META: no more sexybits, please
Persons of MGoBlog:
Y'all gotta cut it out with the barely PG-13 bewbs stuff. (And for the rare times a woman has intrepidly posted BEEFCAKE in a thread, that too.) I've never liked it much because I think it can be offputting to women, but it wasn't something I wanted to police.
That's got to change, as Google is now actively scanning for that kind of stuff and sending me emails like so:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Hello,
This is a warning message to alert you that there is action required to bring your AdSense account into compliance with our AdSense program policies. We’ve provided additional details below, along with the actions to be taken on your part.
Affected website: mgoblog.com
Example page where violation occurred: http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/
Action required: Please make changes to your site within 3 business days.
Current account status: Active
Violation explanation
Google ads may not be placed on pages with adult or mature content. This includes, but is not limited to, pages with images or videos containing:
- Strategically covered nudity
- Sheer or see-through clothing
- Lewd or provocative poses
- Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches
For more information about keeping your content family-safe, please review our program guidelines and these tips from the policy team.
-------------------------------------------------------
Obviously losing adsense would be a very bad thing for the viability of this site, so Kate Upton's gotta go. In the future we're going to be deleting this stuff on sight; persistent violators will get docked points.
February 19th, 2015 at 9:26 AM ^
If only you could get around it by stating Not Safe for Google Adsense.
Not an unreasonable request. This isn't 4chan or somethingawful.
February 19th, 2015 at 9:29 AM ^
as I'm not the owner of this site, but I think Google getting all puritanical about some cleavage in a thread is just insane.
I love my country, but we have our priorities all fucked up. My European relatives think we're all insane.
Graphic violence? Totally acceptable, pg-13 rating.
A female nipple? OMG what about the children!!! They'll be scarred for life!!
February 19th, 2015 at 9:58 AM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 10:11 AM ^
The one's responsible for modern civilization, culture, art, food, and everything else that's good in this world.
Such awful people. Best to stay in your trailer park and avoid them at all costs. I hear the big US cities are infested with them too.
February 19th, 2015 at 10:21 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 19th, 2015 at 11:01 AM ^
What did you want them to do - build new buildings to house their erotic toys? Or leave old buildings empty unless they can be used only for non-erotic purposes? Or, seclude any erotic business to a newly constructted part of the city - because, you know, there is just so much land up for grabs in Europe. I think letting the market run its course is a better idea. People will sell what they can, and not sell what people aren't buying. Perhaps the market is better exemplified there than here in the US.
February 19th, 2015 at 9:29 AM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 10:04 AM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 10:05 AM ^
Brian posted in the forum!
February 19th, 2015 at 10:23 AM ^
I agree with Google and the puritanical public driving their decision making.
We have a problem in this country with people unabashedly flashing their sexy bits to others, sending them either to the hospital or killing them on the spot. We have seen it many times over on the rough streets of Detroit, Chicago, New York, and LA, we have seen a disturbing rise of sexy bits being explosively released in schools, inflicting abhorrent damage on our youth, and now there is a stiff rise of sexy bits being cavalierly flashed by cops to civilians who have their own sexy bits safely tucked away.
Sexy bits are real problem in society, and a key way to address it is to erect barriers to any hint of their existence on the interwebs. Thank you Google.
February 19th, 2015 at 10:28 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 19th, 2015 at 11:46 AM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 1:55 PM ^
Which in your case seems to involve NSFW Asian females?
February 19th, 2015 at 11:48 AM ^
So I take it we'll never see a Kate Upton Game of War ad on this site, right?
I'm fine with that. I've been ad-blocking all the suggestive pics anyway, so this just helps me out by addressing on the front end.
But the real question is - IS NAKED GUY VERBOTEN??
February 19th, 2015 at 11:53 AM ^
Land of the Free! This countries Puritanical domnation never ceases to amaze me. Lighten up Francis, sex is fun and being in shape is healthy.
February 19th, 2015 at 3:28 PM ^
Private enterprise, they can do what they want. Or would you also take a stand with your employer if your job/livelihood is at stake?
Face it - this is part of Brian's (and staff's) livelihood. Respect that and move along.
February 19th, 2015 at 5:13 PM ^
But rather the entire system.
It seems this country is majority whiny wheenies.
February 19th, 2015 at 12:15 PM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 3:30 PM ^
I'd argue that it's not "for good" but for the bottom line. Google has advertisers and partners who don't want to be associated with "smut" so they build those policies to acquiesce. Like I said above, they're a private enterprise and can do what they want, but let's also be realistic. It's purely a business decision, not thinking of the children or for the greater good.
