For the end user, AMP links are clearly marked, and non-AMP news results are readily available.
For the content producer, Google only publishes their content via AMP if the content producer permits it. Indeed, it is up to the content producer to make the AMP version of their content.
Content producers are being strong-armed into this by Google because AMP capable pages are being given preferential treatment in the SERPS.
They also:
- break the web
- hijack content
- reduce the value for the publisher
- make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content
- are a step back from an open web
Why stop at mobile?
Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards.
>hijack content
AMP Cache is different than AMP. Do CDNs also "hijack content", by serving them from faster servers?
>reduce the value for the publisher
By offering them an option to make pages load faster?
>make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content
Incorrect. Read up on the allowed tags in AMP. Both ads and analytics are possible; they're just delayed until after the content is shown.
>are a step back from an open web
Built on open web standards.
> Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards.
Will only comment on this: it should be easy to figure out a way to break the open web using HTML5 standards:
- browser sniffing
- crazy javascript navigation
etc. Just from the top of my head.