Is this guy a Google lover or what?
Seriously though, how is any of this uniquely Google's fault? I mean basically isn't most of this inherent to success in this market, regardless of who it is? Sure it happens to be Google, but pointing that fact out is basically like accusing GM of ruining the Earth's environment. Sure they're a big contributor (huge car manufacturer), but is it their *fault*? And if they hadn't done it, wouldn't someone else have?
All this also ignores the state of the 'net before Google came along. Search was infinitely worse (I was there using the 'net, I remember it well), click-through ads still existed and massive fraud still plagued adverstisers. In fact if I recall correctly click-based ads died for a few years until Google brought them back. Advertisers just didn't trust them. Google was trustworthy and hence they brought trust back to the market. Apparently that may no longer be the case but previously the awareness of fraud was very widespread, so either it's just a lot more sophisticated and well hidden now, or it's not as bad as some are claiming. Because clearly the market is aware of the *potential* for such problems so they must be keeping an eye out for it. They abandoned click-through ads before because it just wasn't working so if it really isn't working now, what's to stop them doing it again?
Anyway whatever the reality is this article seems to me to be pretty well loaded with hyperbole and pretty light on real, insightful commentary or information.