Audience Reach and real time broadcast for the web is finally here with PiP, private internet publishing on private channels via private pages.

PiP is the first content server that distributes to 100% full audience reach of websites and apps, totally private, totally outside of big tech tracking and targeting, totally decentralized and totally monitizable.

A PiP page achieves audience reach for creators by integrating with a dynamic non-indexed HTML5 content page that is broadcast on a private channel that exists in between all web pages on websites and apps – Gone are the days of reaching only a fraction of your audience!

if you would like to learn a little bit more about the audience reach problem, click here If you would like to view our presentation on a slide click here

FACTS: No matter how large the audience, currently any publisher, creator or influencer can only reach about 1% of their audience, while big tech has 100% audience reach on the web.

FACTS: During the 2020 Covid breakout, reliable news and journalism had 1% audience reach while big tech had 100% reach through their ad networks.

FACTS: There simply was no technology during Covid that allowed real time broadcast of timely reliable and current information at any scale. Reliable and trusted publishers have 1% reach, ad networks have 100% reach.

PiP can make sure something like that never happens again, a service to news and journalism as well as unique opportunity for creators, publishers and audience.

PiP’s unique real time content management and distribution platform does not replace any publisher platforms, but rather integrates with them, existing in between all of their pages, an “internet inside of an internet” that is always broadcast in real time, with real updates.

PiP is the the first media broadcast technology for full 100% reach.

Connect with anyone coming to your website from anywhere and disseminate crucial details seamlessly.

PiP offers you the means to communicate and broadcast effectively with your entire audience.

The Private Internet Page, or PiP, is a totally private Mobile HTML5 content page that cannot be indexed by search algorithms or collected by third parties. It exists alongside and partners with a publisher or creators own website or app. This creates a new alternative channel on the internet, impervious to censorship or filtering from big tech’s mediation platforms, and an extraordinary new digital product for monetization.

Check out some PiP pages (MOBILE ONLY for now) here.

Private channels for Influencers

Influencers can have their own customized private channels that broadcast a single story while hyperlinking all of their channels into a single broadcast channel they own.

Decentralized Autonomous Media Networks

A DAMN is a totally private publisher platform, giving the owner a set of unique web publishers and apps which can broadcast private pages on private channels.

PiP is for iOS first marketplace alternative to data tracking Google/Facebook ad matrix

iOS and Apple took the first steps pushing back against Big Data, with Apple allowing users to block being tracked on their mobile apps. This has already caused a $10B revenue loss for Facebook alone, not to mention many apps or brands/agents without any alternative.

That alternative is a PiP page, a piloted and tested full technology suite that is market ready Q1 2023.

PiP for News Journalism

PiP solves the audience reach problem for content on the mobile web.

PiP for news journalism and the reliable broadcast of information works simply. PiP allows 100% audience reach to exposure of a content article to the full mobile audience of any news journalism website.

For example, a large news organization, like Vice Media or CNN, may have more than a few million readers on their websites each day, all of them only accessing individual articles, making the “reach” of any one article very low (usually around 1%) while the ad networks broadcast to the full reach of their audience.

Now, a journalism website can publish a content page that will reach the full audience, which can essential for the vast distribution of reliable information to counter misinformation or disinformation flooding the media markets.

Pip for bloggers

Bloggers can integrate their WordPress with a PiP Channel, giving their websites real time broadcast and full audience reach.

Sponsored PiP

PiP has potential of reaching 2% global market capture of the entire digital advertising and marketing globally, a multi-billion dollar annual revenue market. Our business plan evolved with over $800,000 in research and development to date.

PiP is the only GDPR compliant alternative to Google and third party ad tracking, period.

PiP is its own proprietary server which exists independent of the Google/ad tech matrix of platforms.

Our server decentralizes the exchange between a website or app creator/owner and a brand or agent.

This allows brands or agents the ability to work directly with a website or app creator to create PiP pages on their platform.

A website integrates with PiP (a very simple process with even a WordPress plugin) and discovers they have a “secondary” Pip content page broadcast channel which exists in between all of the pages on their website or app.

