I am using a border around my ads, and have the images lined up next to the ad blocks outside the border. Google has approved this time after time when i ask them to review my site when making changes. I quote Jokomo's google quote above: In addition the background color of my ad blocks are different than the background of the web pages, I guess thats what they mean about the color changes in that quote.
But the point is, why are you using images next to your ads? Well, I guess the obvious reason is to draw attention to the ads, thus increasing the click rate. Google speficially say not to use ads to draw attention...and this is what you are doing. Seriously guys, why do you not just remove the ads all together? Really isn't any point in trying to take the risk.
Well, if the TOS states that it's allowed when you do have a border or different ad color then why not do it? Images are the best way to attract the people.
All fine and well with pages I'm in the process of creating or about to create. Yes, I can comply. But what about those gazillions of past pages floating around out there? I don't have time to change all them. Anybody here with lots of pages, are you changing them all? Only think I can think is to just delete the images off the server...leaving a pretty little dead spot on each page. Greaaat.....
That's insane... you really need to start thinking 'outside the box' and develop a reaction.. Also, would you mind sharing the URL in question? It would be interesting to see how this could happen.
That's amazing. Down 100% would mean it went to zero. Down 400% means negative earnings. Are you paying them now?
I don't read anywhere in their post any language that says you can't use images to draw attention. They are quite specific in pointing out that you cannot create a RELATIONSHIP between the images and the ads. They don't want the image to be ASSOCIATED with the ad. If you have an abstract image next to your ads, I would suspect their are very few instances where someone would mistake the image as part of the advertisement. How about a graphic arrow next to each ad. It draws attention, yet does not mislead. Instead of lining up four images next to four ads, use three images so they aren't perfectly aligned. What about one image that spans the height of the ad block and again, is abstract? I believe these are ways to still draw attention with a graphic, yet not risk 'tricking' the viewer into thinking its part of the ad, and therefor would be approved by Google.
No, but if you read the standard TOS, it says: Web pages may not include incentives of any kind for users to click on ads. This includes encouraging users to click on the ads or to visit the advertisers' sites as well as drawing any undue attention to the ads. By placing images next to ads is clearly drawing attention, otherwise they would not be placed there! But that is just my opinion, maybe I am wrong...but I would like to stay in the margain of not abusing the terms of service.
I can certainly see not wanting to break the TOS, no one wants to get banned. I still think that 'undue attention' is clarified by the recent post to mean a deceptive association. The spirit of the TOS is to not deceive the viewer.