# TV Tropes is in trouble **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [October 31, 2010, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943 "2010-10-31T01:03:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/81 "2010-11-01T01:16:07Z")
> [@hajario](#): > > They are free to have the most inconsistent, ridiculous rules that they want to have so long as they don’t violate any Civil Rights laws. Of course; the laws are largely written by corporations for the benefit of corporations. That makes it legal, but it doesn’t make it right. > [@hajario](#): > > This is Bizarro World stuff. Google isn’t telling people what they can and can’t say. They are telling them what you can and can’t say _if you want to use their product._ You can raise your funding some other way or fund yourself. Except that doesn’t appear to be practical, which makes them de facto censors. > [@hajario](#): > > Google is the one giving money to TVTropes so the two are not equivalent. The equivalent would be forcing TVTropes to change their policy and take the ads and not have the choice to decline both. You, not I am the one arguing that fairness doesn’t matter. If fairness doens’t matter then it doesn’t matter if they are “equivalent” or not. If fairness doesn’t matter then there’s no reason why we shouldn’t just send in the government to make Google employees all dress in plaid and sing _“We Are The Champions”_ on You Tube. It wouldn’t make sense to do that - but according to you, it doesn’t matter if it makes sense. > [@hajario](#): > > Shut down the internet? How are they shutting down the internet? They aren’t because they aren’t actually enforcing their rules most of the time. > [@hajario](#): > > Why is it Google’s responsibility to keep TVTropes alive? Because they’ve set themselves up as internet gatekeepers. When you grab the power, you get the responsibility with it. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/82 "2010-11-01T01:42:35Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Nonsense. Clearly it can’t just be ignored. Economic power is just as real and just as coercive as political power. You can censor with money at least as easily as you can censor with a bunch of guys with guns. But that’s ridiculous. Ask any website owner, hosting your own ads is the most profitable way to go. Google AdSense is a stopgap measure until you get big enough to do that. I’d argue that TVTropes is big enough to do that if they really wanted to go for it. Obviously that’s not going to happen with a server bill looming. But you can bet your ass they’ll be looking into now. And actually, an Amazon Affiliate link can be more profitable than Google AdSense if enough stuff is bought in a month. Google is not the only game in town, and people arguing that it is in this thread are woefully misinformed. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/83 "2010-11-01T01:45:53Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > When you grab the power, you get the responsibility with it. Not if enough of us believe otherwise and let you get away with it. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/84 "2010-11-01T02:17:09Z")
If Google’s services are really so inadequate, it shouldn’t be difficult for others to step in fill the void being left. This is really hysterical nonsense. 10 years ago no one needed Google’s ad revenue in order to maintain a web site. 20 years ago no one needed a web site in Oder to exercise free Speech n Google Doesn’t control who stays on the web. People whomwqnt certain information are free to support the providers of such information, as has always been the case in every medium of communication. And fuck it allmwhether Google “selectively enforces” it’s contract. That’s their right. Google is merely a service. It doenlsnt control access to the Internet. You could make unreasonable case that Cox, Comcast, and Verizon should be considered common carriers, but not Google’s advertising services. ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/85 "2010-11-01T02:55:26Z")
I have trouble with the argument that Google can kill any website they choose by pulling advertising for the simple fact that webmasters voluntarily and without duress bring AdSense on in the first place. If Google can kill a website by denying them use of AdSense, I can’t see it as anything but the webmaster’s fault for relying wholly on Google for revenue and not scrupulously adhering to their policies, however crazy they may be. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/86 "2010-11-01T06:21:28Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Turnabout is fair play. If free speech and fairness don’t matter, if censoring TV Tropes is OK, then why not force Google to advertise where it doesn’t want to? Turnabout is fair play. And force them to make all the advertisements variations on how awful Google is. Let’s see how they like someone barging in and telling them what they can and can’t say. The problem is solely the question of whether Google as middle-men are introducing terms to the contract or enforcing those terms in a way the advertising businesses would not have done themselves, and only because the nature of their business makes it a natural monopoly. This does not make your warped “fair play” anywhere near justified. So please, stop saying stupid things, you’re making us look bad. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/87 "2010-11-01T11:46:01Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > The problem is solely the question of whether Google as middle-men are introducing terms to the contract or enforcing those terms in a way the advertising businesses would not have done themselves, and only because the nature of their business makes it a natural monopoly. This does not make your warped “fair play” anywhere near justified. So please, stop saying stupid things, you’re making us look bad. People keep saying that Google is a monopoly in the web ad business, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn’t make it true. