Does Google Design AdSense Contract So You're Almost Forced To Break Its Terms?
from the seems-kinda-evil dept
We've noted numerous times in the past that one of Google's major faults is that it's absolutely dreadful at customer service. To much of the outside world, Google represents something of a big white monolith, with very little human face. When something goes wrong, such as people locked out of their documents or a blogger having his blog deleted with no recourse, the company often appears to be nearly impossible to reach in a human way. People send emails that never get answered, or get answered in a highly automated way. Decisions are made with absolutely no recourse or real explanation. This is most clearly true in cases involving getting kicked out of Google's advertising programs. Now, it's no secret that there are a lot of folks out there looking to game the system, and Google appears to have taken a low tolerance approach to dealing with just the potential for wrong doing. Many users might actually appreciate that, but if you're suddenly kicked out without clear evidence of why, and almost no human contact to help work through the details, it certainly feels extremely cold.The latest such example of this, as sent in by a few different folks, is from a rather successful freelance journalist who was just kicked out of Google's Adsense program, which he'd been using to make a fair amount of money in posting quite popular videos about trucks and slightly less popular videos about sailing. As the guy, Dylan Winter, explains, he feels like he's been fired by an algorithm. The piece is really kind of long -- but the crux of it is that the guy has a huge following around his truck videos, and a much smaller following around his sailing videos. But the community who view his sailing videos are pretty committed to what he's been doing with those videos, and it appears that they may be clicking the AdSense ads much more than is standard. Google's response, without any warning whatsoever, was to shut down the account. The guy complained, and got back a notice saying that after reviewing his account, the decision stands, that's it. Oh, and by the way, the guy won't be getting the thousands of dollars he'd earned in clicks since October.
We've heard this story, or variations on it, plenty of times before. I'm sure Google's response is that it has to act this way to avoid scammers from figuring out how to game the system, but it still seems really exceptionally cold. The other part that's quite interesting is that Winter claims that the AdSense terms of service -- especially if you use them on YouTube -- is written such that it's impossible to avoid violating the terms -- meaning that Google always has an excuse to kick out whoever it wants to kick out:
The contract is designed so that it is almost impossible not to break the Google rules. If you disclose site data then you are in breach. YouTube discloses just the sort of site data that would have me thrown out -- but YouTube is Google which is Adsense.This is probably a bit of an exaggeration. I don't think the AdSense contract forbids the release of all "site data." Looking at the actual terms suggests it's a bit more limited. It does say that you agree not to disclose Google confidential info, and among the things that includes are:
If your subscribers are clicking on adverts and not buying, then you are in breach. This is a new concept -- do not look at an advert unless you intend to buy.
[...] The website owner is to be held responsible for the activities of his site users. Imagine that being applied to cars or baseball bats or hamburgers.
Here is a great one -- if you are an Adsense account holder and you hear of another Adsense account holder who is breaking the rules then you must report them to Adsense, otherwise you too are guilty by association and will have your account disabled.
Presumably since Youtube appear to be breaking the rules as well and I have not reported them to Adsense then I am breach of the contract I ticked.
"click-through rates or other statistics relating to Property performance in the Program provided to You by Google"That appears to only apply to the clickthrough rates on ads -- which is not the sort of information that YouTube makes widely available, contrary to Winter's claim.
That said, it is true that Google does seem to have an itchy trigger finger, and a pretty broadly worded terms of service that it can almost certainly claim almost anyone violated, and it provides little real recourse. This is, of course, Google's right to do this, but I still keep wondering if this is going to come back to haunt Google. The company never seems to think that its poor customer will hurt its reputation, but this is the kind of thing that can snowball pretty fast, and it's not the sort of thing that you can just fix on the fly. This situation here may have other issues behind Google's decision to terminate (6% clickthroughs seems ridiculously high), but Google's failure to respond in a human way is getting attention again, and it still seems like a major weakness in Google's efforts.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: adsense, customer service
Companies: google
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I can't name one.
You shouldn't single out Google. Amazon and everyone else are exactly the same.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This makes me wonder...
