As a result, we have disabled ad serving to the site.

I violated the TOS

[rubenski]

Hi,

Google has disabled the serving of ads to my one and only website, because I broke the TOS. I have read through the TOS, but am still not sure how I violated the TOS. What I *think* is that a link unit looked to much like my normal site navigation, although it was clearly marked with a 'sponsored links' notice. The other ads on my site are just ad blocks within the page text. I don't copy text, write everything myself, etc. Oh well, I am not here to defend myself, but rather to ask you what I should do. I have removed the ads that may violate the TOS and asked Google to re-enable the serving of ads, but they wont. Any suggestions? I'd really like to know exactly what I did wrong, but all Google does is refer to their first e-mail which is very unspecific about it.

[wheelie34]

As a result, we have disabled ad serving to the site

What did they point out to you, maybe thats the answer, did they point to a specific page?

[BillyS]

>>What I *think* is that a link unit looked to much like my normal site navigation, although it was clearly marked with a 'sponsored links' notice.

That doesn't sound right, Google encourages blending.

[rubenski]

They gave me a whole list of things that could be wrong with my site, but I don't see anything that actually applies to my site. Using copyrigthed content for example. There is not a word on my site that wasn't written by me. Or creating doorway pages. I don't have those... I think I'll send them an e-mail asking them to reconsider. It's all I can do.

[sailorjwd]

Did you ever hire any of those content writers you talked about in December?

If so, maybe they copied some content. We are in the same industry and my content gets copied all the time.

[ann]

I would think that where you made your biggest mistake was by contacting a google advertiser or if they contacted you, for not sending them directly to Google. That is one of the biggest no no's.

here is the post
[webmasterworld.com...]

You discussed it in and They may have gone to Google with questions about the deal.

[Matt Probert]

You did say, and I quote:

"My site is running Adsense ads, but I would love to move away from Adsense in order to diversify my revenue streams."

Now it seems you have your chance!

From your earlier public discussions, it is pretty clear you at least considered running non-Google text link adverts on pages also serving Google Adsense, that's just not acceptable to Google, as they make clear when one applies for an Adsense account.

My advice, be grateful Google haven't sued you, and move on.

Matt

[rubenski]

@sailor: No, I never hired a content writer.
@Ann: The advertiser contacted me. I think I can't be blamed for a advertiser contacting me, especially since that advertiser didn't use Adwords, not to my knowledge anyway. And furthermore, I am pretty sure Google has any knowledge whatsoever about this. Their e-mail states that my site violated the TOS after it had been reviewed, so I guess the violation has something to do with the way my ads are/were placed.
@Matt: I don't think it's a crime to 'consider' moving away from Adsense, not even according to their TOS. Besides that, Google has no knowledge of my considerations and has no way of connecting my posts on this forum to my site's domain or my Google Adsense account

In short, I am pretty sure they disabled ad serving because of a display issue. I'll send them an e-mail asking for the exact reason and start building a new site. There's not much else I can do I'm afraid. I'll let you know what happens. Thanks for your suggestions.

[europeforvisitors]

I'll send them an e-mail asking for the exact reason and start building a new site.

Why build a new site? That won't get you back into the AdSense program, since Google normally bans publishers, not sites. Wouldn't it make more sense to find new revenue sources for your existing pages?

[ann]

If true that the advertiser contacted you then you were still supposed to point them to Google. (I think :))

[nomis5]

If I were Google, one of my big worries would be publishers and advertisers getting together and cutting out the middle man. To some, this might seem like a great idea, especially advertisers. If this is the case, you now have the total attention of a huge mega company focussed on your earlier post which contemplated exactly this. Have no doubts, one way or the other they will have identified your site with the original post.

Getting adverisers from sources other than Google is fine but any advertiser connected with Google, especially through your site, is just not fair game. Google provide you with a potentially hugely profitable advertising revenue income, and they bear the set up and maintenance costs of this. Just don't bother jeapordising this is my advice. if you fancy a change. try Yahoo, adbrite etc. I've been there, done that and they are all varying degrees of abject failure. Affiliates work, plus direct non-Google advertisers.

[gibbergibber]

--If this is the case, you now have the total attention of a huge mega company focussed on your earlier post which contemplated exactly this. Have no doubts, one way or the other they will have identified your site with the original post.--

I think you're exaggerating both how much interest Google would have in a single advertiser, and how much they can tell just from a post on here. They're not James Bond villains! :-)

[tim222]

I think you're exaggerating both how much interest Google would have in a single advertiser, and how much they can tell just from a post on here.

Some people talk about Google like they are omniscient, and if that's true, they would have no problem finding out who's naughty and who's nice.

Thinking good thoughts about Google right now, and channeling them toward Mountain View

[ann]

It only takes one grain of sand to begin a large beach...Of course Google will take notice. Or as Confusious say, one step is the start of a journey of Thousand miles.

