Ads and image placement - The official word from Google

yes yes yes... lol images

 

Big G should send email to all publishers about their new policy

 

Their argument will be that it's on the AdSense blog and everyone should subscribe. Which obviously I do. Now. Since about an hour ago...

 

I just think it's interesting that they changed their original stance on allowing images as long as there was a visible border

 

An other nail in the Adsense coffin.

 

I agree and it has been a pain removing them from a number of my sites today having previously had clarification from Big G that the placement was OK

 

It's good to know Google now has a statement about this subject. But still to me is now a clear subject, and after reading the blog 2 or 3 times it still doesn't cover every aspects of image placement. I talked about one month ago with 2 guys from the adsense support team and for them some of the placements of images next to ads were ok and if you ask me, I would ban an accout with that placement.

 

Frustrating!

I had agreed to do certain things with Google Adsense. This was years ago.

Since then, Google has changed her side of the agreement about three dozen times. Not once for the better, for me.

I have no right to change the agreement. Google does. This feels constantly one sided.

I am very concerned. 'Tomorrow', Google will decide what kind of picture I may or may not place 'near' the advertisement. Thenafter, she will extend on what kind of text I may place 'near'. In no time, she will get more into what content I can have (other than what we agreed on in the begining), not just sin stuff, but maybe what is "not beneficial for the user", color or even software.

See my problem? It is a slippery slope, where an Adsense publisher has no hold, and Google is just pouring water from the top.

It is frustrating, but when in hell, there is only one to make deals with.

 

I mailed Google the following:

and Google AdSense Team replied:

I can't find a way to edit my original (first) post of this thread. I think it's a good idea that the above is added to it at the end.

 

This will halve my CTR.

 

Having ads shouldn't be banned. The user sees a link he wants to click on becuase its a topic he/she is interested in and clicks. If the user didnt want what the ad was showing regardless of a picture or not they wont click.

 

Sad news. Google, as well as us, will lose out big on this.

 

It's tough when you can't get an explanation from the ones making the calls. I went through similar problems with paypal and ebay, it's like dealing with a dictatorship, and there is no where else worthwile to bring your business. Reeks of a monopoly

 

Its easier to not draw a line becuase then we can use it against them. If its a moving target its harder for us to get it right becuase we really don't know what right is. Ahh well need to start bringing out some other tricks. I wonder what their response is to a bar of color (100X300) next to the ads? There isn't any actual image in it. Ive been trying this for a while and it seems to be working.

Google is so stupid. Why not have your ads come with images in the ads. Have companies serve images in their ads. Or even a logo, anything. It helps everyone if that is done.

 

Hi all

Google have a large proportion of the Search Market sown up.

I can be argued that this move along with all the other moves we have been moaning about help customers trust the 'ads by goooogle' brand and may therefore actually benefit us in the long run.

Or is that just a bunch of hooey?

 

anyone have idea that whether a video beside the ads? Will this be against the TOS? Just curious, cos only image are not allow right?

 

Here is an other beef.

Google gives the reasoning that the image next to the ad might mislead the user on thinking that the ad is part of the site - and not a paid advertisement...

Well... Then what is blending, which has been promoted by Google?!? Isn't that making ads look like part of the site - in essence misleading the user?!?

 

I agree, it is an absolute pain. It would be great if google could assess each placement individually, but they simply don't have the time/staff.

 

So what about this?

<TABLE><TR><TD>
<font size=15 color=blue>*<BR>*<BR>*<BR>*</FONT></td><td>

Adsense code

</td></tr></table>

Code (markup):

It's text, but is basically the same thing? Or what if we use wingdings?

 

"Up to three ad units may be displayed on each Web site page.
A maximum of two Google AdSense for search boxes may be placed on a page.
A single link unit may be placed on each Web site page, in addition to the ad units and search boxes specified above. Link units are considered to be 'Google ads' for purposes of these program policies.
A single referral button per product may be placed on a page up to a maximum of 4 buttons, in addition to the ad units, search boxes, and link units specified above. Referral buttons are considered to be ‘Google ads’ for purposes of these program policies.
No Google ad may be placed on any non-content-based pages.
No Google ad or Google search box may be displayed on any domain parking websites, pop-ups, pop-unders, or in any email.
No Google ad may be placed on pages published specifically for the purpose of showing ads, whether or not the page content is relevant.
Elements on a page must not obscure any portion of the ads, and the ad colors must be such that any ad elements, including text and URL, are visible.
Clicks on Google ads must not result in a new browser window being launched."

I don't see anything that says images can't be placed next to ads here.


What about placing images nearby but also putting a border around the ad unit. Would that be ok?