Jason Rodriguez | Writer, sometimes designer, web + email advocate.

February 16, 2018

I’m an email guy. I’ve written three books on email, spoken at a bunch of conferences on the topic, and help build tools for other email folks at my day job. I love seeing the email platform grow and evolve. I love seeing people working on interesting ideas that make email more valuable for the subscribers that receive them.

So, you’d think I’d be thrilled by Google’s announcement about adding dynamic content and interactivity to Gmail with AMP for Email. You’d be wrong.

Although I do love the idea of making emails more interactive and (in theory) more valuable to subscribers, I have severe reservations about Google’s approach to doing so and their ability to make it happen.

AMP for Email is an offshoot of the Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP)project, which “is an open-source initiative aiming to make the web better for all”. It’s goal is to allow publishers to create better performing pages for mobile audiences. Less bloat, faster load times, happier users.

While the stated goals of AMP are noble, there has been a massive backlash from the developer and publisher communities against how AMP for the web has been implemented. From concerns about a Google monopoly to accounts of even more bloated pages, the response from the web community has been full-throated and harsh.

As an email geek, I’m liable to disagree with a lot talk in the web world but not in this case. I think AMP for Email is a bad idea. An interesting idea with some cool demos, sure, but poorly executed by Google.

Here’s why:

Logistically, I just don’t see Google getting the adoption it needs to make AMP for Email work across ESPs and other email clients. I absolutely think the Gmail team should be working to bring interactive and dynamic emails to their users, but they should do it in the context of improving support for proper HTML, CSS, and JavaScript (if they can wing it).

Philosophically, I’m completely against Google’s AMP project and AMP for Email, too. I will always side with the open web and the standards that power it, and AMP is actively working against both. I’m all-in on a faster web for everyone, but I just can’t get behind Google’s self-serving method for providing that faster web.

What do you think? Email me or join the conversation over on the Litmus Community.

https://www.rodriguezcommaj.com/blog/on-amp-for-email