Google's left hand doesn't know what the right one does.

As you may have heard Google mistook some lingerie ads on adland for "adult content" and shut down our ad serving quite abruptly. This was very similar to last years Google freakout over the Sloggi ads I was ranting against.

Like I said then, it makes no sense if Google holds publishers to a higher standard than advertisers, and this is exactly what I told Google when I appealed. Now I have this reply:

Hello, Thank you for making the requested changes to your site in order to comply with our policies. After thoroughly reviewing, we have now re-enabled ad serving to this site. Because ad serving to your site was temporarily disabled, you many notice a delay of up to 48 hours or more before ads begin appearing on your site again. We appreciate your patience and cooperation. Sincerely, The Google AdSense Team

Except of course, I have made no changes, all I did was show Google the article I wrote about how wrong it was of them to block us for that image alone. I like how they backed out of the room slowly there. At least if it's a bot of some sort that gets us tangled into the alarm system due to sudden appearance of skin, let us know?

And I know that when I click on "agree" I am agreeing to follow their terms of service. These rants are pointing out that I actually am and I still get my account shut off. That's not a good thing.

Adland® works best in Brave browser. Adland® is supported by your donations alone. You can help us out by donating via Paypal.
Anonymous Adgrunt's picture
Files must be less than 700 KB.
Allowed file types: jpg jpeg gif png wav avi mpeg mpg mov rm flv wmv 3gp mp4 m4v.
caffeinegoddess's picture

I find this ironic considering how many pics show up in their image search when looking for terms that have nothing to do with naked or half naked women and yet they show up in the results.

Dabitch's picture

I think it's a bit scary when the ad-network that eats all other ad-networks is stricter on the publishers than the advertisers.