By Cliff Potts, WPS News

If Part One (15 January 2026) examined how Google AdSense structurally fails small publishers, Part Two addresses the deeper consequence: a global digital economy in which independent creators quietly subsidize one of the largest corporations in history while being told this arrangement represents progress.

The issue is not merely low payouts. It is the normalization of extraction as the price of visibility.

When Revenue Becomes Symbolic

For many independent publishers, AdSense revenue is not income in any meaningful sense. It does not cover reporting costs, research time, hosting fees, or even basic maintenance. Instead, it functions symbolically—proof that a site is “monetized,” even when earnings amount to $10–$30 per year for sustained effort.

This symbolic monetization serves Google more than the publisher. It keeps creators producing, keeps audiences engaged, and keeps advertising inventory abundant—all while obscuring the fact that almost no value flows back to those doing the work.

Monopoly Without Negotiation

Google controls a dominant share of the global digital advertising market, often estimated at 25–30% worldwide, with even higher concentration in search-based and display advertising. For small publishers, this dominance eliminates meaningful negotiation.

Creators cannot set rates.
They cannot bargain revenue splits.
They cannot audit advertiser placement.
They cannot meaningfully opt out without losing visibility altogether.

This is not a marketplace. It is a take-it-or-leave-it system in which “choice” exists only in theory.

Consent Under Constraint

When creators participate in AdSense, defenders often argue they have consented to the terms. But consent without alternatives is not consent—it is compliance.

Scholars have long noted that systems offering only one viable option collapse the distinction between agreement and coercion. Participation becomes mandatory for survival, even when the terms are exploitative. Independent publishers accept AdSense not because it works, but because refusing it means economic invisibility.

The Entertainment Justification

This system persists in part because audiences have been trained to view content as entertainment rather than labor. Articles, essays, analysis, and reporting are consumed freely, often without awareness of the economic structures behind them.

The result is a moral disconnect:

  • Readers assume creators are compensated.
  • Platforms imply creators are compensated.
  • Creators absorb the cost.

The theft is not hidden. It is normalized.

Who Benefits From the Status Quo

Google benefits from:

  • Infinite content supply
  • Minimal labor costs
  • Advertising revenue at scale

Large media organizations benefit from:

  • Volume-based monetization
  • Preferential advertiser interest
  • Brand safety algorithms tuned to their advantage

Independent creators benefit from:

  • Exposure
  • Analytics dashboards
  • The illusion of participation

Exposure does not pay rent. Dashboards do not fund reporting. Illusions do not sustain careers.

Why the Global Internet Accepts This

The global internet community tolerates this system for three reasons:

  1. Distance from Harm – The financial damage is dispersed across millions of creators, making it invisible at scale.
  2. Cultural Conditioning – “Free content” has become an unquestioned norm.
  3. Platform Dependency – Creators fear losing what little visibility they have.

Together, these forces allow extraction to masquerade as innovation.

What This System Produces

The long-term outcome is predictable:

  • Fewer independent voices
  • More homogenized content
  • Increased reliance on corporate narratives
  • The quiet disappearance of creators who cannot afford to continue

This is not a failure of talent or effort. It is the intended outcome of a system optimized for platforms, not people.

The Cost of Calling It Progress

AdSense is frequently framed as a stepping stone—a starting point on the path to sustainability. For most, it is not a beginning. It is a ceiling.

Calling this progress does not make it so. It simply shifts responsibility away from those who designed the system and onto those struggling within it.

For more social commentary, please see Occupy 2.5 at https://Occupy25.com

References (APA)

European Commission. (2019). Antitrust: Commission fines Google €1.49 billion for abusive practices in online advertising.
Google. (2024). How AdSense works. Google Help Center.
McChesney, R. W., & Nichols, J. (2010). The Death and Life of American Journalism. Nation Books.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs.

Discover more from WPS News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.