With all respect, I'm afraid that most of what you are saying is incorrect. Google is a "publisher" but not in any way that uniquely competes with ZH. No Googl

With all respect, I'm afraid that most of what you are saying is incorrect. Google is a "publisher" but not in any way that uniquely competes with ZH. No Google property takes traffic from ZH, for ZH's audience. ZH is a well known brand, long established, with huge proportion of return visitors and inbound link traffic. Google is also very much not the only game in town for advertising. They are the default choice for many publishers but there are many, many, many monetization partners, a high degree of liquidity and flexibility, and a brand as well known and with as loyal and wealthy an audience as ZH is ideal for many monetization strategies that are much more valuable than plain old Google ads. I understand the anti-trust framing and the "teamed up" with NBC business and conflict of interest and so forth, but with all respect, that amounts to conspiracy theory/faulty inference thinking. It is not reality. Google's lawyers are not concerned about any of this. Ads is just a monetization tool. Advertising is ALWAYS sensitive to messaging and reputation and issues around implied endorsements and so forth. People confuse that with speech, but it is not. It is about b2b contractual relationships with both sides being free to end them at any time. Ads are not "pipes" like ISP service (or arguably CDN). They are not search, not publishing. Just money. Cheers.