy
- joelhaasnoot 16y ago
  Facebook and Google just need to talk. Might be a holler over the fence, but their rift is spreading far and wide. Yes, they are both growing powers on the internet, but for the sake of users and developers alike they need to settle some of their differences. I wouldn't be surprised if this 'contract' move was partly inspired to be able to block Adsense. If so, this is one of the oldest tricks in the book: forcing everyone to agree to something Google can't. Or it was the legal department going overboard.
  - ignifero 16y ago
    I hope so :)
  - rbarooah 16y ago
    I don't think it would be good for developers for Google and Facebook to settle their differences. The last thing we need is the internet in the hands of a giant cartel.
- dctoedt 16y ago
  > "... upon request, the Advertising Provider agrees to provide Facebook the names of and contact information for any employees and/or contractors " I didn't see anything prohibiting Facebook from selling that information to headhunters, er, recruiting firms.
- nostrademons 16y ago
  I have the suspicion that FaceBook already has the names and contact information for the vast majority of Google employees and/or contractors.
- ajtaylor 16y ago
  I'm pretty sure the parent was being sarcastic. :)
zem 16y ago
i'm amazed anyone agreed to those terms. i'd be worried that they were so pathetic a company that they couldn't gain business any other way - not exactly confidence-inspiring.

phoboslab 16y ago

So, who has any experience with one of the allowed Ad Providers[1]? I visited a couple of sites from that list, but most of them don't offer _any_ information of what their rates are, how you get paid (per impression vs. per click) or what their ads look like (I don't want overly distracting, blinking ad banners). That is, without signing up first. Finding a good ad provider seems to be exceedingly difficult :/ [1] http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/ http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/

ignifero 16y ago
Rockyou ads seems to be the least awful option, but their cpms are less than half as good as adsense
encoderer 16y ago
Interesting to me that none of the premier CPA networks made the list. It's completely true that most of these networks run offers that are the 2nd tier "enlargement" and "weight loss" fare -- that sort of thing is probably 75% of their available offers and 99% of their revenue. But a good pub on a top CPA network can make a lot more money than a good pub using Adsense.
- lftl 16y ago
  I'm interested in looking at some CPA networks for an upcoming project. Would you mind listing who you consider the top CPA networks?
  - AlexC04 16y ago
    Adzoogle, Neverblue - but they'll deny your application if you don't have serious publishing experience. I'm making an assumption that if you don't even know their names you're not going to have enough experience to get approved. Your best bet for finding someone who is big enough to have offers, but not so that they turn people down. Try Commission Junction for a proper 'place CPA banner Ad' type setup. They'll (probably) have you. Once you're reliably making a few hundred to a few thousand a month, then you'll be able to waltz in to Adzoogle and any other affiliate network you want. As it turns out though, a lot of the smaller 'niche markets' are as good or better than the big guys. Maybe sign up for offervault to get the names networks you want to apply to based on the offers that they carry.

ScottWhigham 16y ago

Wait - I must be the only one who doesn't "get it": what does AdSense have to do with Facebook? Can someone explain how AdSense and Facebook advertising worked before The List?

ignifero 16y ago
People who make facebook apps can put ad banners in them. Even zynga used to have them some time ago.
swombat 16y ago
You could have AdSense ads in your Facebook apps. Now you can't.
ScottWhigham 16y ago
Thanks!
g_island 16y ago
Any idea roughly how much revenue loss this represents for AdSense?

swombat 16y ago

Somehow people are surprised that Facebook (a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising and is competing for "Top internet dog" spot) and Google (a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising and is competing for "Top internet dog" spot) are not in harmonious agreement when it comes to having each other's ads on their properties. Seems pretty predictable to me. Facebook will do whatever it needs to win the battle. My commentary here: http://swombat.com/2011/3/5/facebook-predictably-bans-adsense-applications http://swombat.com/2011/3/5/facebook-predictably-bans-adsens...

joelhaasnoot 16y ago
If Facebook is "a company that makes most of its revenues from advertising", and Google is stealing their revenue according to them, they need to work on their Ad Platform. As a small startup, we did some ads on Facebook with 500,000 displays but only 13 or so clicks (but then again, the ads were cheap to run). Nobody cares about Facebook ads and no one clicks on them, I know I very rarely do.
- swombat 16y ago
  I'm sure that's true and they're no doubt aware of it. But just because your revenue model needs work doesn't mean you should leave the door wide open to your largest competitor to steal your customers who are building apps on your very own platform! Facebook's move makes perfect sense. I'm surprised they didn't do it sooner.
  - AlexC04 16y ago
    Maybe they should start making their own adsense then. Allow publishers to put ad units on their own websites out in the wild. The ads would be of various standard banner sizes Placed via iFrame so they were contextually relevant to the page you were on, but also socially tied back to the person doing the viewing - cookie tracking the user. Self management system through facebook gets an option for placement on the "extended network" I bet facebook clickrates would go WAY up because the ads would be everywhere. What's even better is people who get "BANNED FROM ADSENSE" would have a real viable alternative. It's not a small task - but - seems the way to go. Facebook Adsense

