Guilty Until Proven Innocent

What If?
In the movie "The Lives of Others" (Das Leben Der Anderen), a question is asked, "What does an actor do if they can no longer act?"

The movie takes place before the fall of the Wall, in the socialist Deutsche Demokratische Republik, or DDR, a state with an all powerful government that has complete and utter control over its inhabitants lives. The state has complete autonomy to determine the success or failure of any person. There is no appeals process for those whom the state has deemed broke the rules, nor consistency in the passing of judgment. That element of whim is especially dangerous for those trying to live by the state's rule.

At first, such a state almost works, but in the end such suffocating power alienates those living by its rule. And, in a just world where enough outside pressure exists, the people can ultimately find a better life through an alternative system.

Google is such a system. It is the equivalent of a socialist state, and each day it ruins the lives of those dependent upon it. For the ruined, the blacklisted, there is no redemption or reprieve. I know. I am one of them, and I could live with that because I had options. I cannot now because often others do not.

In "The Lives of Others", Albert Jerske is a director blacklisted by the state, and his life never recovers. It wasn't just the impact of his ban on art that was the tragedy but the ruining of a good man. A central character, the writer Georg Dreyman, finally takes action, motivated by the impact the state's overly harsh decision to ban Jerske had on his friend's life. For Albert Jerske to be denied a livelihood didn't just impact Albert but all those whose lives he touched.

Google. Not Just the New Microsoft.
Much has been written about Google being the new Microsoft. The latter has its fair share of detractors, and for the savvy few, they can live their lives free of Microsoft's reach. There is a difference between being able to and having equivalent options easily within reach. You might be able to live without Microsoft, but it's not easy for the vast majority to do so. The same is true of Google. As a consumer, other options exists; whether they are equivalent is up in the air, but they are available for use without difficulty.

As a business, though, you do not have the same ability to live without Google. Whether you rely on organic search traffic or paid search traffic, if the Google Socialist Sate judges you unfit, your business will be ruined. There are workarounds, but all rely on deceiving the state that you no longer practice your trade.

When the State is young and its reach not as widespread, the number of bans to false positives are in alignment. When it must make judgments across an ever increasing universe that has grown in not just scale but complexity and especially subtlety, the State makes mistakes. And that is OK, because everyone will make mistakes. Where it is not OK, and where we are today is when the innocent have no voice.

It's a search engine, what's the big deal?
I used to be of this camp when I'd hear of people who had their publisher sites shut down or their advertiser account banned. Surely, the State had its reasons. They broke the rules. Then, it happened to me, and I had a taste of its potential impact.

As someone that has written extensively about the online space, I am fortunate to have both a broad and deep understanding of many aspects to the online advertising ecosystem. That knowledge doesn't necessarily translate into practical expertise, the same way that some of the best coaches will never play as well as the players they coach. Still, first-hand experience is critical in making for not just a better player but coach. For me, that means understanding what those I write about go through.

I started promoting an offer, having first built out a site to support it. It was a pretty unique offer but the backend for it relied on a technology provider that a wide range of other companies also leveraged. The experience provided just what I hoped it would and a chance to put my money where my words were. Then, one day, about three months after I begin, all traffic stopped. After checking the settings and ruling out the obvious, I wrote in to Google. The reply surprised me.

No AdWords for You.
Google suspended my activities because of "repeated violations." Given that I had never received a warning or error, I sat dumbfounded. I wrote in again. The reply let me know that it wasn't necessarily my account but one to which I was linked. (Given Google's ultimate goal of user experience which includes policies against double listing, if they feel a person has set up two different accounts to game the system, they treat those accounts as one.) That they do this in an automated fashion makes sense given the sheer size of accounts and ease with which a person can set up an account. It's ripe for abuse.

There are countless stories of how accounts get linked, and many are cautionary tales at best, horror stories at worst for companies who might not appreciate the consequences. A classic example is as follows. A person who has access to the company's AdWords accounts has their own AdWords account. They are a good employee and don't work on their personal project at the office, but as a good employee they do work on your business while at home. By accessing both AdWords accounts on the same machine, Google decides both accounts are the same person despite their being different. Worst case, the employee breaks the rules with their personal account. The employer finds their campaigns stopped and can't get them back online.

With my account, linked because of the technology provider's other clients, I called Google support to see if any additional information would come to light. Dealing with Google is like a bad dream, like the a perversion of justice. Want to know what it's like? Read John Grisham's non-fiction book, The Innocent Man. The arrogance, lack of information, and unwillingness to help by Google employees who find themselves in the position of power and more frustratingly the almost unquestioning trust in their system's correctness in dispensing sentencing. Without a doubt, you are presumed Guilty, but you will not be allowed to prove your innocence.