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/88 "2010-11-01T16:26:55Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > If Google’s services are really so inadequate, it shouldn’t be difficult for others to step in fill the void being left. You have to be kidding. When a company grabs as much market share as Google’s Adsense has, they suck most of the oxygen from the environment, making it VERY difficult to compete, even if the monopoly is doing a horrible job and screwing customers over left and right. (Here’s a little thought for you: the Internet was not created by Bell Labs, in fact, they hated it when it first came out. Why? Cause any change for a monopolist is seen as destructive … they rule the roost, they are against changes in the roost. Monopolists are hindrances on the marketplace, REAL free market advocates despise them.) In any event, and to fight ignorance, there ARE alternatives to Adsense. Here’s a link to what seems to be a very good article about them aimed at small publishers: > **[The Top 10 Alternatives to Google Adsense - best adsense alternatives -...](http://www.rosswalker.co.uk/adsense_top10/)** > > The top 10 alternatives to Google Adsense, updated for 2016. This is a comprehensive list of the best adsense alternatives. It has been updated to provide the best Adsense Alternatives for 2016. This site contains a list of what I find are the top... But please note this caveat appearing at the beginning of the article: > [@](#): > > The problem is that most of the alternatives to Google’s Adsense are pretty useless. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/89 "2010-11-01T16:29:33Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > People keep saying that Google is a monopoly in the web ad business, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn’t make it true. I’ll bet their market share is pretty damn close to being monopolistic. Just because a monopoly is not mandated by law, it does not mean the monopoly does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/90 "2010-11-01T16:56:32Z")
There are NSFW words in my GMail account, and Google doesn’t have any problems displaying ads there. Bullshit policy, needs to be protested. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/91 "2010-11-01T19:19:12Z")
According to [this](http://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-now-controls-69-of-online-advertising-market/6632/)recent article, Google commands 69% of the online ad market. That’s big, but it’s not really quite a monopoly yet, is it? If it _is_ an effective monopoly, then maybe it’s a good thing that Google are letting go of important pieces of the market like TV Tropes - presumably some other ad aggregator can then pick up and specialise to that section of the market. Otherwise, what’s the solution? ---
**Author:** ![Gustav](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/919ad9/32.png) [@Gustav](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gustav)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/92 "2010-11-01T19:43:11Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > So what’s the solution? Force Google to place ads on sites that neither they, nor their paying customers wish to? Force them to establish an plainly stated set of rules that outline what is and isn’t allowed, and enforce them fairly, instead of this wink-wink nudge-nudge business. That doesn’t seem like too much to ask. Clients should be entitled to know the terms of their contract when they sign up. ---
**Author:** ![hajario](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hajario/32/171_2.png) [@hajario](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hajario)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/93 "2010-11-01T19:50:06Z")
> [@Gustav](#): > > Force them to establish an plainly stated set of rules that outline what is and isn’t allowed, and enforce them fairly, instead of this wink-wink nudge-nudge business. That doesn’t seem like too much to ask. Clients should be entitled to know the terms of their contract when they sign up. Force them? Who should do the forcing? Adwords can be canceled with no notice by either party. It’s not like TVTropes was locked into anything. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/94 "2010-11-01T19:52:32Z")
> [@Gustav](#): > > Force them to establish an plainly stated set of rules that outline what is and isn’t allowed, and enforce them fairly, instead of this wink-wink nudge-nudge business. That doesn’t seem like too much to ask. Clients should be entitled to know the terms of their contract when they sign up. And why should they be subject to such a requirement, when only government-regulated industries are subject to this kind of contract policing? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/95 "2010-11-01T19:55:45Z")
> [@Gustav](#): > > Force them to establish an plainly stated set of rules that outline what is and isn’t allowed, and enforce them fairly, instead of this wink-wink nudge-nudge business. That doesn’t seem like too much to ask. Clients should be entitled to know the terms of their contract when they sign up. Most of that already happens. The only bit in question is the even-handedness of enforcement, but we don’t seem to have established what their metric is for policy compliance, or if they just rely on snitches, or what. Without knowing the variables, a mechanistically-applied system could be quite easy to misinterpret as being inconsistent. ---
**Author:** ![TBG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c89c15/32.png) [@TBG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TBG)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2010, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/96 "2010-11-01T23:40:54Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I’m not intimately familiar with TV Tropes, but it sounds like the action here might have been a bit on the heavy handed side (which ought to make site reconsideration a fairly low hurdle) > Here’s the relevant bit of policy: > > > [@](#): > > > > Publishers may not place AdSense code on pages with content that violates any of our content guidelines. Some examples include content that is adult, violent or advocating racial intolerance. > > > > Sites with Google ads may not include or link to: > > > > - Pornography, adult or mature content > > - Violent content > > - Content related to racial intolerance or advocacy against any individual, group or organisation > > \*\*\* Excessive profanity\*\* > > - Hacking/cracking content > > - Gambling or casino-related content > > - Illicit drugs and drug paraphernalia content > > - Sales of beer or hard alcohol > > - Sales of tobacco or tobacco-related products > > - Sales of prescription drugs > > - Sales of weapons or ammunition (e.g. firearms, firearm components, fighting knives, stun guns) > > - Sales of products that are replicas or imitations of designer goods > > - Sales or distribution of coursework or student essays > > - Content regarding programs which compensate users for clicking ads or offers, performing searches, surfing websites or reading emails > > - Any other content that is illegal, promotes illegal activity or infringes on the legal rights of others > > I guess it comes down to the definition of ‘excessive profanity’, unless there are some other areas of infringment also. (Bolding mine.) Goodbye BBQ pit. