Associated Content Chairman Tim Armstrong Replaced by Michael Perlis

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CONCERNS
Googling for more information about The People's Media Company, a keyword search for Associated Content lead to a series of controversial articles questioning the validity of involvement by Tim Armstrong, President, Advertising and Commerce, North America, & Vice President, Google Inc. Just announced, Friday, March 14, 2008, Armstrong had been up to that point the Chairman of the Board for Associated Content.

WEB COVERAGE
Industry Moves: Google's Armstrong No Longer Associated Content Chairman; Perlis Steps In
From paidcontent.org, Staci D. Kramer cites that no specific reasons were given by Associated Content on the change but that Armstrong "has faced suggestions of conflict of interest over the company, with a business model based on paying for content that can be search optimized and used to generate revenue through Google AdWords."

CRITICISM OF PARTNERSHIP
Over 8 months ago, CNET's News.com published a pointed news analysis called Pay-For-Blogging Site Raises Questions. Staff writer Elinor Mills acknowledges that it is common practice for many content websites to use techniques to maximize search engine optimization to garner more hits on Google searches. However, there is criticism that Associated Content contributors may put an unwarranted emphasis on unnecessarily peppering keywords throughout their content to maximize their potential to come up on keyword searches and risk compromising content in the process.

Layer on top of this a board member with a firm understanding of Google's "Ad Sense" program which serves ads based on keyword searches married to Associated Content, a company which produces content and you have a potential conflict of interest. The implication and downside being that inferior content could be clogging Google searches and ads served to less than ideal viewers.
http://www.news.com/Pay-for-blogging-site-raises-questions/2100-1024_3-6195919.html?tag=news.1

POSSIBILITY OF AN ANTI-TRUST LAWSUIT
With Tim Armstrong no longer Chairman of the Board for Associated Content, this may have decreased the possibility of an anti-trust lawsuit. The government has strict guidelines and antitrust laws in place to protect consumers and businesses from unfair business practices, to ensure competition in the marketplace is protected so individuals have choices and monopolies are prevented while being mindful of ethical behavior.

With Tim Armstrong as part of the Associated Content Board, it theoretically gave Associated Content a slight advantage over other information content providers with the potential that Armstrong could advise Associated Content on how Google's ultra guarded search engines determine which material gets served advertising material. Another example is that Armstrong could ask content to be specifically created in order to sell more advertising and as a media company, this would be like an ad agency asking a television station, just to produce a show that will meet an advertiser's requirements. These are just some of the possible unethical actions that could arise.

Prior to this announcement, here is what one Associated content producer, Paul F. Davis wrote, suggesting an anti-trust lawsuit could be imminent.
Associated Content - the People's Media Company? Let the People Decide! Confront Power & Greed

IS ASSOCIATED CONTENT ON THE LEVEL?
As a relatively new writer on Associated Content, before I tell friends and family about my first official paid publishing foray online, I want to make sure Associated Content is legitimate. I've just successfully uploaded a few unpaid articles and my first paid article. Once I got over my own learning curve, technical shortcomings and confusion about setting up my PayPal account, I feel great about getting officially paid for my first contribution. What I also find most appealing is the huge availability of quirky content because Associated Content is serving more as an information portal for the masses. I am certain that in order for Google to be successful, it must continue to provide and suggest content which is valid. In that sense, Associate Content producers must continue to make producing interest content a priority and keyword searches a secondary priority.

PIONEERING INFORMATION CONTENT MODEL
Just as eBay has resurrected and redefined small business from being retail storefronts to allowing home-based businesses to conduct business internationally, The People's Media Company offers the same possibility beyond writing in small community newspapers and newsletters to allow a critical mass of people with specific, unique interests to gather together to share information on a global level. Google's Ad Sense allows the economics to provide payment for content producers and for advertisers to reach specific, highly targeted consumers and businesses.

NEW RULES
In any new endeavour such as phone companies, media, computer companies, etc. there are inevitably new rules which need to emerge to protect consumers and advertisers. Synergies are built from pooling the collective brain trusts from successful online companies. In an effort to progress and move the industry forward, there is no doubt that lines will be crossed and many more conflicts will arise. However, it is likely, this is not necessarily the overall intention when companies partner together to pool their resources when online start-ups get individuals from brand name internet companies to join their boards. In the case of Tim Armstrong, there was not anything necessarily underhanded going on when he first joined the board of Associated Content as it was done so with Google's knowledge and support.

OPEN ISSUE
The question remains is that online pioneers certainly take risks and put themselves out on the line to invest their time, knowledge and finances while possibly reaping either huge financial gains or losses. While Tim Armstrong is no longer on the board of Associated Content, he is still an investor. Is this still OK? Should he be allowed to actively invest in information portals or technology even associated with Google? Should he in the future have to make blind general financial investments on certain industries just as there are strict rules for politicians? What do you think?