Google Officially Disallows Images Near AdSense Ads

Dec 19, 2006 • 7:54 am | comments (1) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Google AdSense
 

The Google AdSense blog wrote a much needed Ad and image placement: a policy clarification. There has always been confusion about Google's policy about placing images near ads, to increase ones click-through rate on those ads. Here is a quote:

We ask that publishers not line up images and ads in a way that suggests a relationship between the images and the ads. If your visitors believe that the images and the ads are directly associated, or that the advertiser is offering the exact item found in the neighboring image, they may click the ad expecting to find something that isn't actually being offered. That's not a good experience for users or advertisers.

The Google blog has more details with examples of what does not comply with the terms of service.

Over the years, there has been a lot of confusion about this. Google recently was caught show casing a site with images near ads. And we have covered ways to use images to increase your CTR, plus tools for wordpress to make that easier.

Most AdSense advertisers are a bit upset by this clarification.

Forum discussion at DigitalPoint Forums (also here & here) and WebmasterWorld.

Previous story: Google Defines Duplicate Content & Answers Duplicate FAQs
 

Comments:

Jen

12/20/2006 09:30 pm

I wish Google would disallow the following advertiser of "www.lawnjockey.com" from advertising within their network. As an African American I was totally offended by what I found. I happened to visit a blog last week about Internet Marketing issues and saw an Adsense ad for this advertiser alongside the content on this page. At first I did not believe my eyes. I saw the url lawnjockey and thought could this really be what I've heard and read about from our country's history books. I typed the url in my browser and to my shock and disgust saw this offensive line of lawn jockeys on sell. Google should reevaluate exactly what it's definition of "user experience" really means. Are advertisers allowed to sell well known documented racist items. I found this to be one of the most negative user experiences. Surely just as they've cracked down on measly one page, relevant squeeze pages with agonizing scrutiny, they could have certainly classified this as an unfavorable, negative user experience. How could they have missed this grave oversight in judgement is beyond comprehension. I'd really like to know what users are they particularly trying not to offend on the one hand at the expense of others.

blog comments powered by Disqus