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
If a lot of people have appealed and not been accepted it shows to me that a lot of people have been caught correctlyThen you assume that Google is actually looking at each appeal. I think Google will send a standard reply to each appeal: "Ban was correct, don't contact us again...".
Check my post on the second page of this topic where I write about a guy that managed to get his account unbanned. After the first email Google did not actually look at his case. He got the same standard reply everyone is receiving when they appeal. Second email same story. But after the third email they finally had a look at his case.
Google tells in the first email not to contact them anymore and that if you do they will not reply. How many people will send a second email or even a third email after that message from Google?
Don't agree, there definitely are far fewer scam sites, malware sites and MFA sites on AdWords form what i can see
I have been running into B2B all over organics for any variations on the 3 keywords ..and big dog affs and shopping sites and ebay ruling the adwords on the first three pages ( whatever time of day or night I search )..when I have found manufacturers they all say the same thing .."adwords is killing them because they are having to bid so high to get around the "big dog affs" and the shopping sites and ebay ..for their own products ..they are competing with B2B sites that they never joined ..and affs that bid on their names trademarks and products and send customers to their competitors ..or require sign up ..to send customers to their site ..many of these sites are not even affs ..they are just email address harvesters building mailing lists of "interested customers for your product" ..these have also been whitelisted ..because it it were truly impartial and automated ..they would have been removed weeks ago..
Googs answer to the manufacturers ..raise your bid
When google wants to clean a niche in serps or adwords or adsense it can do and has done so within 24 hours ..this is all about removing the small fry before either rolling out their own product ..or cementing deals with the big aff dogs ..and may be connected to their roll back via green link Geo indicators of the ( til now ) international marketing and access to and of products and information via the web ..it doesnt suit Google if person or company A ( based in country B ) can sell to person C via a site hosted in country D ..that doesnt make adwords any money on the transaction ..
unless google start offering hosting ..
and we all get forced into becoming digital sharecroppers for the GORG ..
BUT I still think they've done the right thing and we'll see the improvement on AdWords. IMO there's more than a little bit too much anti-G hysteria going on at the moment.
What I am thinking though is that in G's own words, they've done this to improve user experience. So, the same rules of user experience should apply to the SERPS. So, if I was an affiliate right now I'd be worrying that all this on AdWords is a method for G to refine their quality guidelines on a smaller number of sites and therefore minimise civilian casualties before moving on to the SERPs within the next year or so...
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.
So if you ever messed up in the past, they just disabled you now, even if you have since corrected the problem.
Fair? Probably not. But there's your reason.
So if you ever messed up in the pastThe problem is that there is no way you can tell in advance if an ad/landingpage wil get a low QS. Even when you ask and get aproval in advance from support you might get a QS of 1/10 one week later while de guidelines did not change, the website did not change, the campaign did not change in that week. That is what I asked support and they told me that a manual aproval will not guarantee anything. In other words even support does not know when a landingpage fits in the guality guidelines. Now how could an advertiser ever know if his landingspage is good or not?
And when you get the 1/10 QS and contact Google about it then sometimes they will restore it and apologise for the mistake made by the algorithm. Even then that same landingpage might get again a 1/10 QS one week later. Then you can contact support again to let them correct the problem for the second time. But perhaps the ban algorithm does not look at mistakes corrected by support and will see it as two violations anyway.
I had a campaign running for about four years with 8/10 QS. Then suddenly 1/10 QS while I did not make any changes. I was promoting that specific website as an affiliate (direct linking to merchant) and currently other affiliates are still promoting the same website. So Google did not accomplish anything by disabling my account because the website is still listed in the ad section.
even if you have since corrected the problem.If that is true then they don't send out warnings. Because when you get the first email about submitting one or more low landingpages they will ban you one month later. No matter what you do. So they tell you it is a final warning but basically you should read it as a notification that your account will be suspended within a month. Even when you correct the problem. The would explain the following:
A lot of advertisers (including me) had contact with support after the first and final warning, then removed everything (including ads, adgroups, campaigns) that suddenly got 1/10 QS and removed anything that might could get a 1/10 in the future. And last but not least stopped adding new ads. And then one month later they still receive a ban. That is what happened with me and with other advertisers.
Affiliate marketers are different - we promote dozens/hundreds of sites and do not have control of many aspects. If a merchant site starts loading slowly, one of hundreds we promote, that could now be enough to have our account closed. Google's response (if they shared their thoughts) might be "well don't promote sites you don't control".
They'd do everyone a favour if they just stated their position on affiliates. If they want rid of us they should just say.
[adwords.blogspot.com...]