This channel will show a skippable content page to their full audience for five seconds, and if a user is not interested in the article they easily click away and continue their journey.

This gives any web publisher the full network benefits that Google and YouTube offer their community, where as a publisher can present a content article of their creation for a few seconds instead of a video like on YouTube.

This channel is independent of Google or any third party platform, cannot be blocked by ad blockers, cannot track, cookie, or target users, and can be sold as a premium channel on any website or app with surgical contextual targeting.

This delivers to the vast mobile website and app marketplace a new advertising model that removes all the problems many marketplaces face without any alternative to the Google ad tech matrix.

Additionally, it gives news and journalism websites a reliable sponsored model that pays far more than the Google matrix of ads.

About PiP development background

The Private Internet Page is a pre-existing community asset that failed to launch in 2019-2020, with COVID closing the doors for a few years to recollect. Since 2015, the business plan, development and piloting has consumed over $700,000 in research and development

The community is now ready to deploy marketplace piloting, sales and business development.

Phase 1 Caterpillar PiP 2023/2024

Phase 1 of PiP technology suite is market ready to pilot in 2023, decentralized to brands/agents and websites/apps.

Phase 2 Butterfly PiP

Phase 2 decentralizes our main server, allowing internet users who download an app to replace “third party ad tech” mediation platforms by distributing, verifying, and viewing individual PiP pages on a P2P decentralized exchange between websites and apps and their audience. This creates a new distributive utility contract, a single insertion order for one web publisher to serve one pip page to one internet viewer. This becomes a way to sell, store, and earn the value of five seconds of viewers attention on the internet, a true attention currency.

Transforming a $400Billion a year marketplace into a true, decentralized sharing economy that is operated and managed by internet users as the distributors.

This big picture view allows global “ad spend” dollars or “media dollars” to evolve into a robust new economy, a true attention marketplace that can sell, store, or trade the value of .05 seconds of attention on media marketplaces.

This produces a true “attention asset”, a “PiP” type of digital or virtual asset, that easily becomes a stable micro currency for the web, complimenting both off-chain and on chain media marketplaces.

The decentralized network turns a $150B media marketplace into a true sharing economy, with internet users become partners in the ecosystem instead of the product. We have a robust business plan and technology suite that has a practical development and deployment roadmap, getting us there.

Big Mother, Inc

The community is acquiring a pre-existing media agency with a client register and launching Big Mother, Inc taking PiP on the media marketplaces in Q1 2023

According to a 2018 Pew Study called Crossing the Line, What Counts as Online Harassment?, there is no consensus on what actually defines “online harassment”, especially amongst internet users, which makes building tools to solve online harassment cloudy. What’s more, even when users do agree on where the harassment is, they still disagree on where it begins.

Clearly, we need a consensus on what online harassment is if we have to develop tools and new regulations to protect each other from it.

Where does free expression cross the line as a violation of common decency, or in some cases the law, and how can we programmatically determine when online harassment occurs?

Harassment may be easiest to define as non-resolving communication or actions intended to target an individual or group of individuals.

Harassment is psychological.

While users may not agree on what it is, anyone who has been harassed online knows what it “feels” like when someone is targeting them directly, and no definition is even required. In many cases online, that form of harassment can be challenging, if not impossible, to even communicate and explain to others.

Harassment is intimate – it requires the adoption of a relationship with another person.

The relationship sought out by the attacker is a toxic one, with a winner and a loser, and left to continue will evolve into an abusive relationship.

Of course, harassment can come in so many different forms and interpretations, but one consistent pattern emerges (so far at least, from years in this case study) is the non-resolving identifier.

Harassment is the continuation of non-resolving communication.

Nonresolving communication emerges from users with no intention of resolving an online relationship, conflict, negative impression, opinion, etc. Most non-resolving communication is hostile simply in interpreting the words used at face value.

If a blogger receives a comment “FU!” once, that is a non-resolving communication, if it reoccurs, it is harassment. Obviously, harassment can begin as very mild and increase to the extreme by the continuation of non-resolving communication. Many online users, simply having a bad day, can leave a toxic comment on the internet, and many of these same types of users may quickly collect themselves together, so a singular toxic comment might “flag” potential harassment, it alone would not qualify so much as direct harassment.

