ISY1000 Report: Analyzing Google Ads Revenue Decline and Solutions

This report examines the decline in Google's ad revenue, attributing it to the company's lax enforcement of DMA principles and copyright regulations, leading to brands freezing their ad accounts due to copyright infringement. The report identifies the lack of a robust policy framework and Google's tolerance of copyright violations as key issues. To address these challenges, the report recommends that Google adopts an open AI and machine learning algorithm to block infringing content, develops a comprehensive copyright infringement policy, actively promotes ethical IT practices, and reduces user tracking. The report covers the introduction to the case study, the body of the report, copyright issues, compliance strategies, conclusions, and recommendations. The report also includes an executive summary, table of contents and references.

Executive summary
The report focuses on Google case study of declining ads revenues. This report has
established the key reason for this decrease in revenues. The report has associated this to the
relaxing by Google to enforce the DMA principles and regulations in its operations online. This
is evident by the lack of a proper policy framework to subdue the requirements of this regulation.
In addition to this, the report has established that some brands froze their ads account with
Google due to continuous copyright infringement tolerated by Google. Despite some school of
thought allowing for such practices as copying one's data and creative content to ensure
continuous improvement over generations.
The report has identified the following recommendations that can be adopted by Google
to achieve a high rating among the Brands;
First, Google must adopt a more open AI and machine learning algorithm that shall be used to
genuinely block out contents deemed to violate the DMA
Secondly, Google must come up with a copyright infringement policy framework that shall be
used to legally pursue those users who violate the DMA and use google service to commit fraud.
Third, Google must put in a more active role in advocating for a more professional and ethical
based IT environment to ensure the community follows the generally accepted computing skills.
This shall make google become a champion for legality on the web.
Last but not least Google should reduce tracking and any features to that effect that are exploited
by the third persons to exploit genuine users

Table of Contents
Executive summary.........................................................................................................................1
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Body.................................................................................................................................................3
Copyright Issues..........................................................................................................................4
Compliance strategies..................................................................................................................5
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................6
Recommendations............................................................................................................................7
References........................................................................................................................................9

Introduction
The growing demand for big data has enabled companies to emerge as dominant players
in the Big data not only as a technology but also as an Industry. Companies have leveraged the
ability to provide diverse services that are tailored for a specific customer needs such as
marketing targets that suits a particular customer needs. Google has been a major player in this
industry as it has been the front runner is selling ads for corporations who use the Search
engine’s master to predict the behavior of the users based on their previous interactions on the
site. Google has developed an algorithm to analyze such browsing data and use the Big data
technology to make more accurate behavior of the users. This is key data for corporations
(Segura Anaya et al., 2018).
This report reviews the case study of Google involvement in this business which has been
reported to be losing revenue due to strict regulatory frameworks put in place to ensure the
consumer of information remains completely in control of his/her privacy. Several laws and
regulations have therefore been adopted by several jurisdictions to ensure the citizens remain in
control of their data. The first section of the report introduced the case study and gives a brief
background of the issues, analyze the case study and submit a relevant recommendation that can
be used to salvage the situation. The report involved qualitative and quantitative analysis of data
from the past experiences among users who felt offended by Google's placement of ads in their
search results (Martin, 2015)

Body
This section is the main content of the report. It focuses on providing a background to the
incidences that led to the declining revenue realization by Google in their advertisement
business.
The business of marketing and advertisement has been in the evolution mantle over the
past two decades. Their industry has evolved from print media advertisement to more digital
means using electronic devices. Despite these tremendous efforts made in the industry, the core
ethics and professionalism still remains very much limited. The advertisement corporations in
the new era of big data analytics have been in the recent time been reported to massively violate
key users rights more specifically the right to privacy has been in the past violated by these ads
based companies (Wight, 2015).
This uncensored access to peoples data has put Google in bad spat as the advertisers
especially those using the youtube has shown signs of abandoning the channel due to serious
violations of copyright policies which Google has failed to implement for the userbase. The
revenue of the company has been dwindling since the threat to boycott the services emerge. The
Generally feeling among the employees is rather a sinking ship which must take serious
precautionary measures to ensure the dates of the users remain protected and that copyright
issues are guided and protected within the Advertisement business model (west, 2018).

Copyright Issues
Google is faced with a serious moral, legal and ethical dilemma is its attempt to bring the
issues of copyright infringement into rest. More subscriber are opting out to use of other service
providers such as Youtube and the Google display which the content creator deems to be more
proactive in dealing with users who copy content from other users and mischevious display the
same content to the public
There is been a lot of debate going around on the ethical implication of copying and
sharing information around the globe via the internet. Some people who are prop proprietary and
copyright have formed a school of thought where they view the issue to be given top priority by
Googe. These persons have a strong belief in the legal issues that copyright infringement can
bring to the company or individual. Google currently doesn’t have a technique to track all the
content in its server based on who copied what content from who. This has delayed the
implementation of such a stringent mechanism to curb copyright infringement (Sims and Quatro,
2016).
Despite this popular belief, there is a subset of the population who believe in open source
and open access to information. The school of thought argues that every creature that human has
explored should be freely shared to the entire population for the continuous improvement of the
human race as a whole. They argue that even the present pool of information and creativity
borrows its knowledge from the past hence should just be allowed to be open to the general
population. The diversity in opinions has put Google in a very tight spot as it seems the two
contracting bodies of knowledge has their own argument to make (Park and Skoric, 2017).
It is critical for Google to protect the interest of the stakeholders in its business model by going
for strict adherence to copyright policy laws. The title II of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act