Then last month, I received the 'final' warning e-mail from Google. After this e-mail, I deleted the campaigns that contained the URL that Google didn’t like. I did continue to run the campaigns/ads that Google had approved, with QS of 10/10 throughout most of the keywords. Are you telling me that even though I’ve been blessed with QS 10/10, and they do approve the campaigns, I’m still going to get canned?
GR
The numbers are a bit exaggerated, but Vamm has hit the nail on the head: IMO this isn't Google's fault - they've been FORCED to go down the automatic route.
No company the size of Google can be FORCED to do anything. Not with $20B+ in revenues and market cap of $185 BILLION. This was a CHOICE motivated by profits (or cost control) to use automated tools to ban accounts and have almost non-existent customer service to handle account holders with issues.
And CHOICES reflect the values of a company (or people for that matter). Back to my point about a mega-corporation becoming arrogant and forgetting core and healthy business principles. This happened to MS some years ago and they had to restructure and became one of the most hated corporations in the world for it. Google is next as someone else on this forum said.
It also shows how poorly they executed their automated scheme. You all know as technical people, you don't roll out automation without a LOT of testing upfront. They should have tested their automation on a small group, refined/tweaked it, then 2nd test etc...
That's exactly what's going on. Many of us get canned for historical reasons. My account was banned without any campaigns running at all. And we've only had ONE occurrence of low QS.
Dlocks,I don't know. In my post I was replying to StoutFiles post and making assumptions based on StoutFiles reply. It might not be the case at all. I will perhaps never know because support will not give any specific details about why my account was suspended while I took the steps as I described.
A few months ago I revived a few campaigns that contained a URL that Google did not approve of; many keywords had QS of 1/10.[..]
I’m still going to get canned?
In other words, you might be able to use AdWords for the next ten years but it is also possible you will receive a suspension email tomorrow.
Therefore you should never ever depend on AdWords alone. Nowadays AdWords is a very unreliable business partner so don't spend all you marketing budget with them.
Are you telling me that even though I’ve been blessed with QS 10/10, and they do approve the campaigns, I’m still going to get canned?
Well, that's _exactly_ what happened to me. So I guess nobody is safe.
I just got banned and my sites have no malware, no hidden fees, in fact NOTHING malicious at all. They are 100% white hat. So this reason for banning is completely inaccurate. They are also not affiliate sites, I don't link to affiliates.
I think the sites are as white hat as you can get.
Replying directly to the email will send your email to the correct team (whereas contacting support in any other way will not) and I recommend it as the best way to get one's questions and/or concerns addressed.To set reasonable expectations, I am guessing that the response time from that team will be measured in days, rather than hours.
AWA: Can you follow up with this team to make sure this is in fact the case? We responded to their email immediately but have no reply from them yet.
Low and behold, within 24 hours he was actually emailed information from 2 of his 20 unique email addresses information from the company named in the recent "Google Money" lawsuit. What he figured out was that two of the sites that he was promoting were actually front sites for the company that is being sued in the "Google Money" lawsuit. He also suspects Google actually tested various sites over time by signing up with email addresses looking to see what actually happens. He suspects Google has a Blacklist of URL's and are using it in helping to determine who is to be banned and who is not to be banned. With that being said, he spoke with his attorney and the attorney stated "Google is in the midst of a lawsuit and they will continue to hold a ban until the lawsuit is settled. Currently your site could be used as evidence in the lawsuit as it unfolds. You should not worry about Google coming after you because you had no idea that email addresses were being sold or given to a 3rd party. The sites you were promoting stated they never gave out or sold email addresses to third parties and it is obvious that they mislead you."
So my acquaintance and his attorney are gathering information for a lawsuit against the two "Front Companies" and will more than likely be in contact with Google's legal team. They will more than likely file a lawsuit against the two "front companies" for a loss of income because he was being mislead. After everything works out his attorney feels Google will reinstate him.
With all of that being said, have you looked at who you are actually promoting? Did you take a hard look at your own people you are promoting? Are they being ethical and honest? The answer may be that you are actually promoting some front companies in a named lawsuit or a pending lawsuit that has yet to be filed. You should read AdWords TOS real good and put all of your own customers to the test and see what actually happens when you do sign up with your email address. If you were mislead by one of your own customers there is some legal remedies out there and available for you.
I cannot comment anymore than what I just wrote on the pending lawsuit so please do not ask about it. Just take the information and test your own customers and see what you come up with.
netmeg: hopefully not, or hopefully this is a temporary situation if so. If the disabling process is generating false positives (as certainly seems to be the case given our experience), then it would obviously be desirable if those false positives could be reinstated quickly.
So, he took some time to dig a bit further to find out why.