Yet language alone cannot be trusted to identify this behavior online because ultimately it is the intention of users in a relationship that relates to the harassment and any language used.

Users intention is often completely hidden from context on any online platform.

How can we detect someone’s intention?

Some online harassment can be so subtle, that only the intimate parties involved truly in the exchange understand what the text or set of images used mean, while that same set of text or image, viewed by outside parties, may seem innocuous.

This makes, I imagine, machine learning AI difficult if not impossible to detect some forms of online harassment, as the definition of what the text means is solely dependent on the interpretations of the target and the attacker.

To understand and define non-resolving communication, we can start by more easily defining and understanding “resolving communication.”

A “resolving” communication leaves both parties satisfied or at least content with the exchange. In a resolving communication, if a mistake is made, or a misunderstanding emerges, the resolving communication will find a resting point to the satisfaction of both parties.

If parties are given a choice, to enter into some form of social contract that offers resolving communication – and if a user chooses to accept the social contract or more importantly if they don’t, we can come to easily define, spot, and correct and more importantly resolve harassing behaviors online.

This is one way how the emerging aiki.wiki platform will programmatically be able to identify true harassment, independent of users definitions or contexts but applicable to all of them while giving all users online tools to resolve and handle online harassment.

Harassment does have many different expressions and comes in many forms online, different platforms define online harassment differently.

This article was originally published in the case study “Wikipedia, We Have a Problem”, available here.

The Audience Reach problem is a really really really big problem.

The “audience reach problem” is a distribution flaw of the world wide web, inherent to all web publishers.

“The Audience Reach Problem” means that regardless of the size of the visitors, readers, or viewers a website has––each individual piece of content can only reach a fraction of that audience size. No web publisher, even the largest in the world such as the BBC or New York Times, can actually reach their full audience.

There is only one centralized company that can reach the full audience of the internet, and that is Google, which enjoys 100% audience reach.

How is the audience reach problem such a profound problem?

I could make a case that the audience reach problem put both Donald Trump in the White House and also contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths from Covid19.

How could the audience reach problem cause all of these things?

A quick story

In 2016, Pop Sugar, a popular webzine for females, had a monthly readership of around forty million female viewers a month.

In 2016, Hillary Clinton, famously running for president, wanted to reach a large female demographic with her political messaging, Pop Sugar was an obvious choice to reach this demographic.

The Clinton campaign approached Pop Sugar with an idea; could Hillary Clinton write an editorial article directly to the readership of Pop Sugar?

Hillary Clinton’s article “An Open Letter to Working Mothers” was published on Popsugar Aug 31 directly to women readers.

Exactly how many readers on Pop Sugar did Hillary Clinton reach?

Around ten thousand, out of forty million female viewers visiting Pop Sugar. Out of forty million female readers a month, less than 1% of the readers would even see the article written by Hillary Clinton.

To confirm; out of 40,000,000 monthly readers, only 10,000 of them would be exposed to Clinton’s article. So how would Popsugar, or Hillary Clinton, reach the full audience of readers?

Her campaign would have to take out ads on Popsugar promoting the article on Popsugar.

Can you imagine? You’re one of the larger publishers on the internet, and if you want to reach your entire audience with an article, you have to take out ads on your own publication to reach your own audience, hoping they will click on the ad and go to the article.

Unpacking the 2016 Election

At the risk of running into a political conversation, please stop if you think that is where this is going, because it’s not. I am not making any sort of “case” one way or another by simply relying an anecdote on how this problem likely contributed to Donald Trump becoming president. I relay this problem so the reader will understand the scale, impact, and consequences of this problem.

Let’s first state the obvious, Hillary Clinton lost by small margins in parts of the country where those small numbers made a big difference. Clinton lost Wisconsin by around twenty two thousand votes, Michigan just over ten thousand votes.

Now let’s just follow an assumption, that the announcement by the FBI on July 5th, 2016 that they were opening an investigation into Hillary’s emails contributed to suspicion about Hillary Clinton, even paranoia in a manner that made a difference in the numbers of votes cast for Trump.