[tim222]

rubenski, I sympathize for you but I do appreciate that you started this thread. I didn't realize that it was against the TOS to display non-Google content-targeted ads on the same page as Google content ads. After seeing this thread, I found the clause in the TOS and removed AdSense from two of my pages that were in violation. Thanks for the heads up.

I thought I understood the AdSense TOS pretty well but it's easy to miss one or two sentences here and there.

[chikung]

On a different note can somebody please explain me here that if a site want to place their link on my homepage and pay me per year, is it against TOC? Someone wanted sponsor my site and they wanted their link only on home page.

[ann]

Yep, it sure is.

Check this out about links and Google.

[mattcutts.com...]

[farmboy]

Getting adverisers from sources other than Google is fine but any advertiser connected with Google, especially through your site, is just not fair game.

If that's true, then an AdSense publisher should never conduct any non-AdSense advertising on the site. We have no way of knowing which advertisers' ads are being displayed to the various visitors. In other words, any advertiser could be advertising with us via AdSense and we wouldn't know it.

If I were Google, one of my big worries would be publishers and advertisers getting together and cutting out the middle man.

It's very easy for some of the publishers and advertisers to find out about each other just by publishers viewing which ads they see when they visit their own site.

But I don't think that's a big worry for Google. The technology behind the PPC concept and the contextual matching eliminates the majority of publishers from offering advertisers the same experience.

FarmBoy

[farmboy]

Yep, it sure is.
Check this out about links and Google.

[mattcutts.com...]

Hmmm. Maybe I missed it in Matt Cutts' post, but what's the difference in selling a link and in selling a text advertisement?

FarmBoy

[chikung]

Dear Ann

Thanks a lot for the link. I would str8 report to G for their opinion.

[tim222]

Hmmm. Maybe I missed it in Matt Cutts' post, but what's the difference in selling a link and in selling a text advertisement?

It's not really the same thing. Matt Cutts' blog post is about buying backlinks for the purpose of getting a higher rank in Google search results. An advertisement isn't really the same thing.

AdSense TOS says that we cannot place "any advertisement(s) that an end user of Your Site(s) would reasonably confuse with a Google advertisement or otherwise associate with Google." That implies that it's OK to have other advertisements, as long as they don't look like Google's ads.

Further, the next line of the TOS says that we can't have content-targeted advertisements rhar reside on the same page as a Google content ad.

I hope AdSense Advisor is following this thread. It would be nice to get some clarification on this.

[bostons4u]

So does this mean you can't use other peoples copyrighted content when you have permission? Google will ban you?

[Genuine1]

You can use with permission like wiki but it wont help you get links or traffic! Google wont index it.

[incrediBILL]

So does this mean you can't use other peoples copyrighted content when you have permission? Google will ban you?

It's called DUPLICATE CONTENT and all but a couple of copied of the same article will go supplemental. We don't need 10K sites showing the same junk, it's just silly and a stupid business model.

I have paid advertisers on my site and I don't allow Google to crawl through the click redirect counter for ad stats, which means I don't pass PR, never have.

[tim222]

I have paid advertisers on my site and I don't allow Google to crawl through the click redirect counter for ad stats, which means I don't pass PR, never have.

Bill,

What is the meaning of "crawl through the click redirect counter for ad stats"? I'm interested in what you're saying, but don't quite get it. Thanks.

[incrediBILL]

when you click on things on my site it goes through a redirect page, i don't allow Google to crawl through that redirect page, therefore Google doesn't know where that link goes and no PR is passed.

[tim222]

I see. So if you had non-Google content-targeted ads on the same page as an AdSense for Content ad, Google couldn't detect that automatically because your non-Google ads appear to be just another internal link on your site.

[europeforvisitors]

So if you had non-Google content-targeted ads on the same page as an AdSense for Content ad, Google couldn't detect that automatically because your non-Google ads appear to be just another internal link on your site.

That would depend on the nature of the links. If you were using plain-vanilla HTML links with ads, you'd want to use the "nofollow" attribute to keep PageRank from being passed and to make it clear that you weren't selling links for SEO purposes. (But that's beyond the scope of the AdSense forum; the Google Search News forum has at least one major thread on the topic.)

[tim222]

...you'd want to use the "nofollow" attribute to keep PageRank from being passed and to make it clear that you weren't selling links for SEO purposes.

Thanks for the tip. I'm going to do that.

Actually, your comment helped me understand Bill's post better, as well.

[rubenski]

A fast update, I'm in my lunch brake:

I have sent them a large email explaining that I am not sure how I violated the rules and asking for Google to reconsider their decision to stop serving ads to my site (yes, they DO block individual sites within an account, without disabling the entire account). Today I received an email stating that my site is now OK and that they will start serving ads again soon. It must have been a link unit that looked too much like normal navigation... Wow. This is my lucky day....