My suspension was not just frustrating, but it felt like a questioning of my character. You feel like crying out, "Don't you know who I am? People will vouch for me. I'm respected in my field." And on and on. You don't because you know it will fall on deaf ears. And, while your friends feel for you, they know how the State works and won't offer up their relationships in the State to help, lest they need to use their one get out of jail free card for themselves.

No Longer Silent.
The real problem with the suspension is that it's not a suspension. It's a ban, a blacklist. I am tainted. If I want to help someone else out, I can't, unless I do so from a machine that never logs into my gmail account. That was my first mistake. I set up my AdWords account using the gmail account that I use for my entire life.

I didn't write about my ban initially because I had other things to do. My time and effort was being spent on LeadsCon, which is looking fantastic. It's unfortunate that I cannot actually advertise my conference on Google because of my suspension, not unless I go through some extraordinary lengths to make it seem as though it's not actually me behind the conference. I know how to do it, but I don't want to live two lives. My childlike was reaction has simply been to make sure Google is not welcome at my show. We need to understand how to use them, but that doesn't mean they represent the type of company that I want around the people I like and respect. If MSN were smart, they'd make sure to be at the show to tap into marketers who spend more than $2 billion are big in search and display. Yahoo will have some people there, which I think is a smart decision and consistent with their aims of better understanding lead generation especially aftertheir acquisition of Blue Lithium.

My Albert Jerske
This post has certainly had a quasi-therapeutic effect, allowing me to finally share, rather vent, about a personal frustration, but if it comes off only as that, then I've failed at expressing the main point, the danger of Google's policies and raising awareness of a growing problem that impacts a growing number of a legitimate talent each day. It's much like a global warming; you know the problem exists, but until your life has an interruption due to it, you can do a pretty good job ignoring it and paying it lip service.

What really forced me into writing about the Google State was not my experience, which is several months old now, but one that happened to a dear friend, not just my friend but a friend to the industry, a remarkable person, who as it turned out also happened to spend several hundred thousand monthly with Google. Almost insultingly, Google wouldn't assign him an account manager. Can you imagine a company that you spend seven figures with yearly and you didn't have a person in the company to whom you could speak and knew your business?

His particular problem started when Google having sent him a note informing of an infraction early February. Then, on February 13th, a follow-up email came saying that they had done as requested. Google had said that his campaigns contained too many irrelevant keywords. Like many of the more sophisticated, he was a long-tail bidder, and long-tail is often audience based, especially, and as was the case for him, when spending money on content sites. It makes sense to advertise a high end watch on high end car words. There is an audience overlap. A person spending money on a $100k+ car is the same one who is likely to want a $5k Panerai. His weren't quite that far reached, but it's the same concept.

My Albert Jerske, my amazing talent of a human being who was blacklisted, didn't expect to receive a note sent at 5pm PST this past Friday saying that his accounts were being shut done and that any new campaigns or accounts he tries to set up would be declined. He's not on PST. Do you think Google works on the weekend? No. What type of behavior is that on their part to shut down his business, which isn't just him but a staff of people who rely on him for employment, at the end of day on a Friday?

You could blame him for not diversifying, not figuring out display or email or not doing scale with other engines, but anyone who actually spends money on search, I mean truly spends money, knows the fallacy of those arguments. Google is the online advertising platform for an enormous group of companies, much like Microsoft is for personal computing. Not everyone can be a Toyota or Proctor and Gamble (or wants to be); not every company has a business which doesn't really need search. For those that do, Google is the only real alternative.

Remembering Spider Man
The Jewish people call it Yiddishe Kopf. It's a way of thinking and caring for your fellow human, a type of consideration and compassion. If you are a superhero, you could describe it as Spider Man's Uncle Ben did, "With great power comes great responsibility." It's the Golden Rule, and that's just the problem. For Google, the Golden Rule is mathematical. They revere phi. For a just society, we revere a much different Golden Rule. Google could learn to get in touch with that other Golden Rule. Mathematics might help describe the universe, but it can't help the people of the world.

I can accept a mistake made against me, but I can't can't when something happens to someone as dear as family. I respect and appreciate what Google has done and built, what they provide. But, I don't like them, and I certainly don't trust them.

Actions speak louder than words. Google has always had the right things to say, but their words are empty in the face of their actions, a shield that weak people hide behind to feel righteous and better. it's time for the world to see that the emperor has no clothes and for those inside the State to change lest their Wall comes down and leaves all the bureaucrats without their layer of ill-earned, ill-deserved, and protective self-importance.