This is a major reason why I have been rather reluctant to embed myself with Google on everything. I don't like handing over the keys to my life to any corporation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I am a white seo of over 8 years experience and I can tell you in the early days we use to make allot of money for our clients by having them inform their loyal reader to click. That stopped after Google started to cut people off starting in 2003 or 04 (not sure).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yahoo is not much better
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They sent me a message saying that one of the lines on my blog could be construed as encouraging users to click on the ads and I had until a certain date to fix it. I was on vacation when this occured, when I rerurned I removed that line and sent them an email stating that. They then restored my adsense account and stated that my account was now in good standing. A few weeks later they disabled my account on that particular blog with no warning and no explanation. After numerous emails that got no response I finally got one that said my account was disabled on that blog for the original reason and would not ever be restored again and that there was nothing I could do about it, but that I was free to continue using adsense on my other 4 blogs.
Google's actions make no sense and seem completely random.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
For example I had a website I did SEO/SEM for and they had around 178,000 avg unique page views a day. The website owner was happy about the traffic but he had to up his hosting plan 17 times in 9 months because of the traffic for a website not selling anything so he put a plea on his main page that people buy the products the ads were selling to help him pay for hosting. (He did this before I could tell him he could just put a "Donate" button on the site.) Google dropped his account, but after 8 or 9 emails to various people we got his account reinstated after removing the plea.
Lesson: Small websites you have no hope.
Big websites you can get it fixed.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
However this part is just evil:
"Google is still placing adverts against my work on Youtube. My films on there are heading for 2 million hits in December."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
So you can go with the easy of youtube or set up and host your own videos. (Which I can tell you will get expensive.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Google's customer service
Everybody else is a product that Google (and Facebook et al) sells. That includes web users and content producers like Dylan.
We are not Google's customers so why should they provide customer service to us?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Well I suggest he read the terms again and understand what adsense is about. Visitors are not required to "BUY" anything. Adsense is PPC, not PPA. That would not have been the reason at all for his account being disabled. He misinterpreted the clause that I think he is referring to.
In the end, YouTube and Adsense are simply not a good match. YouTube doesn't allow their users any way to access their Channel or video HTML in order to place any sort of protective measures. Adsense should basically stop the monetizing of videos on YouTube until they find a way to allow it's users to at least monitor their visitors.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I'm glad to see you guys covering this
Lame, Google... what happened to "Don't be Evil?"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
First things first...
I got a problem with your site and your views, I don't have to confront you to make your on-life difficult. All I got to do is record a macro, have it click your ads 24 hours a day for a few days and bingo, I have made your life difficult because Google's gonna kick your financing in the hole and you won't get it back.
Many have found this to be the case over the past years. Techdirt would be in the same boat with the industry shills haunting the site all the time. It's one of the favored tactics.
At p2pnet.net, their Adsense ads were revoked because some of the ads tripped Googles' unsafe site detector. Why? Who knows. As with this story, no answers given beyond the boiler plate ones.
I know for sure, no site I ever host, service, nor visit will I depend on Adsense. There is also a down side to it in my book. Since they are so dirty about it, I don't have to view their ads and I don't.
I left ARSTechina last year over the nonsense that if you are running adblock then you are cheating them of financing. They don't make that sort of issue over there any more if I understand it. Couldn't be that they lost so much readership that no advertisers wanted to sell them ads at the same rate could it?
What I do know is that by not viewing ads, I don't get the malware that comes through iFrames. It seems one of the continuing efforts to serve malware to the masses is to sneak one in there whenever.
So I'm happy for Google to never serve me ads. Not on websites and not in searches.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
That just seems like the biggest bunch of contradictory double-speak.
"We put the ads there to get people to click on them but whatever you do, don't tell people to click on them, because then they might actually do it."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This makes me wonder...
But realistically, you can expect to get billionaire with that, because costumer service is painful for many reasons and that makes onerous to do it right. There are many crazy people out there that think they are owned the world, not to mention bad people that would try to game anything and that is the first road block. This is not really an easy thing to solve, anyone who tried we tell you. Because of that chances are you growth will be limited by that environment and that is ok, limits are good, infinite growth is bad.
After that said, yes one can compete with the big dogs offering better costumer service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
Of course if you get caught you could end up in jail not to mention fines.
