As AI kills search traffic, Google launches Offerwall to boost publisher revenue:
Google's AI search features are killing traffic to publishers, so now the company is proposing a possible solution. On Thursday, the tech giant officially launched Offerwall, a new tool that allows publishers to generate revenue beyond the more traffic-dependent options, like ads.
Offerwall lets publishers give their sites' readers a variety of ways to access their content, including through options like micropayments, taking surveys, watching ads, and more. In addition, Google says that publishers can add their own options to the Offerwall, like signing up for newsletters.
[...] Google notes that it's also using AI to determine when to display the Offerwall to each site visitor to increase engagement and revenue. However, publishers can set their own thresholds before the Offerwall is displayed, if they prefer.
Many of the solutions Offerwall introduces have been tried by publishers before, across a range of products and services. Micropayments, for instance, have repeatedly failed to take off. The economics don't tend to work, and there's additional friction in having to pay per article that's not been worth the payoff for readers or publishers alike, given implementation and maintenance costs.
[...] In Google's case, it's working with a third party, Supertab, which allows site visitors to pay a small amount to access the online content for a period of time — like 24 hours, a few days, a week, etc. The option (currently in beta) also supports subscription sign-ups and integrates with Google Ad Manager.
Google notes that publishers can also configure Offerwall to include their own logo and introductory text, then customize the choices it presents. One option that's enabled by default has visitors watch a short ad to earn access to the publisher's content. This is the only option that has a revenue share, and, on that front, it works the same way all Ad Manager solutions do, Google notes.
Another option has visitors click to choose from a set of topics they're interested in, which is then saved and used for ads personalization.
[...] However, early reports during the testing period said that publishers saw an average revenue lift of 9% after 1 million messages on AdSense, for viewing rewarded ads. Google Ad Manager customers saw a 5% to 15% lift when using Offerwall as well. Google also confirmed to TechCrunch via email that publishers with Offerwall saw an average revenue uplift of 9% during its year-plus in testing.
If Google AI is taking all of their clicks away, it would seem the publishers are over a barrel here and don't have much choice.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 01, @07:24PM
Is not more Google gatekeeping.
(Score: 3, Touché) by crm114 on Tuesday July 01, @07:52PM
I think this is a great idea.
"Opt In" to get spam. Count me in on google implementing this.
(Score: 0, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 01, @09:07PM
LOL
(Score: 4, Insightful) by pTamok on Wednesday July 02, @06:55AM
Alphabet/Google are doing 'whatever it takes' to become essential to the use of online services.
Some would say that they have reached that point already.
Should it become impossible to use an online service without 'going through' Alphabet/Google, they will then be able extract revenue from that forced necessity. Once they control access, they can set the toll rates, and it will not be in the user's favour.
If you are being bullied, you have two options: go up against the bully, or run away. In the case of Alphabet/Google, it is difficult to challenge them, partly because they are already so large: but it is possible to run away - that is to say, not use their 'services'. As many people as possible should do so, to prevent buying 'services' from the bully becoming mandatory.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday July 02, @01:45PM
Dear Google,
Thanks, but No Thanks!
I use the internet for MY own porpoises. Not to see ads. Not to fill out surveys. Not to see short presentations.
All you are doing is steering me to elsewhere.
If you sell a product or service I want, then I'll buy it. But I will go shopping for it first. I don't want a million ads in order to get the one ad I might have an interest in.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday July 02, @06:45PM
Actually super successful for everyone except major legacy publishers. Plenty of youtube content creators, patreon folks, must be a dozen donation systems like patreon, substack, etc. Heck, I suppose onlyfans counts too.
Everyone's making money off that model except legacy middleman giant centralized publishing companies. Naturally the other legacy middleman giant centralized publishing companies describe that situation as the sky is falling.
There used to be an entire business model around get big enough to shovel absolute crap and the consumers will "have to" eat it because they have a monopoly. Whats a small timer going to do, buy an entire newspaper printing press on their credit card? However, the technological underpinnings of that have disappeared, and along with that, the business model of shipping trash at a huge economy of scale has also disappeared.
I'm not really seeing a problem if that business model goes away. I already actively avoid their "products".
Just to be blunt, I probably get "more" out of watching a month's worth of "asianometry video essays" than reading a months worth of techcrunch. Asianometry only makes enough money for one to ten dudes but thats OK because his organization is roughly one dude. Depending on who's numbers you trust, techcrunch might have 497 employees to pay off that "one to ten dudes worth of revenue" from microtransactions and that ratio is a slight problem for them. But not for me, I'll get my content elsewhere.
Economy of scale no longer applies to publishers; a large company full of deadweight is just ... deadweight. The talent generating all the revenue no longer makes enough revenue to pay for the huge deadweight numbers; thats is not a problem for small content creators but it means all the "legacy middleman giant centralized publishing companies" are going to have to close.