DuncanIdaho 16y ago

The game is on! Please place your bets! So now we see who is the real powerhouse and if the Facebook is the Google killer hype lives up to its expectations. I place my bet on Google, I also see in my crystal ball that Zuckenberg is going to do something so stupid and greedy that he will shadow Rupert Murdoch. And I also divine that this will happen in next 5 years. By 2016 you will see headlines: Facebook is dead, Larry Page reads obituary. Stock options worthless.

cabalamat 16y ago
> I place my bet on Google, I also see in my crystal ball that Zuckenberg is going to do something so stupid and greedy that he will shadow Rupert Murdoch. While I don't think fb will die soon, of the two companies I'd say Google has the far higher staying power (and is more ethical)
- dstein 16y ago
  Google has the far higher staying power Make no mistake, Google is scared stupid. They know their core business is in the crosshairs of both Facebook and Apple. They won't go down without a fight, but that Google is reaching out in every possible direction clearly shows that they know they need to move fast to avoid the situation Microsoft is now in (irrelevancy).
  - xenophanes 16y ago
    apple has search and mass market ads in their crosshairs...?
    - dstein 16y ago
      Apple definitely wants a piece of the mobile advertising market otherwise they wouldn't have created the iAd network. And I speculate Apple will drop Google from the Safari search box at some point and replace it with a custom location & context aware "mobile search" engine.
16y ago

spyrosk 16y ago

I wonder what would happen if google dropped facebook from their search results in retaliation. At least for tech-savvy users it won't pose a problem, but for the rest it will cause major problems (e.g. the RWW article). Will it be legal though?

swombat 16y ago
Google can't do that. They'd get sued under anti-trust laws for serious money. Edit: Seriously. Tweaking your search algorithms to the detriment of some providers and to the benefit of others is one thing (that Google does now, and which they won't be sued for). Deliberately removing a direct competitor with as high a profile (and deep pockets) as Facebook is a different kettle of fish. Google owns 84% of the search market globally (http://marketshare.hitslink.com/search-engine-market-share.aspx?qprid=4 http://marketshare.hitslink.com/search-engine-market-share.a...). That is considered a monopoly as far as Anti-Trust laws are concerned.
- gnaritas 16y ago
  A company the size of Google isn't afraid of a lawsuit, nor has it been established that the search market is something those laws apply to; Google has plenty of room to do whatever they want with their search results including banning Facebook. They can say the same thing Facebook did, they're our competitors and they're stealing our customers.
  - jbrechtel 16y ago
    I'd argue that Google would be terribly afraid of a lawsuit that might establish that the search market is something those laws apply to.
  - recoiledsnake 16y ago
    The reason they won't is that so far Google hasn't overtly manipulated results(not in a highly publicized way atleast) and that's why there is a lot of trust on them. Once it's proved that they're doing this, it's legitimacy will go down big time. Bing can trumpet that Google doesn't show any results for THE social networking site etc.

thefreshteapot 16y ago

With the google app store coming into effect with html5 games(and apps), those game creators on fb maybe lured or tempted into trying their games in a new segment. I for one use facebook less and less. Purely as a place to go when I want to communicate with a friend who likes fbmail over email.

TallGuyShort 16y ago

There goes the business plan for the 4 "businesses" so far this year that have asked me to build their website that's going to compete with Facebook. That's a shame. They all seemed so talented. </sarcasm>

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

ddbbcc 16y ago

It is facebook. What would you expect? It is the same thing if Google didn't allowed facebook in their search results. Both "own" a monopoly and shouldn't be allowed to do such things.

recoiledsnake 16y ago
It's not the same. Facebook is a social networking site. Google advertises to be a single stop indexer of all web sites.

DanielBMarkham 16y ago

Warning: rant ahead (pet topic) When HTML came out, it was purely academic. People said sure, it's cool, but how could you ever make money from just text with pictures and little links? Now we have the answer: you create content -- text, video, pictures, games, etc -- that actively interacts with the user. Then, if you're smart, you make it so they have to "visit" your site to see this content, and, once there, they can only see whatever you choose. It's called a walled garden. All is beauty and loveliness. As long as you stay within the walls and don't piss off the gardener. But this idea of "visiting" a site is only there because people type some text into a navigation bar and the browser loads material from a certain server. There's no reason or law that says I have to type in an address -- or that once I type in an address I am limited to seeing things from one server only. There's not even a reason I should see the information in some certain format or another. Why not type in "weather" and see various weather forecasts put out by various sources? After all, I want weather, not Joe's weather or Amit's weather. With all due respect to Joe and Amit, weather is weather. Google is already doing this, of course, but only as a gateway. And they've got their own walled garden they're working on. Play by the rules and you'll appear on Google -- exactly where we want and alongside ads we feel are relevant to your page (and ads we make money from) But what if you took the "location" idea completely away from HTML? Then you wouldn't be "visiting" anybody's site, and there wouldn't be any gardens to build. What if you simply interacted semantically with your computer and it gathered information from various sources and condensed it into plain text for you to consume? Gone would be "site stickiness", "addictive gaming", and "landing pages" and all sorts of other nonsense that's grown up around the idea of internet locations. You could still consume multimedia and interactive material, of course, but only under terms you set, not terms the various site owners set. Perhaps you would want no ads, or no hyperlinks, or a time limit each day that would be acceptable for you to play games. This puts the user back in control of their internet activities, the way it should be. It destroys many business models, but the internet is data-based, and it must evolve. I do not want the same internet in 2050 as we have now. It also gets back to the true meaning of HTML -- separating the data from the presentation. The designers of HTML realized that the purpose was structuring the data so that it relevantly linked, not creating a walled amusement park in the form of Facebook. The curating and presentation of data is inherently a personal matter and best not left to others. We either fix this problem or it will continue to get worse, as recent events keep showing.

