Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

Google Bans Porn Ads

Sexually explicit content prohibited in AdWords and Google Play.

by
Paula Bolyard

Bio

June 10, 2014 - 1:55 pm

Google recently updated its AdWords policy and will no longer accept sexually explicit ads. Morality in Media posted an email that was sent to an advertiser potentially affected by the new rules:

Dear AdWords Advertiser,

We’re writing to remind you about a change to Google’s advertising policies we announced in our Policy Change Log that may affect your AdWords account: https://support.google.com/adwordspolicy/answer/4271759

Beginning in the coming weeks, we’ll no longer accept ads that promote graphic depictions of sexual acts including, but not limited to, hardcore pornography; graphic sexual acts including sex acts such as masturbation; genital, anal, and oral sexual activity.

When we make this change, Google will disapprove all ads and sites that are identified as being in violation of our revised policy. Our system identified your account as potentially affected by this policy change. We ask that you make any necessary changes to your ads and sites to comply so that your campaigns can continue to run.

Sincerely,

The Google AdWords Team

Morality in Media credits a productive meeting the group had with Google in May “about how they can help protect individuals, families and children from exploitation.” Google was listed on the group’s 2014 Dirty Dozen list  because of their involvement in and profit from pornography in Google Play, Google Ads, and YouTube.

At the time the 2014 Dirty Dozen list was announced, Morality in Media accused Google of being in the pornography business. “Although their policies somewhat prohibit pornography and/or sexually explicit content on most of their products, both forms of content can be found throughout Google YouTube, Google Play, Google AdWords, Google Images and Google Search,” Morality in Media said.

Today Morality in Media applauded the steps Google is taking to protect children from sexually explicit content:

The company announced a policy change to prohibit pornographic ads and ads directly linking to sexually explicit websites. We are so grateful because this has been one of our top priorities with Google. We raised this specific matter with Google officials in a meeting with them in May.

Another priority of ours was to get Google to stop offering sexually explicit apps in Google Play. Thankfully, Google recently announced an end to such offerings as well.

We are grateful that they are realizing that their profits from porn are not worth the devastation to children and families.

In March, Google banned Google Plays apps that contain sexually explicit material.

Previously Google allowed sexually explicit ads but listed them as “Approved (non-family)” or “Approved (adult)” which meant they were excluded from “safe search” mode and some partner websites refused to accept the adult-oriented ads. Googled warned in March that under the new AdWords policy, “sexually explicit content will be prohibited.”

Morality in Media is calling on Google to further improve their policies and actions, especially on Google Search, Google Images, YouTube and Safe Search.

In addition to writing for PJ Tatler and PJ Lifestyle, Paula also writes for Ohio Conservative Review, and RedState. She is co-author of a new Ebook called, Homeschooling: Fighting for My Children’s Future. She is a member of the Wayne County Executive Committee. Paula describes herself as a Christian first, conservative second, and Republican third.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
About time. I can control what I see, but I can't control what they put in the ads, and everyone is using their stuff.

I wish I DID have a choice to control this stuff.

One thing that really annoys me is the "travelgirls" ad; it's not explicit, but it appears one step removed from prostitution.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Um, I may want to watch a legitimate clip on you-tube or read PJMedia, and I don't like those ads popping up. I don't have a choice.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Whoop de woo.

Interesting that a company which has "Don't be evil" as its corporate mantra had to be lured/harangued into doing this.

Color me monumentally unimpressed.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (14)
All Comments   (14)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
With things like AdBlock for my browser, and my choice of alternate search engines (StartPage and IxQuick) I never much see those advertisements anyway.

The great thing about the pornography industry (for censors) is that it uses a particular vulgar jargon that's easy to spot. Pretty much any sexual act or sexual part of the anatomy has an obscene term associated with it. Block any references to the f-bomb, and you're rid of about 90% of pornography links right there.

The other 10% would be easier to eliminate if only other bits of the jargon didn't come from certain rare-but-still-in-use terms, such as terms for female dogs (still used on dog-breeding sites), an obsolete poetic term for cats which is now used to refer to female genitals, a term for roosters and the act of preparing one's firearms for firing, a Latin term still used in philosophical treatises and during graduations that now is more vulgarly used to refer to semen, and certain adjectives referring to the mouth and anus that are also perfectly good medical terms. (Medical sites giving advice on oral cancer and anal pustules would be having trouble with search engines if they banned these terms.)

Still, in most cases, it really shouldn't be that difficult to design custom filters for yourself to filter out the filth. Just as virtually no pornographers are hiding behind an NC-17 rating (they prefer to rate their flicks things like "XXX" and "H for Horny!"), nearly none of the pornographers online are making any effort to disguise what they're pushing either.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Most people don't know how to use Adblock, plug-ins, etc..., let alone "design custom filters". This is a good change by Google.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Speaking of which, the spammers are now trying harder and harder, based on the new icons, to get our attention.

Hey, PJMedia has readers all over the world, so it's read 24 hours. Spammers, you cannot escape!
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
About time. I can control what I see, but I can't control what they put in the ads, and everyone is using their stuff.

I wish I DID have a choice to control this stuff.

One thing that really annoys me is the "travelgirls" ad; it's not explicit, but it appears one step removed from prostitution.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Bet Google has NO PROBLEM hiring young guys to "screen" the ads to make sure they "comply"... I can hear the conversations with their buddies..."Dude I got hired by Google to look at porn all day...there IS a God"!!
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Porn on the internet...simple fix: create the following for them (dot) sex, (dot) gay, (dot) lez ....PROBLEM SOLVED...YOUR WELCOME!!
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
There's already a .xxx designation; so far, however, nobody is forcing the porn-peddlers to move there.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Because regular people cannot be trusted not to go to porn sites.
They have to be protected from seeing ads that can lead them astray.
By other people, better people, smarter people, who always know what is best for everyone else. Who watch pornography so that you don't have to.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Um, I may want to watch a legitimate clip on you-tube or read PJMedia, and I don't like those ads popping up. I don't have a choice.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
I must be doing something wrong, because I am not getting those ads. :)

A much better approach would be for Google to let individual users opt out of (or into) various types of advertising. That way the decision stays in the hands of an individual customer, and advertisement can be assured not to offend him. That way it's a win-win-win.

A blanket ban deprives me of choice, and I don't like that, even if I am not a fan of a particular type of content.

19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Um, like those "if you don't want to be on our mailing list" links spammers send you (which only bring you more spam if you click on them), links from the people getting revenue from online advertising that allegedly allow you to "opt out" from their advertising really ought to raise a lot of red flags for you. I wouldn't trust Google with any such "opt out" link. The best approach is custom ad-blockers for your browser and (if you have access) your router, which you control directly.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Nobody talks about interacting with spammers.
Of course, the best course for a consumer is to take initiative and use an ad blocker. Yet that probable wouldn't be Google's preferred solution. :)

Google is perfectly capable of using a more intelligent approach to this than a blanket ban. After all, targeting particular customers is its bread and butter, isn't it?
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
EXACTLY...god forbid we would exhibit some of that dreaded "Personal Responsibility"!!
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
Whoop de woo.

Interesting that a company which has "Don't be evil" as its corporate mantra had to be lured/harangued into doing this.

Color me monumentally unimpressed.
19 weeks ago
19 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All