Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

kajic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 183 posts

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#21

Post by gumby »

J5892 wrote: post #8
tragictrash wrote: post #2

Google is not your friend and must be treated as an adversary.

This applies to literally any public corporation.

> > Google is not your friend and must be treated as an adversary.

> This applies to literally any public corporation.

I can clearly see the "not your friend" part.

Are all public corporations the adversaries of citizens though? I'm not sure.

I'm not asking for edge cases: companies tend to be friends and not adversaries for their CEOs, for example, and I can imagine that Red Hat (when independent) was not any individual's adversary).

But it a good heuristic that any given public company will be your adversary? Certainly none really care about you.

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#22

Post by saalweachter »

kurthr wrote: post #14
dsl wrote: post #9

Welcome to the world of blackhat SEO. If someone starts driving up the price of ads for a targeted keyword, you generate a massive amount of abuse and pay people to write complaints to Google. From Google's perspective, they look at your account and see activity that indicates you are doing terrible things. Coupons are an extremely competitive and hostile market to be in. Not saying what happened to OP is fair or acc…

Exactly, competitors may well be the source of your problems. It's cheaper (and safer) to trash your competitors than raising your own rankings (with SEO).

When I was in e-commerce, I was told a story that implied that one merchant in a niche market paid a botnet to DDoS his competitors in the tiny niche during the Christmas rush.

I have no first hand knowledge if it is true, or who the merchant was, or the botnet, it's all hearsay and rumor ... but it's the sort of rumor you have no trouble believing after working in e-commerce for a few years.

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#24

Post by todayisfriday »

Stories like this seem to pop up semi-frequently on HN.

So I'm wondering -- has anyone tried to sue Google, perhaps in small claims court (for U.S. residents)? Surely that would at least compel an actual human to address the account closure, ban, etc. I am assuming there are legal or financial reasons this approach is unwise?

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#25

Post by [deleted] »

ilamont wrote: post #4

Good luck getting a straight, specific answer from anyone at Google regarding supposed problems that violate one of their vaguely worded policies. Some of the stuff flagged by their automated systems are laughable - one that comes to mind is an ad promoting genealogy research that was blocked for promoting birth control. Not that the other platforms are much better. A nonfiction book publisher once told me her Amazon…

[deleted]

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#27

Post by mission_failed »

pzm3292 wrote: post #23

I think you are violated Google's Circumventing systems rule. I noticed your affiliate site is using woltcode.de as domain name but "wolt" is maybe registered trademark of wolt.com. Google cannot allow this kind of similar domain name in generall.

If only google would bother to explain why their AI banned someone, and gave reasonable methods to appeal

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#28

Post by dollar »

The biggest indicator of a monopoly is when they can treat customers like garbage and keep doing business anyway.

Google suspended the Ads account of our largest agency client ($20,000 per day) with no explanation other than a vague “policy violation”. They steadfastly refused to explain how the policy was violated or what we could do to come into compliance.

We contacted attorneys, wrote letters to Google executives, begged, pleaded. In the end our client fired us and they went back to their old agency.

Later we learned their old agency paid off a Google insider to flag our client’s account resulting in suspension.

Of course, we could never speak to a human being at Google and explain this. One day, the truth about Google Ads (and Facebook) will come out, which is that it is all 85% fraud anyway. Save your money.

Today, we no longer do business with Google Ads or Facebook. Given these companies make up 95% of digital ad spending, it’s fair to say we are no longer a digital ad agency. We’ve adapted to market around big tech, whether they like it or not.

With “partners” like Google and Facebook, who needs enemies?

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#29

Post by kajic »

goldcd wrote: post #19

Was just pondering if you could unionize (in a very loose way). Come up with your own set of rules that come within google's, peer review each other to ensure that you meet your own rules - then if google pulls one of you, the rest of you walk. Don't have to shift how google works, just present to google as a large enough mass of money that you get promoted to a service rep, rather than templated rules and emails. Th…

I think this is a great idea. The only way to deal with power is to amass sufficient counter power of your own that ignoring you becomes more costly than dialogue.

Re: Google Ads suspended me and turned a deaf ear

#30

Post by erehweb »

Hmm. If I understand correctly, the website is a play to get money from Wolt by getting other people to sign up via OPs referral code. Seems kind of arbitragey - OP is not actually selling something, and Google would probably rather get the advertising $ from Wolt directly. So I see where Google's coming from, and think it can reasonably be classified as "Engaging in practices that circumvent or interfere with Google's advertising systems and processes, or attempts to do so" - the examples given are non-exhaustive. Why OPs and not other promo / coupon sites? Who knows - maybe the others add some more value, or maybe G will come for them eventually. (Edit - corrected assumption of OPs gender)
Post reply on HN