They're still trying to do exactly that with their control over advertising.

Just this week, Google demonetized an article from Catherine Salgado about a CPAC panel focusing on the response to the Covid pandemic. We were told that the article made “unreliable and harmful claims.” The piece quotes Katie Pavlich from our sister
site Townhall saying, “Talk about the consequences of these constitutional violations… there are real-world consequences that have changed American society and the world forever as a result of this kind of First Amendment censorship and surrogacy.”

https://pjmedia.com/columns/paula-bolyard/2023/03/10/they-say-were-dangerous-n1676390

Google needs to either but out or be broken into little pieces. They have no business influencing what is made available for us to read through their massive monopoly power over on-line advertising.

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 3/10/23 7:29 PM, ScottW wrote:

Google needs to either but out or be broken into little pieces. They
have no business influencing what is made available for us to read
through their massive monopoly power over on-line advertising.

On the contrary, they have a responsibility to do so.

https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6008942?hl=en

These policies are designed to ensure a safe and positive experience for
our users and abide by applicable laws. This means that our policies
prohibit content that is harmful to users and the overall advertising ecosystem.

Our advertising policies cover 4 broad areas:

Prohibited content: Content you can't advertise on the Google Network

Prohibited practices: Things you can't do if you want to advertise with us

Restricted content and features: Content you can advertise, but with limitations

Editorial and technical: Quality standards for you

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, March 11, 2023 at 7:08:17 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:

On 3/10/23 7:29 PM, ScottW wrote:

Google needs to either but out or be broken into little pieces. They
have no business influencing what is made available for us to read
through their massive monopoly power over on-line advertising.

On the contrary, they have a responsibility to do so.

https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6008942?hl=en

These policies are designed to ensure a safe and positive experience for
our users and abide by applicable laws. This means that our policies prohibit content that is harmful to users and the overall advertising ecosystem.

Our advertising policies cover 4 broad areas:

Prohibited content: Content you can't advertise on the Google Network

We aren't talking about "on the google network".

This about google as an ad agency determining what content their ads (which is almost
everything appears on websites is an ad placed there by a google pr meta service)
can appear next to.
In this case google says none....so the piece gets "demonetized" giving google veto
power over what a news and commentary site can post without taking a hit
on ad revenue.
The way websites are constructed your pretty much restricted to picking one
ad agency.

A few years ago I recall an issue arose where google was putting blatant left leaning
ads on conservative sites....Ads for Abortion Services on Right to Life pieces etc.
The advertisers should have been pissed cuz that was wasting their money.
The site where the ad appeared had to explain to disgruntled readers that they have
no control over the ads place on their sites.
Google does.

Your mixing apples and oranges here....google as it's own site and google as the dominant on-line ad agency.

Here's a lesson for you.

https://geekflare.com/best-online-ad-networks/#

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, March 11, 2023 at 12:24:33 PM UTC-5, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, March 11, 2023 at 7:08:17 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:

On 3/10/23 7:29 PM, ScottW wrote:

Google needs to either but out or be broken into little pieces. They have no business influencing what is made available for us to read through their massive monopoly power over on-line advertising.

On the contrary, they have a responsibility to do so.

https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6008942?hl=en

These policies are designed to ensure a safe and positive experience for our users and abide by applicable laws. This means that our policies prohibit content that is harmful to users and the overall advertising ecosystem.

Our advertising policies cover 4 broad areas:

Prohibited content: Content you can't advertise on the Google Network

We aren't talking about "on the google network".

This about google as an ad agency determining what content their ads (which is almost
everything appears on websites is an ad placed there by a google pr meta service)
can appear next to.
In this case google says none....so the piece gets "demonetized" giving google veto
power over what a news and commentary site can post without taking a hit
on ad revenue.
The way websites are constructed your pretty much restricted to picking one ad agency.

A few years ago I recall an issue arose where google was putting blatant left leaning
ads on conservative sites....Ads for Abortion Services on Right to Life pieces etc.
The advertisers should have been pissed cuz that was wasting their money. The site where the ad appeared had to explain to disgruntled readers that they have
no control over the ads place on their sites.
Google does.

Your mixing apples and oranges here....google as it's own site and google as the dominant on-line ad agency.

Here's a lesson for you.

https://geekflare.com/best-online-ad-networks/#

ScottW

And I can't talk about both Steve and Trevor in the same post, that's mixing idiots and ignoramuses.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 3/11/23 11:24 AM, ScottW wrote:

On Saturday, March 11, 2023 at 7:08:17 AM UTC-8, mINE109 wrote:

On 3/10/23 7:29 PM, ScottW wrote:

Google needs to either but out or be broken into little pieces. They
have no business influencing what is made available for us to read
through their massive monopoly power over on-line advertising.

On the contrary, they have a responsibility to do so.

https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6008942?hl=en

These policies are designed to ensure a safe and positive experience for
our users and abide by applicable laws. This means that our policies
prohibit content that is harmful to users and the overall advertising
ecosystem.

Our advertising policies cover 4 broad areas:

Prohibited content: Content you can't advertise on the Google Network

We aren't talking about "on the google network".

This about google as an ad agency determining what content their ads (which is almost
everything appears on websites is an ad placed there by a google pr meta service)
can appear next to.

Google should be forced to place ads on other media?

In this case google says none....so the piece gets "demonetized" giving google veto
power over what a news and commentary site can post without taking a hit
on ad revenue.

Get another broker.

The way websites are constructed your pretty much restricted to picking one ad agency.

There's a regulatory structure that covers all of them:

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/resources/advertising-marketing-internet-rules-road

A few years ago I recall an issue arose where google was putting blatant left leaning
ads on conservative sites....Ads for Abortion Services on Right to Life pieces etc.
The advertisers should have been pissed cuz that was wasting their money.
The site where the ad appeared had to explain to disgruntled readers that they have
no control over the ads place on their sites.
Google does.

And blatant right-wing content appeared on left-wing sites, too.

Your mixing apples and oranges here....google as it's own site and google as the dominant on-line ad agency.

Here's a lesson for you.

https://geekflare.com/best-online-ad-networks/#

Seems I was justified in telling you to seek alternatives.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)