Read on Twitter
I'm confirming a few details with colleagues at other institutions before moving forward, but at this point I know Wiley did remove ads from PDFs for at least one library. So, it's possible to do so, and still not acceptable as a revenue stream. https://twitter.com/panoptigoth/status/1346830376518430721
In their own words to shareholders, Wiley has "ample liquidity" in both cash on hand and undrawn credit. …https://wiley-ecomm-prod-content.s3.amazonaws.com/Q221_Earnings_Presentation.pdf
Wiley assures me "advertisers have to meet our set of requirements which include relevancy to the reader of a given journal; high quality products and services that advance science; reputable organizations who display a true commitment to science."
Setting aside my curiosity at how to measures the quality of such products or how one assesses a ‘true commitment to science,’ this isn’t the first time Wiley has offered inelegant solutions to a problem.
For example, back in 2016 @gluejar wrote about Wiley's sledgehammer approach to prevent automatic downloading. https://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/2016/06/wileys-fake-journal-of-constructive.html
Wiley flooded its platform with bad data and blocked OA and subscription content if users triggered ‘trapped’ content. This included a fake paper, “Constructive Metaphysics in Theories of Continental Drift” attributed to a real institution.
