I have resigned from the Google AMP Advisory Committee

As per the AMP AC charter, I have resigned with immediate effect. As I was a non-corporate representative, I will not be nominating a replacement.

I have loved working with the AC. They are a team of brilliant individuals who are all committed to trying to make AMP better, and I'm sorry to leave them. I've been a member of the AC for a little over two years and now is the time to step away and let a wider variety of people work on the committee.

As I mentioned in a previous blog post, I am starting an MSc in January so I'm trying to cut back on my extracurricular activities.

The stated goal of the AMP AC is to "make AMP a great web citizen."

I am concerned that - despite the hard work of the AC - Google has limited interest in that goal.

When I joined, I wondered whether I could make a difference. I hope that I have been a critical friend. The AC has encouraged AMP to think more about user needs - rather than Google's needs. And changes to the search carousel were also a concern of the committee which have been partly addressed.

Google's thesis is that the mobile-web is dying and people prefer to use apps - therefore making the web faster and more app-like will retain users. Google don't publish data about this, so I can't directly criticise their motives. But I do not think AMP, in its current implementation, helps make the web better.

I remain convinced that AMP is poorly implemented, hostile to the interests of both users and publishers, and a proprietary & unnecessary incursion into the open web.

I am glad that I tried to make it better, but I'm sad to have failed.

Share this post on…

16 thoughts on “I have resigned from the Google AMP Advisory Committee”

  1. Anonymous says:

    "I am glad that I tried to make it better, but I’m sad to have failed."
    You tried. And that is what matters.

  2. Jansen says:

    Thank you for your efforts - I am sure they will not have been in vain.

  3. Anthony says:

    "But I do not think AMP, in its current implementation, helps make the web better."

    This is where you're completely wrong. Shame on you for pushing AMP and destroying the web.

    1. Robert says:

      What? You think Eden is wrong. Does that mean you think AMP does make it better?


    My biggest issue with AMP is that nobody asked me if I wanted to have to use it. And I find, as an older netizen, that I don't care for the intrusion. Why is it with Google that these things are never binary with Google?

    I am about to switch to a different mobile browser from Chrome because of AMP, and the fact that Chrome on Android is not like Chrome on WIndows or Chromebook, and I find it tedious to use it on Android because of that.

    I have the option to install most apps. I don't always. Please leave it to me to decide if I want a browser experience or an app experience, and then respect my choice.

  5. Flimm says:

    In some cultures I've seen, people use almost exclusively the Facebook and Messenger apps to access the Internet. I am already persuaded that apps are competition to the web, but of course I would welcome any data that Google would publish.

    I would be interested to hear what specifically you find poorly implemented or hostile about AMP. I've heard of many criticisms and I wonder which ones you agree with, especially in the light of recent developments (web bundles and the fact that AMP is no longer required to be in the Top Stories carousel on a Google SERP).


What links here from around this blog?

What are your reckons?

All comments are moderated and may not be published immediately. Your email address will not be published.Allowed HTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> <p> <pre> <br> <img src="" alt="" title="" srcset="">