Couverture de The Monopoly Report

The Monopoly Report

The Monopoly Report

De : Alan Chapell
Écouter gratuitement

In-depth coverage of big tech's antitrust woes from Marketecture.tv. We are covering the Google search and ad tech trials and everything else happening. Subscribe to our newsletter at https://monopoly.marketecture.tvCopyright (c) 2025 Marketecture Media, Inc. Economie Marketing et ventes Politique et gouvernement Sciences politiques
Épisodes
  • Episode 76: John Battelle on AI, Data Ownership and the Future of the Open Internet

    Episode 76: John Battelle on AI, Data Ownership and the Future of the Open Internet
    May 27 2026
    Alan Chapell sits down with journalist, entrepreneur, and Wired co-founder John Battelle for a deep discussion on AI, privacy, data ownership, publishing, and the future of the internet. They unpack the “inner monologue bloom,” OpenAI’s ambitious ad revenue projections, the economics behind content creation in the AI age, and why Battelle believes data portability could unlock an entirely new innovation economy. From programmatic advertising to platform control, this conversation explores who will ultimately control the next era of digital infrastructure. You may find John at https://battellemedia.com/ or https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnbattelle/. You may find the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/. Takeaways - AI chatbots are creating a new “inner monologue” data economy. - Data is non-rivalrous, but tech platforms treat it like a closed asset. - OpenAI’s $100B ad revenue target would require massive market disruption. - Publishers still lack a scalable AI monetization model. -Programmatic ad tech may be one of the most underutilized infrastructures online. - Battelle argues consumers should own portable, machine-readable versions of their data. - AI agents could reshape commerce, search and personalization. - Platform control battles are shifting from browsers to AI ecosystems. - Local journalism faces a growing sustainability crisis in the AI era. - The next phase of the internet may depend on user-controlled AI agents. Chapters 00:00 Alan introduces John Battelle and his background in tech and media. 03:00 The “inner monologue bloom” and AI-driven privacy concerns. 09:20 Why data is treated incorrectly as a rivalrous asset. 15:00 OpenAI’s $100B advertising ambition and whether it’s realistic. 19:30 The future of AI agents and user-controlled personal data. 27:15 Apple, platform gatekeeping and the fight for user agency. 35:00 The economics of AI infrastructure and compute costs. 39:55 How AI impacts publishers, local journalism and content monetization. 50:55 Retail media, first-party data and the future of advertising. 58:00 Journalism as a public good and the risks of centralized AI control. 01:01:00 Why programmatic ad tech remains massively underestimated. 01:11:30 Battelle’s proposed “Token Act” and machine-readable data portability. 01:16:45 Final thoughts and where to follow John Battelle. Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    1 h et 16 min
  • Episode 75: Brave's JP Schmetz: ‘Publishers Need to Get Their Act Together'

    Episode 75: Brave's JP Schmetz: ‘Publishers Need to Get Their Act Together'
    May 13 2026
    JP Schmetz, Chief of Search and Ads at Brave, joins Alan Chapell to debate the questions that most browser executives won't touch on the record. Should publishers stop outsourcing ad sales to Meta and Google? Is "first-party vs. third-party" a meaningful distinction to users — or a convenient line Brave draws to justify default blocking? Alan pushes back. JP pushes back harder. Featuring references to Jason Kint at DCN, GPC defaults, The Knight-Georgetown Institute (KGI) report covering data sharing pursuant to the DOJ Search remedies (among other items), and why rooting against the AI investment cycle is, by default, rooting for Google to win everything again. The KGI Report on data sharing is available at https://kgi.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Designing_the_Technical_Committee_Report_KGI-FINAL-April-2026.pdf. Sumit Sharma’s Report on Data Sharing is available at https://insights.sumitsharma.consulting/p/google-search-remedies-implementation The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways - Brave believes browsers should prioritize users over advertisers. - JP argues Google’s monopoly power comes from distribution and monetization. - Brave blocks third-party requests by default for privacy reasons. - Alan and JP debate the merits of blocking ads in the name of privacy. - Brave Search now powers parts of the AI search ecosystem. - AI could redistribute traffic away from traditional search engines. - JP believes publishers became too dependent on programmatic ad tech. - Subscription-based AI models may create a healthier internet economy. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and meeting JP Schmetz 00:36 Can browsers still serve users first? 04:05 Why browsers need search revenue to survive 05:49 The economics of search advertising 08:10 DOJ remedies, Chrome, and Google dominance 10:39 Brave’s evolution from privacy browser to search business 12:47 Why Brave blocks third-party ads and trackers 16:18 Publishers, ad tech, and selling ads directly 19:18 Ad tech circumvention and browser controls 22:02 Is Brave hurting publisher monetization? 25:05 Contextual advertising vs third-party tracking 28:47 Global Privacy Control and browser defaults 32:36 Brave Search, Google defaults, and monetization 34:56 Google data sharing and search competition 41:15 AI, search, and the future of the internet 46:30 Subscription models vs ad-funded AI 49:43 Why competition against Google still matters 51:25 Final thoughts and closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    55 min
  • Episode 74: The Attribution Cartel: Why “Privacy-Safe” is NOT what it’s made up to be

