Reply to post: Re: Latency

Good news: Google no longer requires publishers to use the AMP format. Bad news: What replaces it might be worse

doublelayer Silver badge

Re: Latency

"So because Google is asking for low latency and other metrics it's evil? Or is the evil bit that it has a way of enforcing that in return for exposure?"

The evil bit is that it's most likely a lie. Last time, the excuse was mobile-ready pages and caching and look the caching is free and we send more readers your way, but the real reason was to kill off other ad providers, grab data about news preferences, and have control over the user's news consumption if they got into a routine. This time, it's still using latency as the excuse but what that really means isn't known since Google decides and doesn't make public whatever that means. It easily could mean that they're still advantaging their ad system because they've cached it while others have to load. We don't know. All we know is they've repeatedly proven untrustworthy before.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021