I ran an ad successfully for a few weeks, and then got a notice that my site was suspended for insufficient original content which is strange because all of the content I created on my own to include a very complex AI eligibility check system to benefit my target market. I called back and they said that my site seems to be for the sole purpose of running ads, but I have NO ADSENSE or other AD Distribution widgets on my site whatsoever.
I was told to change my landing page to the Home Page URL and use site links instead... so I have done that.
I was told by support to add Contact info in case someone wants to call. I have, but the site is not approved.
Can anyone take a look and let me know what I am missing?
My ad got disapproved due to insufficient original content
I think the Algo is broken.. because by the definition of NOT Original content if there are already other results then only 1 website would be allowed as the original creator of that content. So 359K+ other websites would not be eligible to run ads...which would crush Google Adwords revenue model.
Site Suspension[ Edited ]
June - last edited June
original in the context of the policies does not necessarily mean "only one";
generally, the related polices are more about creativity, innovation, novelty,
imaginativeness, originality, or a high-standard of excellence, in some form,
resulting in a high-quality user-experience, such that many multiple users
are inclined to revisit a site over time.
original-content mainly refers to three distinct but related
factors: (a) usefulness, (b) added-value, and (c) relevance.
the automated policy detection algorithms are indeed flawed and inexact --
however, a policy-flag, placed as a result of the automated policy-violation
detection systems, are typically reviewed by people on the policy-teams.
if an automated policy flag seems to have been applied inadvertently
or improperly -- or if a site has been fixed in the areas of usefulness,
added-value, or relevance with respect to submitted ads -- then, the
best likely course would be to re-contact google directly and simply
ask for a more thorough manual re-review.
note that google limits the number of requests for manual re-reviews --
also, if the policy-flag was properly placed, all issues must be fixed --
after requesting a manual re-review, if the specialists on the policy
teams determine that the issues have not be fixed, or a policy-flag
was proper, then the flagged status can become permanent.
Re: Site Suspension
should be determined by the engagement of the visitors. My ads were getting
33% CTR and the site was converting at at about 10%. Bounce rate of 42%.
In our industry, that is phenomenal engagement.
Which brings me to my next point of a flawed system. The auto-detect is a
flag for manual review. I understand that. But then the manual review has
also a very big flaw.
If the site is being reviewed by a person who is Not knowledgeable about
the industry they are reviewing... How can they determine is the site shows
innovation or adds value.
Example: if I go to an advertising services provider and he has an
innovative technique that no one else has but "sounds" similar to others ,
I would not know the difference and therefore see no added value. But for
someone is knowledgeable may find great value in learning the technique.
My point is sometimes to recognize original content you must be able to
recognize the subtle difference that makes all the difference.
The difference between a coral snake and a garden snake.
June - last edited June
first, you're welcome.
typically, the support people that interact directly with advertisers,
who may seem not to be knowledgeable about an industry or site,
are simply relaying the information and findings that have been
studied and determined by the policy related teams.
generally, the policy-teams are constantly reviewing feedback from users,
industry trends, practices, norms, and regulations, analysis of advertisers
attempting to circumvent the policies, etc., and tend to have a much better
sense of a site's safety, purpose, originality, and engagement.
that said, this is mainly a peer-to-peer forum; forum-members do not
have access to any or all the information being reviewed by the policy
teams, both with respect to a particular site or a particular industry.
forum-members can mainly offer suggestions based on
the information posted here within the public forum.
for example, that particular site does not seem to have a clear
statement of the business-model and what the exact offer is in
terms of a user -- that is, the site does seem clear as to the
unique and original service, but not the pricing or payment;
what is the exact offer, what is the exact price and payment
for the offer, and how exactly is that offer and price accepted.
for example, google seems to have become far more strict with respect
to any loan related services or sources of lending related information.
for example, sites that offer any information that is already offered
in some form, by a government agency, such as hud, for free, are
highly scrutinized with respect to usefulness and added-value and
tend to be disallowed, despite any other forms of originality.
regardless however, google is the final arbiter of all policies.
Thank you Celebird! That answer is probably the most insightful answer and makes sense. I agree that loan related services should be scrutinized. We are not a lender, and ironically, that is why we created this site...because there are lenders who mislead home buyers into down payment assistance products that they do not offer, only to switch them out to a regular FHA loan that is not necessarily the best option as far as affordability.
The site was created in order to arm people with the knowledge that they are in fact eligible before talking to a lender who may steer them the wrong way and cost them to lose the opportunity to save $1000s (added value).
Although the HUD site offers the information, it is a PDF, that is not easy to understand. We had to spend countless hours attending trainings and speaking with HUD representatives to truly understand the program in order to create a system that saves the user time doing all this themselves. (added value).
I guess this is the frustration with the Google process ... the actual live world experience plays into the usefulness of the site that is not in any way tangible online.
Thank you again for your response, I think I can make a clearer statement of my business model... which is to give people honest information to empower them to get the right service.
I agree with Celebird, honestly, looking at the site, it doesn't appear to serve much useful function other than to redirect to other websites via the ads and buttons you have on the site.
It looks like you are an affiliate marketer of some sort. You need to drastically beef up the usefulness of the site. Measuring usefullness by CTR and conversion rate isn't a good way to judge it when you are dealing with Policy standards.
To help keep Google AdWords as the top of the SEM world, they require their advertisers to provide valuable, useful, and unique experiences to searchers so they continue to use AdWords for their search needs. With a website like yours, they will only come to your site once, go the main site via the redirects and ads you have, then they will never come back to your site again. In fact, it would have been safer and more useful for them to go to those main sites first and bypass you altogether. Hence, your site have low value.
You want to create a website experience that would make people want to go through your site to get what they need, rather than the parent site. This means you have to create tremendous value in a website if you are going to affiliate advertise.
Based upon your original post about the algorithm you use, you sound like a "minimalist", meaning what is the minimum amount of work I can do to make money with this business model. Rather, you need to change your mindset and ask yourself, "what type of website experience can I make to solve as many people's problems in this area and make them keep coming back to my site as an authority site on the subject matter?" If you think more like the second, you will easily beat this issue.
Oh, and create original content too
Re: Site Suspension
cannot possibly see value. I am not an affiliate marketer... This is step
one of a buying process and crucial to home buyer who would not be able to
buy otherwise. The links in the site are tothe other steps in the process
and all our sites that help buyers move through the process.
Thank you for your reply but I have had the site an ads approved already. I
was able to speak to someone who understands the real estate industry and
thereby the value.
Your site as several violations: the first and the foremost is that it does not disclose the business model (i.e. how are you making money out of this site?) - If by referring prospective owners to financial lending institutions, then you must comply with the financial services section of the Policy. If you collect the users' info and sell / circulate it to other businesses to offer the users loan options - this must be in line with the PII section of the Policy.
There are other violations. But, as already mentioned by @Celebird, - a clear business model is the main issue.
Did you find any helpful responses or answers to your query? If yes, please mark it as the ‘Best Answer’