partisan Google???

[kid_nz]

As incredible as it sounds, I think our website has just been discriminated against by Google...

Our meager budget for advertising (or anything else, really) means that we have a hard time marketing and getting visibility. When we read about Google's 'Adwords' service, we thought it might be a great idea, and only cost as much as we could afford. When the implementation of it got too confusing (and because of how it works, got costly, too), we tried cancelling the account. We very shortly received a customer service reply saying they'd rather help us make it work than have us cancel, so we decided to give it another go. BUT....

When we submitted the site to the woman handling our account we received this reply from her:

"I am writing to let you know that the content of your website does not
comply with our advertising guidelines. I have found language on your site
that advocate against individuals, groups and promote hate or intolerance..."

Specifically, she sited the following e-cards:
'Fundamentalists' (which has a hard hitting content, but DOES NOT promote hate, etc.) and incredibly 'Spender'...and even MORE incredibly 'Loyalty'. BOTH of these last two are about as innocuous as they come.
(Sorry, links not working. They can all be found here.)

We debated whether this was, in fact, policy, or just this particular customer service person's personal agenda, but have no way of contacting a superior or confirming the voracity of her claim. (Google notoriously doesn't make it easy for anyone to contact them directly about such things).

Do you think this constitutes discrimination?? What do we do???

[rabid_nerd]

1. Dupe/Cross post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1758666

That said, the Fundamentalists flash does fit their pattern.

The rule is strict. Technically, the presidential campaigns shouldn't be enabled to run ads, but they spend much much more ;)

The rest of your site is innocuous as you say, but the one flash probably did you in.

It's not worth the headache... I have ad space on DynaWeather.com I'd be willing to run your ad on my overflow inventory to see how it goes. (I have about 1000/week overflow inventory)

The only recourse, really, is to be a narc on the "other side".

Start trying to find:

A. RW ads that advocate against someone
B. RW sites that use Google Adsense Ads for revenue that advocate against someone

The established criteria is very, very responsible for them from a liability and shareholder point of view.

[kid_nz]

2. yeah sorry. Just wanted maximum input...

Interesting that you say it's not worth it. Probably, you're right. But it stings to be shut down for doing something you're not really doing...and I'm pretty certain there are other (as you suggest) more objectionable sites getting away with it.

Also, it seemed like an ideal promotional opportunity. I'm not in charge of the marketing, but I'm happy to have you run an ad for us! Even if I'm not sure what you mean by 'overflow inventory', etc! LOL

I very much appreciate that Google needs to have responsible ad criteria. Rightly so. But from our perspective, feels a bit like prejudice (bar the 'fundamentalist' one, perhaps).

Thanks for taking the time to look into it and offering the ad. Very helpful. Let me know if I can give you any ad info, etc...