Foarte probabil fake. Mai multe detalii de ce sunt sanse mari sa fie fake in Techcrunch. Personal, ma indoiesc ca daca Google are nevoie de bani, se gandesc sa faca rost de la publisherii de Adsense, in special cand banii respectivi trebuie returnati advertiserilor, si Google ar face mai multi bani pe viitor de pe un cont legit decat one paymentul care l-ar obtine daca ar bana un user.

"First, the language. The author refers to Google’s “AdSense divisionµ rather than its official internal title “Online Sales And Operationsµ. He refers to “being a team playerµ, but down in Mountain View they call that “being Googleyµ. He also refers to “invalid clicksµ which are much more commonly known as “click spamµ at Google. “Click bombingµ is a term that wasn’t used internally, we’ve heard, and only makes up a fraction of all invalid clicks."

Then there’s the functional discrepancies. AdSense’s billing is believed to require a publisher to be paid for an advertiser to be billed. That would block Google’s ability to charge an advertiser but not pay the publisher. Google’s policies explain that if a publisher is suspended for policy violations, “Payment for the 60 days prior to the disabling will be withheld and the money will be returned to impacted advertisers.µ

The report also states that employees wanting to use AdSense on their websites were “automatically placed in the Green Groupµ which the poster refers to as VIP Status or the “untouchables.µ That’s not quite the case. In reality, any Google employees with an AdSense account would have to get VP approval to use AdSense on their sites, and those accounts would then be heavily scrutinized.

And the biggest inconsistency of all is simply that this strategy for making money in the short term would decimate Google’s long-term revenue potential. Why would Google sacrifice all future earnings from a publisher just to snatch a month or one billing period worth of revenue? "

Sursa