Saturday, January 23, 2010

My blog is too dangerous for Google

Recently, on a whim, I thought that I'd add Google ads back onto my blog. I had run them previously, mostly as a test for a previous employer, but Google ads ended up paying out about a penny every other year, so I took them off my site when I joined the BlogHer ad network, mostly to reduce the clutter on my pages.

But also because the BlogHer ads are a much better deal. Not only does the BlogHer ad network provide a much better return, it supports women who blog. I'm all about that, especially since some of my favorite bloggers are women.

Turns out that after I turned my back on them, Google decided that I was a danger to their advertisers, and now refuses to provide ads for me to run on my blog, per this email:

After thoroughly reviewing your account data and taking your feedback into
consideration, we've re-confirmed that your account poses a significant
risk to our advertisers.
WTF, Google?

I've got six loyal readers. Even if all of them boycotted one of your advertisers, nobody would notice. Hell, all of them could storm the corporate headquarters of one of your advertisers and nobody would notice. Shit, while storming their way into the building, they could all fit in one minivan and, once inside, they could even share the elevator to the CEO's office with several security guards--who might want to watch out for a sudden diaper change outside of a restroom, or other dangerous parenting activities.

My response:
After thoroughly reviewing your response and taking your feedback into
consideration, I've re-confirmed that you can kiss my sweet white suburban dad's ass.

Subscribe to the Bradstein feed--Vorsprung durch Technik!


  1. I have heard what happens when you change diapers, and I would not want you around my corporate headquarters until the situation has improved.

  2. As one of those six loyal readers I am really curious as to what the hell made them think you were dangerous.

    Must be your bad boy looks.

  3. Frankly, I was terrified at the KISS makeup on that topless drummer.

  4. Wow. Just wow. And again: WOW. I guess now BlogHer can call Google just a bunch of wimpy wusses, eh? :)

  5. CAGirl: Sure. I'll stay away from you, but no promises about what happens when you are here.

    Sarah: Thanks, but I gave up even attempting a bad boy look about 20 years ago. Something about a bowl cut not coordinating with my biker jacket.

    MrJ: You weren't the only one.

    Elisa: Yes, yes you could. Or, you could accurately point out that BlogHer is staffed by caring, discerning people and that Google is staffed by machines run by cold, analytic programmers.

  6. And in OTHER news: love the picture updates.
    3B as Top Chef: I'm loving it. Are those mushrooms with whip cream???

    Gage's new (ok, I like it too) favorite that is not healthy at all: nilla wafers dipped in a tub of icing. To make it better, we used the reduced fat nilla wafers. That's something, right??

  7. Thanks. Pictures is about all I have time for these days.

    Yes, mushrooms with the shaving cream. Probably because Mama doesn't much care for mushrooms, so who cares if they're covered in shaving cream and have to be tossed?

    You could also try Nilla Wafers dipped in Nutella. Tell him it's chocolate icing. Only you need to know that it has hazelnuts in it...that counts for something, right? That's what I tell myself, anyway.