Finally something serious and creative - and simple, without empty shoots. Way to go...
Lately, I've been coming across the sites with topics of interest which would suddenly either redirect, or bring a pop-up (under) with that Google money crap.
And all "promoting" articles are in the form of newspapers, not giving a chance to think it's something spammy.
The initial articles (of interest) were just fine, and probably copied from somewhere, not sure.
Thanks very much for sharing this.
[edited by: bryson at 5:14 pm (utc) on Dec. 10, 2009]
That does not mean you are being sued but they may use you in an evidence chain. That makes 100% sense to me. I doubt AWA will reply to specific cases if there are legal issues. I suggest everyone dig real hard into everyone they are promoting and see what you come up with.
if you are not getting a response from Google or getting a "Canned Response" it is more than likely you may be a part of the lawsuit or pending lawsuits
With all due respect to your wife, whose expertise is in real estate as you point out, I personally doubt this has anything to with it, for most people at least. Not asking AWA to look into specific issues either - just into the general delay time in processing appeals (replies to the disabling email) by the LPQ team. It seems to me that it's just taking longer than planned, maybe for the reason netmeg said. I hope a resolution can be found soon.
To anyone that had/has ANY doubts that the Google process for account banning is a major cluster-@#$@$#! Here's the latest on my end.My account got banned on Dec 3rd - got the std. generic email from LPQ-support.
I replied the same day with an appeal.
Got a reply today (Dec 8th) explaining that after carefully researching my account they have determined that I have been promoting a "get rich quick" scheme and specify a domain that I've been promoting. The domain in question is NOWHERE to be found on ANY campaigns in my Adwords account.
HOWEVER,
I HAVE NEVER PROMOTED a "Get Rich Quick" scheme and specifically have never ever promoted the website and domain they're referring to.
I've replied to that effect.
THIS CLASSIC AND IRREFUTABLE PROOF they (Google) don't have a #$#%@! clue as to what how their automated process operates and how messed up it is.
I'll keep you posted if I hear back.
As promised, I received a reply. A dumb generic email saying they've have "carefully researched" the account and completely ignoring my challenge regarding the specific website in question.
I replied AGAIN, this time asking to have this escalated to a manager.
Got another reply saying: Sorry, I cannot help you and same dumb genetic email below.
Bryson, you never know what is happening when a third party (Google or your clients) is involved
Conspiracy theories are all fine and dandy and there is probably an infinite number of them we could come up with, but Mr Occam and his razor suggest the simplest possible explanation (an understaffed appeals team) is probably the correct one.
I just do not see Google shutting down income accounts without reason. Advertising is their main source of income and there are many AdWords clients have not been affected by this ban. Google has been putting out information and warning since early October on this subject and letting the world know it was going to happen. I would bet that Google already did a lot of research and made the correct move in their eyes so there would be no collateral damage to good standing accounts.
As far as being understaffed, I have never found that to be a problem. It is much better to call adwords support than to email though. It is much better talking to a live person. One of the numbers I have is 1-866-2GOOGLE in the US.
My take on all of this (Besides what Google has already stated that is unacceptable), if you offer a free product or service and take personal information, you will be put on Google's radar to be looked at. Yes, good companies offer free goods and services, but that is a decision Google will make.
[edited by: trinorthlighting at 9:29 pm (utc) on Dec. 10, 2009]
I would bet that Google already did a lot of research and made the correct move in their eyes so there would be no collateral damage to good standing accounts.
Nobody's betting that Google didn't do their research. False positives just happen in a situation like this when you're disabling a large number of accounts quickly. We know so because we just became one. Not really a big deal if the false positives can be appealed and resolved quickly, but that's where we need help.
As far as being understaffed, I have never found that to be a problem.
Me neither but then again we never had to deal with this specific team (the one handling appeals for LPQ disablements) before.
It is much better to call adwords support than to email though. It is much better talking to a live person.
I think the disablement email and AWA's post earlier in this thread make it clear that Google would like to be contacted on this issue only at the email address they sent the message from, and not via some other mechanism, which would probably not reach the correct team (LPQ support in this case) anyway. We're just following their directions.
I'm afraid you are sadly mistaken about this whole affair.
Google's specific reason for shutting me down was that we promoted a certain very specific domain.
However, we have NEVER EVER had any association nor advertised this domain or anything in that market ("Get rich quick"). All our campaigns have been for private clients, all regular local small businesses.
You should read another thread on this site (same category) titled: "early holiday gift from Google". There are numerous people running completely white hat accounts this has happened to.
And the way they're handling customer service and appeals is not even befitting a small mom&pop shop, let alone a $22 Billion company. There's simply no excuse to how they have handled this entire issue.