    Episode 74: The Attribution Cartel: Why “Privacy-Safe” is NOT what it’s made up to be
    Apr 29 2026
    Don Marti joins Alan Chapell to unpack the hidden risks behind the push for industry standards for “privacy-safe” ad attribution, the myth of privacy-preserving tech, and how big platforms may be reshaping the future of digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider is at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Don Marti may be found at: https://aloodo.com/ See Don Marti’s recent AdExchanger piece at https://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/what-happens-when-the-attribution-cartel-meets-advertisings-halo-effect/ Additional discussion re: the problems with PETs for advertising https://privacy-daily.com/news/2025/06/10/PrivacyEnhancing-Technologies-Are-Not-a-Silver-Bullet-PEPR-Told-2506100010 https://rjionline.org/news/the-traffic-and-revenue-crisis-for-news-is-a-symptom-of-big-techs-economy-wide-trust-collapse/ https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-is-squeezing-advertising-jobs-and-companies/ https://rjionline.org/news/big-techs-economic-takeover-can-be-beat/ https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-runs-counter-to-journalism-values-so-why-is-the-news-industry-helping-tech-take-over/ Takeaways Privacy-focused users are often the most valuable customers, challenging traditional ad tech assumptions about measurability. Attribution is fundamentally about linking ad exposure to outcomes, but current models often prioritize simplicity over accuracy. “Privacy-preserving” systems frequently focus on mathematical guarantees that don’t align with real-world privacy harms like discrimination or deception. Proposed attribution standards may unintentionally increase surveillance incentives by enabling fraud and data laundering. Fraud in attribution systems can reward actors who intercept users right before purchase, distorting true performance signals. Big tech companies may benefit from attribution systems that reinforce their own ad recommendations, reducing competition. The “halo effect” shows ads perform better in trusted, premium environments, but current systems undervalue this dynamic. A shift toward cheap, commoditized ad placements weakens both brand equity and publisher sustainability. The so-called “attribution cartel” is defined by systems that avoid user consent and bypass opt-out mechanisms. Effective privacy regulation should focus on real-world harms rather than technical implementation details. Chapters 00:00 Intro & What Don Marti Has Been Working On 01:18 The “Marti Paradox” 02:52 What Attribution Really Means 03:35 The Broken State of Attribution Today 07:32 Complexity, Perception & Industry Behavior 08:21 The Problem with “Privacy-Preserving” Tech 11:54 Big Tech Incentives & Centralization 16:17 The Halo Effect & Ad Effectiveness 17:01 Commodification vs Sustainable Advertising 21:28 Attribution Fraud Explained 23:49 Data Laundering Through Attribution Systems 26:09 The “Attribution Cartel” Defined 29:17 W3C, Standards & Industry Power Dynamics 32:29 Alternative Approaches (AdMap) 37:03 What Good Privacy Regulation Looks Like 40:56 The Future of Attribution 43:20 What Industry Stakeholders Can Do 45:00 Rethinking Privacy Harms Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    46 min
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
Aucun commentaire pour le moment