(The following articles
have been archived for both instructional and reference purposes. To read the
full articles please follow the links to the source located at the bottom.)
Editor & Publisher : Stop the Presses
By: Steve Outing
August 29, 2001
Stopping Unauthorized Alterations Of Web Sites
A Look At Gator and Other Applications
Imagine if the newspaper or magazine that you published was altered
by third parties before it reached its readers. What if unseen hands scooped
up copies from newsracks and driveways and covered up ads with other ads, and
even altered some of the editorial content by highlighting selected words in
yellow?
While that can't happen in the print publishing world, it can
and does happen increasingly with Internet publishing.
And while unauthorized alterations would clearly be illegal in
the print world (not that it's even technically possible), in the online world
it may or may not be within the bounds of the law. Online publishers should
be aware of this trend, for it's beginning to affect them. It may soon be time
to get the lawyers involved.
How low they'll go
There are two parts to this issue: one affecting advertising,
the second involving PC applications that add contextual editorial content and
links to Web sites. As you'll see, the various applications vary in impact on
Web publishers' sites -- from nasty to benign.
Let's start with what I consider to be the most dangerous (from
the Web publisher's perspective) application, Gator, a Web browser add-on. Users
of Gator (who must choose to install and use it) see advertising that is generated
by Gator, which occasionally pops on-screen and hides ads that are supposed
to be on Web sites. In effect, Gator takes over third-party Web sites by covering
up their advertising and overlaying Gator's own -- and thus steals revenue.
(That's my opinion; the company claims that Gator's model is legal.)
The company, which claims that 8 million people have downloaded
its software, offers some useful features as part of Gator -- such as storing
a user's personal information and credit card number to allow one-click online
shopping -- that have enticed people to use the software. But its other features
are more insidious, such as collecting users' information and using it to serve
targeted advertising to them. For instance, Gator could allow a company's ads
to show up on Gator users' screens whenever they visit a competitor's Web site.
The worst-case scenario would be if a Gator-using visitor to Amazon.com were
to see pop-ups ads offering a discount coupon for buying books instead at Borders.com.
One Gator user told me, "Gator remembers all my pesky little
passwords, quickly fills in forms at my OK, but does come up with some pesky
ads when I visit some sites. They are always competitive ads. I've learned to
see them coming, and quickly shut them down. The ads on Gator are a bother,
but the benefits in time saved far outweigh the bother factor. I find it very
efficient."
Though a useful tool in some ways, Gator undermines the whole
model for advertising-supported online content. As if e-publishers weren't having
a hard enough time surviving, along comes a company that makes it even more
difficult.
That's not my link!
Another couple of nasty (from the publisher perspective) programs
are TopText, from a company called Ezula, and Surf+. Both of these programs
are (like Gator) browser add-ons that offer users nifty functionality. One of
the "benefits" of both programs is that they highlight words on any
Web site that their users visit, and turn them into hyperlinks.
For example, TopText or Surf+ might for their users highlight
the word "brokerage" and have it become a link to Ameritrade. A reader
of a WSJ.com article would see that word link to Ameritrade, even though WSJ.com's
editors did not make it a hyperlink. WSJ.com would get no revenue from this,
but TopText/Ezula would. ..
Read
the full article at Editor & Publisher ..