Footnote:
A little bit of irony and an example of how one hand doesn't talk to the other. Here is a message on my personal and currently black-listed AdWords account:

Comments

[Paul K]

Fantastic post Jay. I personally have been treated pretty well by Google as a customer, but have heard the horror stories. Your post is the most articulate I've heard. The whole ban/penalty is an important dilemma for both advertisers and for Google to mitigate.

[Dane Johnson]

Brilliant post Jay.

[thomas]

I was banned and never had an adsense account! I asked for one years ago, was denied (I'd assume no traffic to my site). I recently went to reapply and was informed my account was suspended. I've since emailed twice and have yet to hear back.

I'm not an ad clicker, and I never had ads on my site, so why am I banned?

[Geoff]

Very thoughtful post - you will have to keep us updated on your friend. I still can't believed he was banned with that much volume.

[Elizabeth]

Wow, thanks for the inside look at a banned AdWords account and the darker side of Google help. It does make me think twice about personal gmail accounts mixing with AdWords.

[michael]

The post hit home with me actually on another note. 25 years ago after a futile attempt to escape the "utter control" ; the DDR flag greeted me every morning, albeit distorted through the thick glass of a prison cell.

[Tshirt Business]

Great article Jay. We've had the smae thing happen with our other friend eBay. We are multiple powersellers (multiple accounts) and one afternoon, bam, out of nowhere, our business gone, across the board.

These large so called empires need to remember that it is us the users and advertisers that make their business and pay their bills. Perhaps more squeeking voices like yours will create some for of revision (though doubtful with Google)

[Matt Cutts]

Hey Jay, a blog that I read linked over here. I don't know e.g. which niches/industries you're talking about or what sort of long-tail bidding this other person was doing, but I mentioned it to a couple folks here--AdWords isn't really my area of expertise.

-- JW: Thank you, Matt. Regardless, I appreciate your reaching out; despite this post becoming an inadvertent sounding board for negative experiences, I'm glad that Google supports your thought leadership. You do them and the rest of us a service with your contributions.

[Yura]

They really need to improve their customer service. Such attitude is arrogant at best.

Best of luck to you and your Albert Jerske.

[John Webber]

Great post! I have had the same thing happen to a few friends of mine. It is not fun when a company with this much power flexes it's muscles. But treating customers this poorly could be a sign of things to come. I have been pretty happy with Y! the last few months and have been slowly spending more there and less with G.

[Google Search Sucks]

My favorite part about Google is the hypocrisies and double standards that run rampant in their organization. For example, if you are BMW and run BLATANT cloaking (http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/003245.html) you can get Google to re-list you in a matter of days. But if you are a regular webmaster, good luck getting anyone at Google to pay any attention to you.

[Jeff]

Jay-thanks for the well written post. I had a similar experience with Adsense a couple of years ago. I was presumed guilty without having the opportunity to prove my innocence, which I was prepared to do. Google's attitude toward its customers willl come back to bite them some day. I just hope to live long enough to see it.

-- Jeff, I think you will love long enough to see. :)

[Steve]

This is your best post yet. Wow.

[Scott Kuhn]

Great post--I, as many others have, had a similar situation with Adsense. Despite multiple pleas to provide to them logs, tracking info, etc, I got nowhere. Just a completely unilateral, complete ban based not on any presented evidence, just that they said I was guilty.

[Jan]

I feel your pain. I had some problems with the google gestapo a while back. Luckily for me they gave me a final warning first for so called repeated violations of their policy. The problem was that my landing page did not meet their guidelines. When I asked what I needed to change they gave me vague answers that could be interpreted in numerous ways. Never did they say "yes it's ok" or "no, not ok change this and that". So I resubmitted my ads (2 times) and then boom ... this is your final warning.

Very frustrating.

[Joe McHugh]

Great post. The information about mixing of personal and business accounts even though they are not related was something I never considered. I will certainly review my touch points based on this. Thanks

[Simon Abramovitch]

Nice post, well done. Google is like YouTube - so massively successful on such a large scale that they feel it's acceptable to use their scale to justify their inability to manage it effectively, whether it's for copyright infringement, wrongful accusations, customer service, whatever. You're right to point out that the situation becomes serious when a family-supporting income is involved. I'm hoping the sheer and growing enormity of their current and future role forces them to act more responsibly. For now, the only 100% safe way is to find another means of income. While Google might try to err on the site of letting offenders go for the sake of making sure less of the innocent suffer from an undue ban stick smack, some slip through the cracks, and livelihoods get ruined. Time to try to diversify income streams until Google get their act together.

