Slashdot Mirror


Google's Blogger To Delete All 'Adult' Blogs That Have Ads

DougDot sends this excerpt from ZDNet: "In three days, Google's Blogger will begin to delete scores of blogs that have existed since 1999 on Monday under its vague new anti-sex-ad policy purge. On Wednesday night at around 7pm PST, all Blogger blogs marked as 'adult' were sent an email from Google's Blogger team. The email told users with 'adult' blogs that after Sunday, June 30, 2013, all adult blogs will be deleted if they are found to be 'displaying advertisements to adult websites' — while the current Content Policy does not define what constitutes 'adult' content. To say that Twitter ignited with outrage would be an understatement. Blogger users are panicked and mad as hell at Google."

5 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Re:anti-sex ad policy? by omglolbah · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're not getting the revenue would be my guess...

  2. Non-Google ads by Animats · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is about Google eliminating non-Google adult ads on Blogger sites. A site has to have both adult content and adult ads to have a problem. Presumably the adult ads are not coming from Google.

    Wordpress doesn't allow third-party advertising on their hosted blogs at all. Blogger probably does only for historical reasons. Google may be planning to transition all Blogger sites to Google ads only. Their pitch to new Blogger users suggests that new sites should only have Google ads.

    If this bothers you, buy commercial hosting. It's really cheap to host a blog. Less than $10 per month.

  3. Re:I'm glad that people are mad at google. by dgatwood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems like these days, I find myself making a comment about every two weeks saying that people should not trust Google not to take away services that they depend on. "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." This is actually getting rather tedious at this point, and yet people still get up in arms about something they should have expected. How many times does this have to happen before everyone recognizes Google for what it is—a search engine and advertising firm that uses the promise of free services as a means to get more eyes on their ads?

    The bottom line is this: If you want to provide something to the public, you really only have two viable options—set up a server yourself or set up an account with a hosting provider and back it up regularly to your own machine so that if they decide they don't want you there, you can migrate rapidly and nearly transparently to a different hosting provider. The entire notion of relying on a free web service is a fundamentally flawed concept. You cannot truly trust anything that can be taken away on a whim. You get what you pay for, and you do not get what you do not pay for, at least in the long term.

    If you do not own the software that is used to provide access to your data, you do not really own the data in any meaningful sense.

    --

    Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  4. Re:anti-sex ad policy? by hairyfeet · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which is why I have been saying for years America needs to grow the fuck up. America, the country where you can't show a tit unless it has a knife buried in it and where we nearly impeached a POTUS for getting a BJ, it more than time for us to grow the fuck up and stop pretending that Leave It To Beaver was an accurate depiction of the 1950s.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  5. Re:anti-sex ad policy? by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ex taxi driver from Australia - happy hookers were the norm here 25yrs ago, AFAICT they still are. I must have had at least a couple of hundred strippers/hookers in my cab during the 3yrs I was driving and I concur "I don't think I ever even heard a hard luck story more than this or that girl had a BF that was an asshole.". Probably helps that brothels, strip clubs, and private escorts are all legal businesses over here, they pay their rates and taxes just like everyone else, they must be licensed and are subjected to regular health checks. From a purely logical POV the fact they may be asked to do something they find unpleasant is no different to asking a plumber to clean out a septic tank. While on the subject of pleasure most taxi drivers would rather transport a hooker, stripper, athlete, cat in a cage, in preference to a social snob in a suit. In my experience young drunken women in groups of 3 or more are amongst the worst behaved passengers and seeing-eye dogs are amongst the best.

    Making sexual entertainment a crime simply gives real criminals the chains to enslave sex workers. Accepting the fact that sexual entertainment is a universal human behavior and regulating it ensures the public health problem is controlled, that society benefits in the form of taxes, and (most importantly) it ensures workers can demand the legal protections afforded to other workers in their society without fear of being prosecuted themselves. Organized criminals and corrupt cops long ago lost the keys to a sex workers jail cell in Melbourne and that's a GoodThing(TM). You'd think the same reasoning would have enough force to pull their heads out of their arses and do the same for *recreational drugs, but alas they are too busy banning water pipes and playing legislative "wack-a-mole" with "legal highs".

    *Hard drugs: such as heroine and crack may "enslave" some sex workers but from what I've seen junkies are uncommon in Melbourne's regulated sex industry. Although there are some well known spots where they do try and (illegally) pimp themselves on the street without the requisite license, these are mainly frequented by a tiny minority of people who actually enjoy a $50 blow job in a public toilet, like beggars they are considered a public nuisance but in reality most are simply drug/alcohol fucked or handicapped by a mental illness/deficiency.

    A basic freedom is missing from western society, consenting adults should be the masters of their own bodies to the point where the effect on others goes beyond a purely emotional offense to the mind of the observer (eg: non-custodial punishment to enforce mass vaccinations, jail for using your body to murder/rape/etc).

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.