joined:Apr 1, 2016
What's considered a s h i t ad is subjective at best, and a matter of opinion.
I respectfully disagree. There are ads, such as the <snip> ads of late that are objectively bad. The advertiser engage in practices that in almost any other setting would be characterized as fraud. Other ads use tactics that are explicitly in breach of Ad-Words policies and T and C's, for example including a phone number in the ads is against the terms and can and should be reported.
The problem is that there is very little effort and resources allocating to addressing this issue by AdSense and AdWords. About a year ago I came across this type of ad, I clicked on the ad-choices icon on the ad and try to report it. But, the form required an input that was not present on the ad (a copy of the link). I reported the problem to AdSense support, they fixed the form such that the input was no longer required. As a thank you they credited my account $50. I was very pleased, I blocked spam, and got paid.
This time around, I tried reporting the ads and one there is no ad-choices logo to click on the spam, and if I go to my own link to the reporting page, I the form seemed to have modified again, but that field is required again. So no reporting of the spam is possible. This time, no response from Adsense Support.
Also about a year ago I had the opportunity to meet someone, a friend of a friend who had moved to Mountain View to work for Google, for Doubleclick. He was back here visiting. And he essentially confirmed that in terms of priority inside Google AdSense is far from being at the top of the list.
Unfortunately, the rest of what you say is true. We choose to work with AdSense and we really have no choice but to deal with product/service as it is. And Adsense is very fortunate that there has not been any serious competitor that has eaten up their market share. I am sure if that were the case we would see a much quicker and more serious effort at resolving the problem.
[edited by: martinibuster at 5:21 am (utc) on Aug 25, 2017]
[edit reason] Please read the MEMO about specifics. Thanks. :( [/edit]