plusbryan 16y ago

This will not end well.

eddieplan9 16y ago

I know i might get downvoted. But, how is this different from places that show a sign saying "no outside drinks or food"? It's not like fb has a monopoly advantage in anything. On the other hand, google has a near monopoly in online ads. This might be a good thing for smaller ads companies.

bmelton 16y ago
Eh, the sign isn't "no outside drinks or food" -- it's basically "all outside drinks and food welcomed, except Coke. We friggin hate Coke."
- jrockway 16y ago
  And would you really be surprised to see a sign like that in Pepsi's cafeteria?

ohashi 16y ago

I see an arbitrage opportunity! Create ad company, get into facebook list, backfill with Google ads.

Slimy 16y ago

More information: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-lists-official-ad-providers-google-microsoft-missing/420 http://www.zdnet.com/blog/facebook/facebook-lists-official-a...

suitcase 16y ago

I think this is pretty bad form on both sides. On Facebook's part, they shouldn't be using a "certification process" to try and exclude competitors from making money from their app ecosystem. From what I can tell, the developers trying to make a living creating apps and even the Facebook platform itself can ill afford this sort of disruption right now. This sort of action will hurt the developers who invested in your platform the most. On the Google side, they should be thinking about how to structure some sort of revshare agreement to help app developers get back to using Adsense and getting on the list of networks blessed for Connect sites. Concerning arbitrary and unexplained actions, participating in Adsense alone will get you subject to more than a few of them. Consider what will happen to you as a publisher if you share your eCPM or a screenshot of your Adsense account. And the same thing with advertisers when they have their creatives pulled for no apparent reason. In other words, both sides use bully tactics when it suits them, and in this case, a peace treaty would probably be more mutually profitable than a prolonged slugfest. But it's not like corporate egos haven't fueled destructive behavior before...

ryanelkins 16y ago

Google also recently removed Facebook contacts from Android with the Gingerbread 2.3.3 update. Facebook had an exemption up to that point where they played by different rules with regards to how/where contacts are stored when syncing contacts using the Facebook app. It will be interesting to see how this back and forth goes.

moblivu 16y ago

It's simple all the money passes through Google; they don't have any control. Now they want to see or even collect some of that money; they want control. Result, an army of angry developers, Google loses a lot of clients, a war has begun between two of the biggest web companies.

theturtle32 16y ago

You guys realize the linked forum thread is from all the way back in 2008? :-)

SoftwareMaven 16y ago
The "drop dead" date for prohibiting AdSense was not in 2008, it was on 2/28/2011.

EGreg 16y ago

The real question is, does this include websites that simply USE facebook APIs? If so, it would be extremely uncompetitive :)

patja 16y ago
No it doesn't include them. It only applies to apps on Facebook.com. Also known as canvas apps or iframe apps. Connect apps also known as Facebook for Websites are still free to use AdSense...which is why I converted my app to be a Facebook for Websites app this week.

mkramlich 16y ago

Facebook lets you use the fruit of their labor for free. Then they do something to encourage revenue growth. But you're free to opt out (you don't have to make a Facebook app, or page, or place ads there, etc.) One may not like it but it's well within their rights to do it. Beggars can't be choosers. And vote with your feet. (And believe me I've hated some of Apple's walled garden decisions too, and yes I'm already voting with my feet there: more webapp-centric and, to lesser extent, Android.)

originalgeek 16y ago

Poor Google, using up their favors at the DOJ to go after MPEG-LA, when this is a more direct threat to their business, and also more likely to bear fruit in an antitrust probe.

entrepreneurial 16y ago

If facebook is going to ban google, it should provide its own revenue possibility for its app dev's.

rbanffy 16y ago

Any good experiences with the providers listed? http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/ http://developers.facebook.com/adproviders/

csomar 16y ago

Any official announcement? I feel that Google don't like that their ads are displayed the way most of the Facebook app developers do (with many other ads, driving people to click and very low CPC).