In late August, staffers at several publishers that participate in Amazon’s Onsite Publishing program, or OSP, logged into their dashboards and found what looked like a nice surprise.
Revenues had leapt up, in many cases by double digits and for many by more than 20%. For a program that has turned into a seven- or even eight-figure source of revenue for some publishers, the jumps were more than welcome, especially for those who had seen their OSP revenue flatten or even decline earlier that year.
Those same participants got a much less pleasant surprise a few days later, when those gains all vanished from their dashboards, with no explanation or warning.
After days of complaints and inquiry, publishers received an email saying Amazon had discovered a reporting issue that “inaccurately updated performance metrics” for June, July and August.
That hiccup proved not to be the last. Earlier this month, some participants received an email saying that OSP had under-reported commissions due to a processing error that occurred in September.
These hiccups, coming so close to the start of the shopping season, have put OSP participants on edge. They are also, sources said, emblematic of a program that has grown increasingly frustrating for its participants over the past year, thanks to abrupt changes in content requirements, the downgrading or removal of publisher content from search results, as well as a persistent lack of communication that many participants say is becoming untenable.
While some participating publishers have continued to see revenue from OSP trend upward overall, many have seen it decline precipitously. Sources at two publishers participating in OSP said their revenues had declined so much that they were considering abandoning the program altogether. A third said they worried that they would have to abandon it next year.
“The future of OSP’s pretty murky for us,” said a source at a fourth publisher. “Amazon provides enough reporting on the affiliate side [with Amazon Associates] where you can hire staff, forecast performance, you can follow best practices. With OSP, it feels like there are levers being pulled that are unseen by the content creators.”
Reached for comment, Amazon sent a statement in lieu of responding to a set of questions Digiday sent.
“At Amazon, we are constantly experimenting with our programs to both create the best shopping experience for customers and to help publishers find success on Amazon,” the statement read. “Onsite Publishing is still in an invite-only phase and we will continue to test and learn with how we are sharing this content with customers —testing new placements across Amazon, making it even easier for customers to discover great content and introduce publishers to a new audience. Our goals for the program are aligned with the goals of our publishers, and we’re committed to helping them succeed.”
A loss of standing
While all affiliate programs are at least somewhat dependent on the retailers offering the commissions, OSP requires the publishers participating to invest a lot of faith in Amazon. OSP allows publishers to distribute product guides through Amazon’s site and app, then earn commissions if a person who reads those guides buys one of the featured products.
Though publishers can house all their guides on profile pages inside Amazon’s properties, the overwhelming majority of the guides’ views come from Amazon search queries; for most of the past two years, a person who entered a search query such as “best air fryer,” for example, or “best pillows,” would likely find excerpts from a guide written by a participating OSP publisher among the first few search results.
Like any digital media company, Amazon regularly tinkered with what it put in its search results. Those tests sometimes had catastrophic results for OSP publishers, who said Amazon rarely warned them that tests were coming, though sources contacted for this story said it was perfectly reasonable for them to conduct them. “They wouldn’t be doing their job if they weren’t trying to optimize,” a sixth source said.