YouTube ready to run preroll and postroll ads

Demon_Skeith

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
89,187
2007
4,750
Credits
43,027
Full year of Nintendo Online
Steal Penalty
You're Rich Money Bags Award
Profile Music
YouTube has been plagued with inefficiencies in its ad-sales department and Google is apparently ready to abandon its policy of keeping preroll and postroll ads off the video-sharing site.

The news was first reported Tuesday evening by The Wall Street Journal. The newspaper, citing unnamed sources, also said YouTube will generate about $200 million from ad sales this year, short of Google's expectations.

However, the figure is far higher than most of the guesses made in recent weeks by analysts and media pundits. If accurate, it is almost certain to raise questions about what kind of costs YouTube is piling up if it can't turn a profit with that kind of revenue.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt has said several times this year that he isn't satisfied with the money YouTube makes. Those statements have come after Google, which paid $1.6 billion for YouTube in October 2006, has spent nearly two years trying to figure out the ad model for YouTube.

Adding prerolls and postrolls to the Web's No.1 video site would be a signal that Google hasn't found a more novel way of advertising to YouTube's ad-loathing audience--something the company has said it would do. More importantly, the ads could ignite a major user backlash.

YouTube users have continually bucked attempts by the company to make the site more ad friendly. Last year, when YouTube began experimenting with overlays--the little ads that briefly appear at the bottom of the screen of some YouTube videos--I applauded the move as a great idea.

Overlays are old hat for TV broadcasters, so audiences are used to them. They appear on screen for only a few seconds and then disappear. But plenty of YouTube fans hated the ads, saying they were a distraction and intrusive.

Some of the other highlights in the Journal story:

• Google has identified 105 problems with YouTube's ad sales.

• Advertisers aren't willing to post their ads on many YouTube videos

• Because of legal questions, Google is only selling ads against video clips that have been approved by media companies and other partners, which, according to the story, is 4 percent of the total clips on YouTube. Think about the significance of that. Every minute more than 10 hours of video is uploaded to YouTube and only about 20 minutes is worth anything to the company.

YouTube has long been accused of being a warehouse for pirated material and media company, Viacom, filed a $1 billion copyright lawsuit against Google and YouTube. Google argues that the law doesn't hold it responsible for any illegal acts committed by users.

link

dang again
 
Looks like Google is really going to regret buying YouTube. Between the issues with Viacom and now this...it's going to be a big headache.

It doesn't matter to me though since I rarely watch videos on YouTube anyway.
 
update on the viacom thing.

Viacom has issued a statement about the recent court ruling that ordered YouTube to hand over its user data to the media giant. The full text is reprinted below, but here’s the quick translation: “No we didn’t, and everyone should stop being mean to us.â€

A recent discovery order by the Federal Court hearing the case of Viacom v. YouTube has triggered concern about what information will be disclosed by Google and YouTube and how it will be used. Viacom has not asked for and will not be obtaining any personally identifiable information of any YouTube user. The personally identifiable information that YouTube collects from its users will be stripped from the data before it is transferred to Viacom. Viacom will use the data exclusively for the purpose of proving our case against You Tube and Google.

Viacom has been in discussions with Google to develop a framework to share this data. We are committed to a process that will not only comply with the Court’s confidentiality order, but that will also meet our commitment to the strongest possible internet privacy protections.

It is unfortunate that we have been compelled to go to court to protect Viacom’s rights and the rights of the artists who work with and depend on us. YouTube and Google have put us in this position by continuing to defend their illegal and irresponsible conduct and by profiting from copyright infringement, when they could be implementing the safe and legal user generated content experience they promise.

Groklaw does a great job of thoroughly debunking this statement, ripping it apart piece by piece. All one has to do is check the court documents. As we noted last week, Viacom asked for all the data in the logging database, which contains “for each instance a video is watched, the unique ‘login ID’ of the user who watched it, the time when the user started to watch the video, the Internet protocol address other devices connected to the internet use to identify the user’s computer (’IP address’), and the identifier for the video.â€

Viacom asked for even more than this, but was denied.

In a corporate blog post last week, YouTube said it asked that it be allowed to remove personally identifiable information for the data it handed over. So Viacom did ask for the information, but the backlash it got forced it to reconsider.

link
 
Back
Top