[Hugh Simpson]

I'm a former CONSUMER investigative reporter that has been VERY active on the Net for over 8 years and I have had the same problem with both eBay and PayPal.

While working on a new Federal Trade Commission regulation that could greatly effect PayPal I have come to know several of their attorneys. I plan to tell these FTC attorneys about the PayPal problem which as one of my partners said is "theft by taking" under any other circumstance.

You need to also start a campaign at the FTC about what Google is doing and I plan to let my subscribers to my blog know what has happened here. I write a blog at http://consumershockjock.blogspot.com where I'm the Howard Stern of the Consumerism world.

Hey, if you don't think this can work just ask the original owners of Ammco Transmission what happen to their business when a 23 year old TV reporter help shut them down! That reporter was ME!

-- JW: Hugh, You're the man. Thanks for the suggestion and call to action.

Thanks for this post, Jay. I've been reading your blog for some time now, and this post comes in at just the right time. As I left an online lead gen marketing agency several months ago, and in planning my own independent foray into advertising, this post is very enlightening. This will definitely help shape my plan and approach, and hopefully avoid falling into the same seemingly inescapable traps.

[Red]

I enjoyed the article until you assumed that I believed in Global Warming.

"It's much like a global warming; you know the problem exists, but until your life has an interruption due to it, you can do a pretty good job ignoring it and paying it lip service."

Global warming can't be ignored because its continually shoved down our throats. That doesn't mean the problem is real. Maybe the government should also get involved in Google's matters as well..... if they aren't already in cahoots.

end rant.

[Matt Larson]

Thanks for confirming my paranoia. However, I routinely access my personal and company accounts from the same computer as do probably 1/2 of the search marketers out there. Have you given more thought as to what it actually could have been that set this whole avalanche in motion?

At some point Google will start reaping what they sow. It is inevitable. In the meantime, I wish you well in finding a way around it.

-- JW: Enough has already been written about the lack of transparency with Google. Documentation does not equal transparency, which Google routinely tries to have us assume otherwise. Similarly, it's not guaranteed that accessing person and business accounts will have them linked, but I would assume Google's system knows that you do. It isn't until you make a mistake or they start to overlap that it becomes a problem. I simply advocate diligence and unfortunately a healthy dose of paranoia.

[Michael]

Great post. Actually I'm very surprised how ignorant the webmaster and webpublisher community has been towards the growing problems with the Google super power. We still endorse Google for having changed the way of searching just like the intellectuals who still endorsed emerging communist states for their positive social implications while being blind for the growing total control in these countries. What do we know about the data that Google collects in their underground data centers? The law in Germany allows me to have insight into the files that the Stasi (DDR secret sercice) might have about me. Why do I have no right to check what Google knows about me? Because their data are anonymously? Ha. It's so simple to connect my personal data from AdWords or AdSense accounts (or the contact data on the websites I have listed in Webmaster Central) with all the other anonymous data: what I search for with Google search, what blog articles I read on blogspot.com, what videos I watch on YouTube, everything I write in emails to any gmail addresses, what street addresses or local businesses I look for on Google maps etc. etc. By now Google must have a pretty clear profile about me.
Yes, I do regularly delete my cookies and change my IP address, but that's certainly only a weak defense.
Unlike the Stasi, Google has no power to come to my home and put me in prison, but they too can easily destroy dreams and the hard work of many people.
Fox was able to manipulate the presidential elections in the US 8 years ago, why shouldn't Google, a company whose philosopy is based on intransparency?
Many will say I'm too paranoid. But let's review that in some years...

[SwitchStories]

That is why we should always have a choice. There should always be an Apple for Microsoft, the same way Google should have a rival (Yahoo+MSN). In competitive markets consumers win.

Good luck, Jay. I hope the bad thing that happened to you will direct you towards better opportunities.

[John Chow]

Cool! I'm with you man.
Actually I had the same problem.

[Jairo]

I share a similar experience with you.
I do affiliate marketing and I pushed the envelope too far according to adwords.
My experience dealing with customer support was exactly the same as yours and I did give up on that account.
So far I have opened several new accounts which have been suspended (I do not market anything offensive or do double dipping) for god knows what adwords reason. And all I can say is that there is ways around the ban, they (adwords) make up their rules and that's all right, but their arrogance has lost me all respect for it and I don't feel a tad guilty of circumventing their ban.
I will not expose the manner in which I do this as I consider it a trade secret and would rather not release any information that they (adwords) can use against me.
And by the way, I've made a pretty buck this way.