advertiser

But it's just part of the PR Blitz package that the advertiser is taking out into the marketplace.

Advertisements are pure deception, and every time a consumer is exposed to one, the consumer loses and the advertiser gains.

People care about how much they think an advertiser is spending on ads?

A system installed on the webserver, where the webmaster offers ad-space which can be bought directly by the advertiser.

These products will change from one reading to another depending on revenue and contract with the advertiser.

Except this wouldn't work well when you are an advertiser looking to advertise on hundreds of medium size sites simultaneously.

This is just a failure of journalism, or possibly an angle that pleases a major advertiser.

If advertiser's landing page is down for example, the loss shouldn't fell on the ad network.

I have never witnessed a scenario where an article is pushed or pulled based on what an advertiser wants and I can't fathom how that would happen.

Ustream has paid Techcrunch as an advertiser, streams their events for free, and has even setup a live cam in their office.

There was a New York Times advertiser caught doing it a few days ago.

The chances of successful replication are lower of course, but the advertiser only needs a few successes to make it worth their while.

Although true, wouldn't an efficient advertiser try not to pay for ads that target those "cheap people" anyway?

If I had to describe a value chain, it would look like this (you can replace "browser" with "app", though with a much more limited scope): User > Device > OS > Browser > Network > Publisher > Ad tech (most of what is shown in the chart above) > Advertiser Basically, every company on this chart is trying to disintermediate every other company to the right and left of them.