Google To Monetize Content From Consenting YouTubers 55
sufijazz writes "Google has announced its intention to allow advertisers to monetize the contents of YouTube videos. 'The ads accompanying the outbound YouTube clips won't be in a video format. Instead, they will appear as a graphic straddling the video or as a link along the bottom. Google won't be pulling clips from YouTube's entire library ... The material sent to other Web sites will be confined to video from providers who sign consent forms. With the new twist, Web sites participating in AdSense now can sign up to specify the kinds of YouTube videos they want shown on their pages.' Everyone sees a cut in this plan, evidently. Both the creator of the video as well as anyone that embeds it on their website will receive a share of the profits. The company has yet to specify the percent each party gets."
AdSense is nowe a very broad church.... (Score:5, Informative)
Glossary: http://www.publisher-world.com/read.php?12,10879,10879#msg-10879 [publisher-world.com]
Rgds
Damon
Re: (Score:2)
Monetize? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Monetize? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
"Cromulent" is of or relating to the god Crom, who doesn't care about your spelling.
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.google.com/search?client=opera&rls=en&q=kromulant&sourceid=opera&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 [google.com]
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=opera&rls=en&hs=5sF&pwst=1&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&q=cromulent&spell=1 [google.com]
Nice try, though.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetize [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Calvin and Hobbes said it best: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
"By the way, if anyone here is in advertising or marketing, kill yourself.
Just a little thought. I'm just trying to plant seeds. Maybe one day, they'll take root. I don't know. You try. You do what you can. Kill yourself.
Seriously, though. If you are, do. No, really. There's no rationalisation for what you do, and you are Satan's little helpers, okay? Kill yourself. Seriously. You are the ruiner of all things good, ser
In other words... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I stumbled to my shoelaces while trying to decipher the summary.
I understood the "I could get paid for my videos if someone would be interested about them", but the "how?" part was bit of a mess.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Confusion (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
AdSense's future... (Score:5, Interesting)
I like AdSense, it provides a reasonable enough income (although nowhere near 30%) for the sites I edit and host, but I think it is time that Google moves into a more targeted direction.
The amount of information that AdSense ads sends to Google is astonishing -- which is one reason most geeks probably block ads. I'm a fan of blocking ads if you don't have any desire in the advertisers, and I openly support it on my sites (some of them even provide a link to ad-blocking software). For me, interested parties who click ads make me more money than uninterested parties that accidentally click ads. Win, win, win.
Yet since Google has such a vast supply of information on people who don't MIND ads, why not start putting up ads that might be of interest to the user? If "John" goes from a site about gambling to a site about sports, Google knows it -- why not start displaying ads for "John" that combine all of his possible interests? The YouTube ads can be the same -- they know where you've been, so why not combine those keywords into ads that MIGHT be more interesting to you?
Sure, it's a privacy breach already, but that's what pays the bills for the sites you're visiting freely. Not many of us are going to pay for a subscription to a site (although I pay for many), so advertising has to be what it is -- it can just get better.
I'd also like to see a user-configurable plug-in that lets a user "vote" on ads. I'm sick of seeing certain ads on certain sites, so we should have the ability to tell Google "Don't show me these anymore." The content publisher (website) may prefer those ads because they pay CPM (pays per visit, not per click), but if the visitor doesn't want to see them, isn't it in the advertiser's and the visitor's best interest to turn them off for that user?
Re: (Score:2)
I am sorry, what? Hard to block? (Score:1)
We are talking about flash based video players right? First block, don't install flash. Second block, do NOT allow the url that server the player to load. Third block, do not allow the video to be loaded.
I am not familiar with browser based blocking, but the last two are trivial with proxy software. My current favorite is privoxy but you might find bfilter to your tastes as well. Hell, if you are really ambitious you can use squid to send all web traffic through several filters. The only effective way to p
Tsk, the solution is even simpler (Score:3, Informative)
Most likely the flash player send two requests to the server, one for the video and one for the flash ad. Just have the proxy return an empty ad, and voila, no ad.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think this is a great idea.
It allows for more choice for website owners and advertisers, but this sounds absolutely dreadful to me as a website viewer who actually displays ads (when displaying such ads doesn't compromise my security/privacy). Google was always hailed for ONLY producing non-obtrusive text ads. They've since moved to graphical ads and so they're one big advantage has been lost. Google is now no longer any different from any other advertising agency.
I'll certainly be avoiding all websites that make use of these obtrus
Re: (Score:1)
Yet since Google has such a vast supply of information on people who don't MIND ads, why not start putting up ads that might be of interest to the user? If "John" goes from a site about gambling to a site about sports, Google knows it -- why not start displaying ads for "John" that combine all of his possible interests? The YouTube ads can be the same -- they know where you've been, so why not combine those keywords into ads that MIGHT be more interesting to you?
Hhmmm... let's see... what if I'm a goat lover and I also happen to like viewing pr0n, what ads should I see?
Re: (Score:2)
You might find a lot of references to that sort of this on this site [slashdot.org]...
GOOGLE! (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The viewer has his cut... (Score:3, Insightful)
Privacy consernes (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's the point in the short novel "Scroogled" by Cory Doctorow. http://www.radaronline.com/from-the-magazine/2007/09/google_fiction_evil_dangerous_surveillance_control_1.php [radaronline.com]
In brief: DHS outsource border bacground checks to Google. Scary...
Percentage revealed (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds Wrong (Score:2)
>Monetize Content From Consenting YouTubers
That sounds like it ought to be illegal under local anti-pimping ordinances or some such.
Barmy old AdSense (Score:2)
So...more ads? (Score:1)
damn it (Score:2)
Good for them! (Score:1)
How long until myspace band youtube again? (Score:2)
640x360 - 320x240 - 160x120 (Score:2)
Do they lose protection of the "safe harbor" (Score:2)