The FBI article was amplified by Clinton’s political detractors through ad networks, all of which have 100% audience reach.

News about the investigation, and all paranoia related, was amplified by ad networks and facebook, as the world knows.

The closer we got to the election, the grimmer the reality certainly appeared to the Clinton campaign, and I am sure a huge sigh of relief when James Comey announced, just three days before the election, that Hillary Clinton was cleared of all charges.

But this news and this announcement only has a 1% reach.

Out of 62,984,828 votes for Donald Trump, how many of them were influenced to vote for Trump out of suspicion of Clinton’s email server? A difference of only thirty thousand votes spread across two or three states would have turned the election in Clinton’s favor.

So in this example; let’s just look at these margins and ask a few questions. Hillary lost in key battleground states by only 30,000 voters.

How many voters were influenced by the FBI investigation into her emails across the nation?

Well, if we were to be really conservative here, and assign a very low conversion number of only .1% , around 62,000 votes, and just under a million votes if we raise it a scale of 10. So it is reasonable to assume that if the FBI never opened the investigation into Clinton she likely would have won the election.

But here is the double rub; she could have also won the election if news publishers had 100% audience reach on the internet!

If the news of the FBI clearing Hillary Clinton could have been distributed enough to just make a difference of around thirty thousand voters, not an unreasonable assumption considering the scale of the campaign, Hillary would have won.

So consider, if only 1% of an internet audience has access to a reliable or verifiable piece of information and they have to sift through 100% reach which runs counter, what would anyone expect to happen?

Foreign and domestic political influence spent hundreds of millions of dollars on ad buys that all have 100% reach, which easily overshadows the reach of reliable information on the web.

Now, let’s revisit 2020 and Covid19 response.

The entire world needs access to reliable information on the internet about COVID. And every reliable news publisher in the world is the only source with which to rely, at scale; verifiable information about the spread of COVID, relief funds, and ultimately vaccinations as they became available.

Would ALL of these news publishers face the same problem?

Sadly, yes.

I use “1% Audience reach” as a placeholder for a small value. In our research, we learned that for most publishers on the web, it’s actually far less, in many cases it is like .1% reach, while social media platforms, the reach can get higher, perhaps 10% to 30% in some cases.

Now, at first one might think that this is simply a hurdle for anyone on the internet, and web publishers that face this problem likely don’t see it as an effective of big tech’s takeover on the web, so consider the issue this way; reliable information on the web only has 1% reach while online misinformation has 100% audience reach.

Big Tech owns 100% of the audience online, and only big tech owns this.

Ad networks have 100% audience reach. Primarily, these ad networks are either owned by Google and Facebook or work alongside their standardization.

How does this happen? Well, if you are the New York Times, and you have say 450M readers a month (called an “MAU” or “monthly active users”), where do you get those numbers from? If you put an article on the front page of the New York Times, won’t it reach everybody?

Not even close. We learned from our research only the smallest number will ever actually go to NewYorkTimes.com to access their news.

Rather, news articles published by the Times are discovered by various percentages everywhere else on the web but the New York Times. Google search, Facebook, Twitter, any social media sites, email sharing, referrals from other mentions. This is where all of that audience comes from and their “pathway of discovery” is just one single article that they may read, while never even visiting the Times website at all.

Unless the New York Times takes out ads, they too cannot reach their audience.

Let’s now look at COVID again. This one hurts, really. This was the only situation I think we could ever have where the world, every single nation, both faced the same problem and would then benefit from the same solution, and the distribution of misinformation having 100% reach on the internet while the information we truly need has to compete at 1% is one of the biggest tragedies that the internet has created. It hit hard and low, this fact. If we were successful in getting launch off the ground, could we have saved lives?

Am I mistaken in these soft estimations? I hope I am, but I do not see how.

What should we expect when the verifiable information we need only reaches 1% of us while unverifiable information, misinformation and even disinformation reaches us 100% of the time, all the time? We’ve launched PiP and Decentralized Autonomous Media Networks