I saw this girl once, she was making webpages for girls and was having a 7 figure income, her website was just nasty behind the curtains, it installed some dubious things that clicked on every ad in her website. The curious part is that she got on the front page of some current news lauded as a kin entrepreneur LoL
[ link to this | view in thread ]
So all you want to do is talk to someone. With Google, there's no chance. But even the companies with a phone number still manage to fail miserably. Take paypal - their phone staff must be trainee politicians as they never give a straight answer, anything other than low level account enquiries are given the response 'I'll have to look into that, and will send you an email when I am ready'. Then you re-enter autobot email world, where quite often they even forget to replace the 'insert boilerplate text here' tags.
Even when I've tried to report customer fraud, I get given such a run around by the autobot system, that I give up. Basically, these companies are now so big, they think they can do pretty much as they please, and unfortunately they seem to be correct.
This is why you should withdraw funds your paypal account daily, only leave a small float to cover chargebacks and expenses etc. And this is why Dylan Winter should have moved over to monthly bank transfer payments rather than taking his commissions in cheque form. That way if they pull your account, the most you can ever lose is a few weeks commissions, and bank transfers cannot be recalled like cheques.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's possible they wake up and realize that the image of being for the user has faded and it will start to impact the bottom line as they make decisions favoring entrenched dying industries.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I am in business and my web pages are my store space and it is needed by me to make a certain amount of money per pixel in order to keep it going. This is the same as having a real store space. Smart store operators know that they have to make a certain amount of money per square foot every month to pay the bills. Business 101.
Google gets over because they know people won't click on the ad, but they will still get the view and be able to sell it. The view is worth way more in value than a click. This is the same old colonial business plan we have had to corrupt the world for several hundred years. Make your money off the backs of the peasants and pay them nothing to make you wealthy. Great scam. Right out of the history books.
Plus does anyone even use the dead links and messed up databases that Google operates now? Last year it only had good links on the first and second page. Now the links are dead even on the first page. Our company did the so-called SEO on all of our web sites and got a better ranking in Yahoo and we didn't even have to submit our site. We actually did very little work to get linked up with Yahoo.
The only thing that keeps me coming back to Google is the simplicity of their basic site. All it has is a prompt and on slow systems that is great. Yahoo makes you wait for them to load an entire page of who knows what, but it had nothing to do with searching.
So it looks like there is room in town for a new player. Someone with both simplicity and accuracy. What Google was in the beginning. Even Bing is slow with their graphics, but faster than Yahoo. I will have to test it now and see where it's accuracy level is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Google's customer service
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Two Evils...
The reason they can provide such powerful free services (their search is a major one) or gmail, calendars, blogs, whatever, is that they do their best to keep their operating expenses low.
A growing company can be expected to reach a critical mass, the point at which they will always have customers. Companies like this include amazon, google, walmart, and the likes.
Critical Mass means that they have enough CONSTANT customers to stay in business, that is, people who dont care about service or anything.
At this point, the money-number-crunchers research and discover. Getting rid of customer service will make 20% of customers leave, but it will save 30% of costs. Simple math really.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Google AdSense's ToS are blatantly illegal in that aspect, where you cannot tell people "Hey, I get paid if you click on these ads!"
What if you lied and said "I don't get paid when you click on these ads!" and everyone knew that you were lying.... would you still be in violation for discouraging people from clicking on the ads.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Yahoo is not much better
If they cannot give me that, then I threaten to file a lawsuit against them, and within a DAY I am usually reinstated because I am bullish enough and hardheaded enough to actually follow through on that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Two Evils...
Sears found that out a few years ago. So did Wal-mart.
Sure, these are brick-and-mortar stores, but the same premise still holds true.
Stuff like this Adsense BS is why I support STRONG AND HARSH regulation on companies.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Google
My next project as a blogger is to become less dependent on Google for search traffic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I'm glad to see you guys covering this
Just FYI, Google stopped adhering to that years ago. Now they are roughly as evil as most other megacorporations.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
WINDOWS 7 TIPS AND TRICKS
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Grammar
Correction: terms of service are written
Question: "poor customer will hurt" or "poor customer service will hurt". Could be either way but the second version would make more sense, one would think...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Google might see this behavior as sinister clicks, personally I view it as the inquisitive and flip-flop nature of people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If no such rules, they need to give answer in the court.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]