February 19th, 2015 at 12:54 PM ^
It's a sad day at MGOBLOG now that the PC Police have rued the day. What's happened to our society that we are no longer willing to stand up for our First Amendment rights?
"Weakness of attitude becomes weakness of character" - Albert Einstein
February 19th, 2015 at 1:19 PM ^
I moderate other forums and always hear this when someone lays down the law and says no NSFW posts etc... Freedom of Speech in no way shape or form has any sway in this situation. This is a privately owned and operated website. as such, the owner can at his discretion make whatever rule he wants to. The impact is directly related to the posters desire to comply with those rules. You have the freedom to pack your virtual bags and take your ball home or obey with the rules. If you decide to not pack your bags and continue to break the rules, then it's the owners, and by proxy the moderators, God given right to put your bags on the front lawn and not allow you re-admittance. So please don't make this a freedom of speech argument. You're more than welcome to start a forum called ilikeuptonstits.com and have people post whatever you want them to there or even not allow them to post things.
February 19th, 2015 at 1:34 PM ^
Who are you the Chief of Police?
February 19th, 2015 at 1:39 PM ^
For your post, yes.
February 19th, 2015 at 2:56 PM ^
The issue is not with Brian, but with Adsense. Also America, I suppose.
98% of dumb policy in this country is excused by public safety or liability concerns. 1% by prudiness. This is the 1%.
Land of the free! Whatever.
February 19th, 2015 at 1:33 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 19th, 2015 at 2:02 PM ^
Sorry but freedom of speech isn't only about freedom from government.. What you need to grasp is that questioning and critisizing, even on MGOBLOG, is freedom of speech. Trying to censore it doesn't change that fact. It just shows someones unwillingness to consider others opinions. Variance of opinions must be given rein and not surpressed.
February 19th, 2015 at 2:09 PM ^
You're joking, right?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech
February 19th, 2015 at 3:00 PM ^
February 19th, 2015 at 3:33 PM ^
to the poster, Google does spend a shit ton of $ on lobbying and campaign donations. And they're really stepping into Orwellian territory with some of their actions.
February 19th, 2015 at 2:18 PM ^
The part where the first amendment has nothing to do with Google not wanting to run their ads on sites with pronographic material. People who get up in arms over pornography being removed like it's some restrictive form of censorship are hilarious.
February 19th, 2015 at 2:44 PM ^
Pornography and "bad taste" are two completely different things. In this case Google finds the items in "bad taste". I'm not aware of pornography on this site nor do any of my comments advocate pornography.
February 19th, 2015 at 3:37 PM ^
That's the first correct thing you've written all day. Everything else about free speech is so wrong, it's actually quite funny.
February 20th, 2015 at 1:36 AM ^
That's because you're an idiot.
February 19th, 2015 at 3:54 PM ^
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
February 19th, 2015 at 2:58 PM ^
Also quite modern.
February 19th, 2015 at 3:56 PM ^
The First Amendment does not guarantee you the right to say whatever you want, wherever you want, whenever you want.
If you want to see naughty stuff on the internet, I'm sure you might be able to find a website or two that will meet your needs.
February 19th, 2015 at 5:32 PM ^
Just Google it. How ironic. And I bet they make money from it somehow.
February 19th, 2015 at 1:14 PM ^
Can you clarify if you are referrencing avatars such as mine, or just outright posts that cross the PG13 line?
February 19th, 2015 at 2:28 PM ^
....is this okay?
February 19th, 2015 at 6:06 PM ^
I've been wanting to ask Brian this meta question for a while, regarding all the objectifying of women on this site. Brian, did you ever foresee "boobs" being a part of MGoBlog? Do you still feel complete ownership of the blog in that respect or is there a point when the MGoCommunity also owns a piece just given its investment and contribution of material via the mgoboard over time? I've often wondered how Brian feels personally about this subject. I've also often wondered what he thinks about the contentious posts on the subjects of rape on campus or sexual assaults by college athletes, and would he like to exclude these from the board given the broad range of responses.
February 19th, 2015 at 6:56 PM ^
"Do you still feel complete ownership of the blog in that respect or is there a point when the MGoCommunity also owns a piece just given its investment and contribution of material via the mgoboard over time?"
This is a great question, but I dont think it applies only to the sexist material the community produces. In fact, the community produces the community, with little input (but I think a lot of behind the scenes technical management) from Brian. He has created a mostly self-organizing system that is informed by, but ancillary to, his front-page posts. In fact, the community probably dsicusses material from other sites more than it discusses Brian's material - there's just more of it. It's quite the good business model if you can impose rules and norms that keep the community attractive to advertisers - which is the purpose of his post here of course.