which provides clauses that ensure that the online providers must make deliberate efforts to
ensure they put in checks to safely harbor any materials or content that are deemed to have
violated the DMA and consequently block the content from being accessed by the nonauthorized
persons.
The corporation has again been under very strong criticism from the advertising content
providers who use accuse Google of not doing anything in their power to protect the rights and
contents of the ads providers from being copies illegally and used all over the Internet. Google is
therefore left with very few choices but to ensure they block contents which they deemed to have
been copied from other users on the Internet. This approach may not be very popular among the
open source community who strongly believes that software and other contents of creative nature
should be free to ensure continuous improvement of ideas and content (Lowe, 2009).
To ensure compliance with the DMA, google must invent new ways to track the illegal
copying of content from other users and possibly come up with algorithms to ensure such
contents are not accessible to the public due to its violation of the DMA act on privacy and
copyright infringements.
Compliance strategies
Google has made tremendous efforts to ensure the consumer base don’t have their
copyright infringed. Google has made research and development into their Artificial intelligence
that shall scan content from different sources and use that information to block contents that the
advertiser may see as objectionable. In addition to the development in AI technology, Google has
made efforts to update its policy statement to ensure the interest of the advertising persons is
protected. In the new policy statement, Google has made effort to position themselves are key

stakeholder in the war against copyright infringement and ensuring compliance with the DMA
acts on copyright which more strictly mentions the role of online service providers to ensuring
the contents of their customers are protected and that non authorized persons don’t duplicate the
data and use as though their original ideas. These efforts are met to attract the users who had
decided to abandon google ads display citing serious copyright infringements in their current
business model (John, Kim and Barasz, 2018).
Google has also partnered with Integral Ad science corporations to find solutions that
ensure the brand of the clients using Google services is protected in the whole value chain. In
this arrangement, Google shall use the MRC-accredited to ensure their verification and
validation of contents on google e server and put in checks to ensure the company follow the
DMA act in protecting the consumers of their services
All this can be made possible if the user agreement is updated and the various policy on
privacy and copyright update by Google to include the due care and due diligence on the
Google’s part to attract the various ads by various corporations. This deliberate effort to ensure
there are legal channels and policy documents to support this procedure shall make Google look
more attractive to the corporations who may want to use their services.
Together with machine learning capabilities, Google can use their data collected and make sound
judgment onto why the revenue on ads have declined due to the freezing of more than 250
brands.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the report has provided a key background to the nature of the
advertisement industry where it started and how it has metamorphosed into a billion dollar
industry with technology giants such as Google having their big share of the market. This

position enjoys by Google has led to them making some serious mistakes especially from a
matter of user data privacy and content copyrights. Google currently doesn’t have a
comprehensive framework to ensure the data about their users are protected and not used or
copied by a nonauthorized party. With the growing concerns over copyright infringements,
brands have been making a mass exodus from Google ads business and opting for rival
companies such as Amazon and Youtube.
The report has established more than 250 brands froze their ads google account. The
general effect is a dwindling revenue realized as per their previous performance. To curb the
menace, Google has developed a plan that is geared towards bringing back the Brands back
onboard. To achieve this, Google has updated its policy framework that includes clauses on the
close involvement of Google towards the protection of user data and copyrights. The
development of the policy frameworks shall enable Google to introduce the use of AI and
machine learning to curb the menace of copyright infringements that have taken the industry
astray. The proposed solution if and when implemented shall attract the already lost brands back
into the Google ecosystem.
Recommendations
Following the above report into the Google case study, the following recommendations
are given to salvage the situation
First, Google must adopt a more open AI and machine learning algorithm that shall be
used to genuinely block out contents deemed to violate the DMA
Secondly, Google must come up with a copyright infringement policy framework that shall be
used to legally pursue those users who violate the DMA and use google service to commit fraud.

Third, Google must put in a more active role in advocating for a more professional and ethical
based IT environment to ensure the community follows the generally accepted computing skills.
This shall make google become a champion for legality on the web.
Last but not least, Google should reduce tracking and any features to that effect that are exploited
by the third persons to exploit genuine users

References
John, L.K., Kim, T. and Barasz, K., 2018. Ads That Don’t Overstep. Harvard Business Review,
96(1), p.62.
Lowe, J., 2009. Google Speaks : Secrets of the World’s Greatest Billionaire Entrepreneurs,
Sergey Brin and Larry Page. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley.
Martin, K.E., 2015. Ethical Issues in the Big Data Industry. MIS Quarterly Executive, 14(2),
pp.67–85.
Park, Y. and Skoric, M., 2017. Personalized Ad in Your Google Glass? Wearable Technology,
Hands-Off Data Collection, and New Policy Imperative. Journal of Business Ethics, 142(1),
pp.71–82.
Segura Anaya, L.H., Alsadoon, A., Costadopoulos, N. and Prasad, P.W.C., 2018. Ethical
Implications of User Perceptions of Wearable Devices. Science & Engineering Ethics, 24(1),
pp.1–28.
Sims, R.R. and Quatro, S.A., 2016. Executive Ethics II : Ethical Dilemmas and Challenges for
the C-suite. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
west, jessamyn, 2018. What Do They Know, and When Did They Know It? Computers in
Libraries, 38(5), pp.12–13.
Wight, J.B., 2015. Ethics in Economics : An Introduction to Moral Frameworks. Stanford,
California: Stanford Economics and Finance.