|Google will syndicate the program using its AdSense advertising system to thousands of Web sites that are predetermined to be gathering spots for Mr. MacFarlane’s target audience, typically young men. |
If I understand right instead of getting AdSense ads you get a video with ads in it? So would you want this on your site?
Most people won't sit through a 15 second preroll clip for a 20 second video clip, especially when other sites are giving the same video with no ads.
On another note, why doesn't Google start removing popular illegal video sites from their search engine? Wouldn't this be a great decision by Google because they would severely hurt YouTube competition?
That's exactly why they won't, Stout. Maneuvers like that are what turn a large market share into an illegal monopoly. With 60+% of searches and a large portion of the online video market, they can't do anything which would severely hinder competition.
Regardless of the legal status of those sites, they're still competing for your eyes, so they can get paid. Anyhow, I'm sure many people have either bookmarked or know the URL to those sites.
I like Family Guy; I like the idea of 50 new 2-minute clips; I don't like video ads on websites. Hopefully the videos won't be playing on load; nothing more obnoxious than visiting a site and getting an unexpected earfull.
If those illegal video sites are violating someone's copyright, google has every right in the world to remove them from SERPS. There's no issue of monopoly here. None. What can they say? We have the right to break the law and be seen while we're doing it? Somehow I don't think that'll wash.
It'd be like a drug dealer filing suit against the legal system on the grounds that he's being prevented from making a living.
|google has every right in the world to remove them from SERPS |
That's what I was thinking. But npwsol made a good point; removing a good portion of sites from the search would let other search engines catch up.
|If those illegal video sites are violating someone's copyright, google has every right in the world to remove them from SERPS. There's no issue of monopoly here. None. What can they say? We have the right to break the law and be seen while we're doing it? Somehow I don't think that'll wash. |
Who determines if they are illegal, Google? Next time Google (or one of their junior editors) may determine your site is illegal and remove it from SERPS, would you then be happy?
Agree. And many of those video sites claims fair use.
|would let other search engines catch up |
True. Google can't change what users' wants are. They've always tried to deliver what users want. Doing this would allow other engines to capture some market share. Not sure how significant a share it would be or even if it would be temporary.
System: The following 3 messages were spliced on to this thread from: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google_adsense/3686641.htm [webmasterworld.com] by martinibuster - 7:19 am on June 30, 2008 (utc -8)
|Google will syndicate the program using its AdSense advertising system to thousands of Web sites that are predetermined to be gathering spots for Mr. MacFarlane’s target audience, typically young men. Instead of placing a static ad on a Web page, Google will place a “Cavalcade” video clip.... |
“Cavalcade” is not only from a high-profile Hollywood talent, but also carries a multimillion-dollar production price tag, by far the largest amount spent on original Internet content to date....
Google and Mr. MacFarlane would not reveal any of the advertisers, but the two said that several deals are among the largest ever landed by AdSense, which went into business in 2003.
A must read. If you've got a web site with traffic, you got reason to be excited. This could be very good news for webmasters.
[edited by: tedster at 3:00 am (utc) on June 30, 2008]
[edit reason] fix link [/edit]
As has been discussed in WebmasterWorld so far the experience of most webmasters with the YouTube video+Adsense has been disappointing. The ecpm is simply too low. G better address this issue before webmasters would want to push these episodes.
This isn't YouTube junk. Apple and oranges.
No, but it sounds like it might be Seth MacFarlane junk, which would be as bad or worse to me (I am not a fan)
However, if it's successful, it might open it up for other/better providers, so that might be a good thing. Don't see it working for any of my sites, but I am sure there are plenty of markets for it.
So far Google seems to have only very little understanding of media, videos and Internet TV.
This market is very different to search engines with only failed competitors like yahoo and msn.
Yeah, netmeg, I'm not excited about MacFarlane.
The idea that Google is going to sell video ads with a focus on demographics, not just content, is what is exciting to me. This means quality web sites will get quality ads. This is an effort to get marketers to pay more. That's good for webmasters, especially good for webmasters who have sought-after, highly targeted demographics.
For newspaper (for example, there are many others), this could be wonderful. They KNOW who their readers are and they are working hard to be more targeted where marketers need it. And, if marketers start having a reason to buy targeted and Google makes it easy, then all to the better.
Those delivering a quality audience doesn't get the money it deserves on the web right now. That needs to change. This is a step in that direction. I hope.
|It'd be like a drug dealer filing suit against the legal system on the grounds that he's being prevented from making a living. |
Google isn't the legal system, they are a rival drug dealer.
If Google fight illegal vids on their search apparently harder than they do on their own YouTube, then they'll have a hard time in court at the next copyright lawsuit they face.