How does the Cheezburger Network Get Away with their Content?

[jost]

Caution! NSFW!
[women.hawtness.com...]

Seriously? Ive been slapped by google a couple of times for images FAR MORE TAME than this stuff.

Does google ignore rule breakers if they are making big money?

[HuskyPup]

Does google ignore rule breakers if they are making big money?

Looks like it, I had to check the source code to make sure from where the ads were coming.

[Lame_Wolf]

Picsdigger is far worse. And if anyone here has images on their site, they better check to see if that site is hotlinking to them.

Google itself has penalized PD, and for two days, adverts disappeared, but they are back again.

Violates the TOS in many ways. Just google the name and you will see how many complaints have been made against them.

[jost]

They may have volume, but the majority of the pics on hawtness.com violate the adult section of the google TOS.

Probably EVERY damn page violates the TOS. #*$!?

If I put those images up id get banned from adsense immediately.

[jost]

Wow - just read up on picsdigger. Quite the scam they are running.

But the cheezburger network has a lot more to lose, they could get their entire adsense account locked and would instantly be out of the google business which is a huuuge part of their revenue.

But I guess those google rules only apply to the small fries.

[netmeg]

I didn't see any AdSense on that page.

[jost]

Its at the very bottom and you can see it in their src

[jimbeetle]

This couldn't be discussed more generally without outing sites?

Very slippery slope.

[farmboy]

This couldn't be discussed more generally without outing sites?

Very slippery slope.

Agreed.

On the other hand, maybe it's a clever "outing" - as in promotional effort?

Either way, it's a bad idea.


FarmBoy

[netmeg]

Well nobody ever said some aren't more equal than others when it comes to Google. I'd be willing to bet that the Cheezburger network is a premium partner, and maybe they not only get different perks, but also more leeway.

[Sgt_Kickaxe]

I agree that the site name shouldn't have been mentioned.

Since it was I took a look at the source code and it shows a "special" adsense account and my oh my that's a lot of ad slots.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, Google does police sites and since there are actual naked people on there I'd wager the account may be in jeopardy. I've seen a "special" adsense account get revoked on a massive mashup site this month already, wish I could name that one too.

[martinibuster]

NSFW? Set your Google preferences to strict and search for hawtness. If it's lewd content then it shouldn't show up. Type in your favorite unsafe website name (sans the .com) and see if it's filtered.

Could it be that Google knows about it and that the content does not break the rules?

[cien]

I see no adsense ads anywhere...

[rocker]

I don't see any AdSense ads either.

[ken_b]

I thought "site reviews" were only allowed in the supporters forum?

[rajivatre]

I thought "site reviews" were only allowed in the supporters forum?

Me too! if I remember correctly I have mentioned few URLs some years back in the discussion which were promptly removed by Mods, those were some of the biggest sites in India which I thought were violating google adsense TOS.
Now why special rules for this site URL? Why URL is showing in this discussion if URLs are not allowed to post?
(I know that Mods allow certain URLs from google or some authentic news or blog sites but this site is not in that category IMHO or is it?)

Moreover I checked the site 2-3 pages though I could see adsense code in the page source I could not see adsense ads on the page.
So may be we presume that google is not showing the ads on these pages?
Or they are blended so well that I could not make out the ads?

Thanks
Rajiv