Post

To play devil's advocate: this could be the end for a majority of ad-supported content websites, but many of these sites didn't offer a great experience to begin with. Maybe that means that the websites who survive are the ones who are directly supported by their community?

Do you have an example of websites that are directly financially supported by their community?

Those are not directly supported. They are indirectly supported via big centralized huge platforms.

One of the sites I run, bluf.com, is directly community supported in the way you mean, I think. All members get all the facilities (so it's not a freemium model). If you donate (Stripe, PayPal, GoCardless) you get a membership card which entitles you to discounts at some shops. Works well for us.

Ad-supported websites aren't all bad, and many are rather valuable. To even lose a few of the good ones is terrible. Separately, this change will harm content discoverability by reducing the number of visitors (who might have supported them), negating the community support vector.

I mean, I mostly agree, but at the same time I don't want to over-value the current system just because it's the one I'm used to (and the one I benefit from). So I'm trying to keep an open mind.

I can absolutely appreciate that. We shouldn't be stuck in our ways because 'that's how we've always done it'. However, I don't particularly see any sustainable path forward for monetisation when the original source isn't receiving any traffic. Perhaps some sort of 'scraping fee'? Seems bleak.

yea…….. been relatively shattered for quite some time with the state of web and dev; enshittification is coming for every aspect of every corner of tech it seems :(

I think the Modern Web Guidance skills are actually promising. I mean, we couldn’t make developers listen to a11y concerns when producing their reactive hand coded slop soup. Now we have at least an avenue to make their tools listen.

Let’s face it: accessibility consulting most of the time feels like screaming into to the void. With contributions to skills provided by big players like google we A) reach the big group of developers that craves ”best practices“ approval B) can actually test the impact on generated code quality

I think it'll have the effect of people thinking their tool is handling accessibility for them and thus not paying it any attention. Perhaps less care than before, even. The output I've seen thus far from testing has been rather worrying, though I understand the 'skills' aren't final yet.

They already did. Either you place it into the tools by stealth, or (like we did) sneak it into the design systems. When mentioning a11y in a meeting, the react devs face melts, the product owner cries because someone told her it’s soooooo expensive, and the scrum master sends you away.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. I don't see this improving accessibility any more than any other AI 'solution' has improved accessibility to date. I can only see it being taken as a lazy, ineffective shortcut in lieu of actual care.

as a seo specialist.... my job is cooked. thats all I can think of. I'm creeped out by the amount of ai. But now what is the future of search intent, and how do I rank sites to increase profits/awareness for my clients?!

I despise having to agree with you. I can't see how 'SEO Specialist' survives as a job after this. I suppose GEO and AIO are the future now. An entire industry just dead overnight is such a horrible thing to see. With no search to optimise, it is a case of pivoting to AI or another job entirely.

> If Google only takes and never gives, then sites cannot profit. We’ve watched this story happen to news publishers over the last decade — took their ad revenue, took their content and took their readers