Google's Blogger To Delete All 'Adult' Blogs That Have Ads

DougDot sends this excerpt from ZDNet: "In three days, Google's Blogger will begin to delete scores of blogs that have existed since 1999 on Monday under its vague new anti-sex-ad policy purge. On Wednesday night at around 7pm PST, all Blogger blogs marked as 'adult' were sent an email from Google's Blogger team. The email told users with 'adult' blogs that after Sunday, June 30, 2013, all adult blogs will be deleted if they are found to be 'displaying advertisements to adult websites' — while the current Content Policy does not define what constitutes 'adult' content. To say that Twitter ignited with outrage would be an understatement. Blogger users are panicked and mad as hell at Google."

Re:Case Study: Why the Cloud and Freeium do not wo

[i kan reed]

The expense of setting up your own physical server, installing custom software, and maintaining it, would almost certainly exceed all ad revenue anyways. The very premise of these "businesses" was built on how cheap it was do dump "content" on a blog, against how much money you could earn from ads.

Related ?

[dargaud]

I have an old but popular personal website that's been running since 96 and using Google ads since the very beginning (2003? Can't remember). Two weeks ago I received a sternly written email that because there was ONE 'adult' picture on the entire site (700 pages), I had 3 days to remove it or adsense would stop. I thought it was some scam but it was the real deal. And yes, it was an artistic rendition of a breast as a mountain with minifig climbers on it. WTF, Google, you turning into baptist hypocrites or what ?!?

Re:anti-sex ad policy?

[hedwards]

They can still have advertisement, they just can't have ad links to adult sites.

I'm guessing that the goal of this is in part to clamp down on human trafficking, illegal porn sites and related crimes.

From what I can tell, the real problem here is that the policy is somewhat vague. A company selling sex toys would arguably be an adult site, but is probably not what Google is intending to bar from those ads. But, without a clearer policy it's hard to say for sure.

Re:who cares?

[hawguy]

the new rule is not that "vague" at all

Define adult. Define occasional "adult". Any rule about adult content tends to be vague since that's the nature of the subject.

I'd like to see the definition too... TFA says it's not defined: "while the current Content Policy does not define what constitutes "adult" content." Is Victoria's Secret an "adult" site because they sell lingerie and other merchandise that's oriented towards adults? How about a ship-in-a-bottle [handcrafte...lships.com] websites because that's an interest generally held by adults? How about Good Vibrations [goodvibes.com] because they sell sex toys and videos? How about a nudist oriented site because it shows people in the nude? How about a "Hot girls in bikinis!" site because it shows hot girls in bikinis? How about a school swim team site because it shows girls in bikinis?

I'd really like to see how Google draws the line between adult and non-adult.

Re:anti-sex ad policy?

[Dputiger]

Precisely. What's "adult?"

Is a site with sexual advice "adult?" What about explicit sexual advice? What about discussion of non-normative sexuality (LBGT, BDSM, etc)? Does adult mean "Pornographic?" It's a ridiculously overbroad policy that's been horribly communicated. No one is arguing that Google doesn't have the right to make changes to its own services, but what the hell does or doesn't constitute "adult?"

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion