Given this substantial level of forum activity, and by way of being more clear as to why the disabling of accounts is occurring, I have been asked by my colleagues at Google to post the message below:
In keeping with our mission to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful, we spend a tremendous amount of time and effort monitoring the quality of our search and ad results. As we've stated many times before, Google's primary focus is on delivering the best possible search experience to our end users. To help further this goal, we work with our advertisers in a number of different ways to help them design and run the best ads possible.
Unfortunately, some online advertisers continue to promote services and websites that do not help, and in some cases could harm, our users. For instance, these advertisers may offer free services that bait users into accepting hidden fees. Or these advertisers may attempt to deliver malware to unsuspecting web citizens. Regardless of the practice, these types of campaigns do not benefit our users and we therefore take steps to enforce our policies [adwords.google.com] and prevent such advertisers from running ads through our systems.
Over the last decade Google has implemented a number of systems and processes to identify and disable ads that direct users to these offending websites. However, the ad disabling procedures have resulted in ongoingback and forth between us and these questionable advertisers as they try to outsmart our systems and processes. Therefore, we're being stricter with advertisers who deliver a bad user experience by permanently disabling AdWords accounts that engage in prohibited behavior.
Recently we began implementing this new account disabling. As a result, many advertisers who provide a poor user experience and have previously had their ads disabled will now have their accounts disabled.
We take our user, advertiser and publisher experiences very seriously, and remain dedicated to delivering only the highest quality advertising results to our users. We believe this new process of permanently disabling accounts will markedly improve the overall experience of our users, advertisers and publishers.
AWA
Like I said, no one from SEPT-DEC ban has been reinstated!
How do you know? Yet another unfounded conjecture, like many others in this thread. (Not to mention that these kind of posts have an aggravating smugness about them which really frustrates me...)
And if that statement were true by the way, it would only indicate that a clear and effective appeal system is needed...
Veto,
Your story is hard to believe....I take it Google never told you what the problem with the site was?GR
I have been dealing with this issue since September. Had a great relationship with Google for years, and now it's almost non-existent.
I was told that this wasn't something the Google Adwords team rolled out, it was the Policy Team...and they didn't even know it happened until they all started getting calls and emails about it...is this true...I don't know.
And no, they never told me the reason.
I have to guess that it's because some of the names of the products we sell. One of our products/ad groups sent us a warning twice by Google because "weapon related". The product was called "Black Powder"...but actually an arginine and caffeine product...nothing to do with weapons.
[edited by: vetofunk at 9:00 pm (utc) on Jan. 29, 2010]
Keep trying if you think it will help, but business goes on, so I would hope that most people are also moving on.
Who knows if it will help or not? One can only try. I'm guessing that throwaway statements like the one above are probably a pretty easy thing to say if your account isn't the one that's been disabled...
Like I said, no one from SEPT-DEC ban has been reinstated!I don't know. And you don't know that either. Or you must be working for Google or having some inside information.
What I do know is that there are websites that got 1/10 between SEPT-DEC got back to normal QS after a manual review. The basis for a lot of bans is submitting 1/10 QS sites AND/OR having sites in your account that showed good QS for over (example) four years and then suddenly received 1/10 QS over night.
Since 1/10 QS is the basis for a lot of bans and there are sites that got back their normal QS after a manual review it would make sense to asume there are also accounts that has been reinstated because of incorrect 1/10 QS.
Good luck in whatever you do job wise in the future and hopefully you can take something positive away from this and learn and grow.
[edited by: trinorthlighting at 10:37 pm (utc) on Jan. 29, 2010]
What part of the term "Permanent Ban" do you not understand? Maybe the word "Permanent"?
FYI, the terminology being used is "Disabled".
You guys can argue and complain all you want, bottom line is that there are no verified examples of peoples accounts being turned back on. NOT ONE CASE AT ALL! If you find one, feel free to share it but I doubt you will ever find one.
I refer you to the cab driver in the Seinfeld episode who said to Elaine: "Smugness is NOT a good quality".
Good luck in whatever you do job wise in the future and hopefully you can take something positive away from this and learn and grow.
Growing is always good, for everybody. But your posts come across as the rantings of a petulant five year old with a grudge against society, so you really have more of that to do than most people.
I checked out the black powder, your client got banned due to new FTC regulations. Google is having to follow some law in that case and that is the reason why. Sticky me if you want more info.
Also, GNC and another dozen other companies on Google are still advertising on it - [google.com...]
There's a fantastic post out today about all this that unfortunately I can't link to. Google "ppc blog" and you'll find it. Can't recommend it highly enough.
They have published a clear way to appeal bans
You have been banned from adsense for clicking on your own ads in the past and now banned from adwords, so I doubt with that type of track record they will even bat an eye at your account now.
That is all you can do and that has been mentioned in all of these threads.And as mentioned in all of these threads all you will get is a standard copy/paste reply. So your method does not work when you need someone to actually have a look at the appeal.
That is a standard message employees are told to use for legal reasons for banned accounts.That is basicly the same as what I wrote: you can't appeal for a ban.
They have published a clear way to appeal bans
ap-pealSo let me ask it again, where or how can I make an appeal?
1. an earnest request for aid, support, sympathy, mercy, etc.; entreaty; petition; plea.
2. a request or reference to some person or authority for a decision, corroboration, judgment, etc.
3. Law.
a. an application or proceeding for review by a higher tribunal.
b. (in a legislative body or assembly) a formal question as to the correctness of a ruling by a presiding officer.
c. Obsolete. a formal charge or accusation.
[dictionary.reference.com...]
They could also say that you must scream three times to the moon.
I do not see droves of people flocking to the internet complaining they are missing all the advertisers, do you?
Banning seems a pretty extreme way to go in any case. Why not just use the $10 minimum bid system that was already in place for questionable sites? Make it $100 minimum bid if need be...
