Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
We ask that publishers not line up images and ads in a way that suggests a relationship between the images and the ads
I've been seeing this a lot lately as I've been browsing the web. I wonder if they'll start sending out warnings?
I have seen a lot of sites pick up on this trick though so it does seem like a big change for Google. Mostly these have been on the arcade and myspace script based sites which seem to be very profitable if you have high levels of traffic. It will be interesting to see the impact upon these sites if Google do enforce this rule.
there is a huge thread on another adsense forum that has covered this issue in agonizing detail, for over a year and a half now.
many sites were approved by g for the exact pic-per-ad layout that you see in their examples... what was once legal will now apparently get you banned?
I'm glad they are discouraging it now.
I'm also surprised to see someone posting in a Adsense forum, that they totally avoid sites with Adsense. It's actually got to be pretty hard to do!
(You can't even use Google!)
does anybody know what's the last day we need to remove pics?
I anticipate under the circumstances that Google will provide some sort of mass notice or, in the short-term, individual warnings before heads start to roll. But it's your neck, so you may not wish to rely upon my guesswork.
hobbs, this is an abrupt policy change by google
Not according to the TOS that I know, and not according to their recent statement:
There's been some confusion on this issue, and so we turned to our policy team to set the record straight
Finally not according to my own gut feeling and common sense.
As for the publishers that claim to have an explicit approval for this, I can only guess it was part of "special" agreements made between them and Google giving them "special" privileges, it happens, and says nothing about the TOS that we go by.
I've written here many times against the vagueness in their blending directive, but in this specific case, the violation is very clear.
Welcome to the world of search engines... that's been the standard for a decade now. A few people do something a little tricky, no problem. More pile in, and some keep pushing the envelope... finally, whammo. Unfortunately, they rarely warn you before the hammer drops, so I guess this alert is unusually gracious. Must be that ol' Christmas spirit.
there is nothing in the old tos that specifically forbids images next to ads, which could be why nobody has posted the relevant links.
an old email i have from adsense support required a border around either the pics or the ad block, and as you can see from this thread, they still do allow pics next to ads under the right circumstances.
i agree with your opinion to some extent, but until you have read the thread that i was referring to, it will be difficult to understand just how far g has swung on this issue.
Most are cowering and providing "attaboy" to Google Adsense/Adwords decisions no matter how shrouded or inconsistent they may be.
This reminds me very much of AT&T.
One of the differences is the 'Internet speed'...
[edited by: Tapolyai at 8:49 pm (utc) on Dec. 19, 2006]
And this issue is not the same as blending. Blending is not about drawing undue attention to ads; to whit, it's about making the ads stand out as little as possible.
I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised by this article. What advertiser would want their fine products and services associated with our cheesy graphics? Seriously, "random" images corresponding to their ads could be seen as interfering with their branding efforts. And they are the ones supplying the cash.
the fake freeware site rules the serps for 100's of apps ..none of which it has
This is proof that something is broken in Google as compared to other search engines in the way it allows the MFAs to rise to the top of the food chain like that.
Isn't it duplicitous though in the end, to say that you are not allowed to show images beside ads because it might be "misleading", but then mislead even far more people yourself by returning pages and pages of bogus MFA-laden search engine results (like the freeware site Leosghost refered to!)?
I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised by this article.
Well, there's people who are surprised, and people who are surprised and unhappy, and then there are people who aren't surprised, etc.
The unhappy people get mad because their attempts to skirt the edge of adsense policy get foiled. It's the same people who complain, each time one of their fave "avenues" gets blocked.
There's no surprise here, as you indicate. Except for people who believe they are entitled to...[fill in blank]
BTW (western) internet in that country to this day is taken by most webmasters as some faceless media which is suitable for milking money without fear to be caught.
as i stated before, numerous websites with pics next to ads were approved by adsense suppport... in the thread discussed by critters, we saw google approval for specific url's that had the exact same pic-per-ad page design that has now been specifically outlawed.
if you are a publisher who got caught up in this, consider emailing adsense support to get an opinion on your specific site... it might give you a bit of breathing room, while you are changing your page design.
...placing images above AdSense ads is not necessarily prohibited by program policies. However, depending on the method of implementation this could be considered ‘encouraging users to click on ads’.
We ask that publishers not line up images and ads in a way that suggests a relationship between the images and the ads.
but in the same breath, they turn around and state that is o.k. to use pics next to ads under different circumstances... so that's no different, lol.