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Alan\_Smithee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/2acd7d/32.png) [@Alan\_Smithee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alan_Smithee)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2010, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/97 "2010-11-02T05:01:03Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > So what’s the solution? Force Google to place ads on sites that neither they, nor their paying customers wish to? The solution is for people to complain on message boards and blogs. If Google gets bad PR among the technorati, they might decide to change. Google is not just an advertising agency, it is also a very, very valuable brand that the company will work to protect. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2010, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/98 "2010-11-02T06:13:53Z")
Ugh. I knew I should have left the “evil” comments out of this. Y’all should know by now that my definition of evil is looking out for yourselves at the expense of others. Google has enough money that they could do what a moral human would do: tell the person what they are doing wrong, and give them adequate time to deal with the situation. Instead, they pull the ads, and give the site owner no information on what he is doing wrong. And why? The owner asked: because they only have 5 million page views per month, which is small change for Google. My reason for my definition of evil is simple. If everyone were to just look out for themselves, we’d have a very amoral society, unless you actually believe Rand. Said society leads to revolution. That the rules Google makes are stupid is just icing on the cake. That they don’t enforce them evenly, as evidenced by this site having the same problems, was just a little bit more to make me have to say something. Finally, I have to admit I was just peeved in the first place. I’m sure all of y’all wouldn’t say “Well, that’s what happens” if I were to go to Google right now and report us and get our Google ad revenue taken away (which, according to the policy and precedent would happen.) And so I detest that you would say “Them’s the breaks” as if it’s no big deal. I made this thread for the people who care about the site. If you think it’s no big deal, why come into the thread at all? The good news is that the stuff they are doing to try to fix this may actually make for a stronger site. This doesn’t mean, however, that I believe that what Google did was right. As far as I’m concerned, it was just another example of a big company bullying a smaller company because they can. Or, at the very least, bureaucracy going overboard. That said, I’m more mad at the person who most likely reported them. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2010, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/99 "2010-11-02T06:22:22Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > People keep saying that Google is a monopoly in the web ad business, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it doesn’t make it true. They don’t have to be a monopoly. All they have to do is mislead the site by letting them earn higher and higher rates until they can’t get anywhere near the same deal from anyone else (at least, in the short term) and then cut them off without warning. In fact, that’s the only reason FastEddie is acquiescing at all–his only other choice is to shut down most of the site. For example, they ran Amazon ads for about a week, and got enough money to run 11 minutes worth of the site. They said that, in a month, they’d get at most what Google would make in a day. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2010, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943/100 "2010-11-02T13:32:55Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Ugh. I knew I should have left the “evil” comments out of this. Y’all should know by now that my definition of evil is looking out for yourselves at the expense of others. Google has enough money that they could do what a moral human would do: tell the person what they are doing wrong, and give them adequate time to deal with the situation. Instead, they pull the ads, and give the site owner no information on what he is doing wrong. And why? The owner asked: because they only have 5 million page views per month, which is small change for Google. I’m probably guilty of not knowing the full details of what happened in this case (I’m afraid I just didn’t have time to trawl through dozens of pages of angst to pick out the pertinent facts - I did get to the bit where they started discussing the details of what had happened though). That’s not my personal definition of evil. IMO, it’s not unreasonable to expect the webmaster to take responsibility for checking that the site is compliant with policy that has been made clear in advance. Webmasters are not the customer in this relationship - they’re the supplier (of ad space on web pages). > [@](#): > > My reason for my definition of evil is simple. If everyone were to just look out for themselves, we’d have a very amoral society, unless you actually believe Rand. Said society leads to revolution. I don’t really believe Google _is_ doing that - just looking out for themselves. I believe they’re catering for the perceived demands of the ad market they’re serving. Their paying customers - if the paying customers don’t like it, they won’t hand-hold the process of remedy - they’ll vote with their wallets. > [@](#): > > That the rules Google makes are stupid is just icing on the cake. Are they? What’s stupid about them? > [@](#): > > That they don’t enforce them evenly, as evidenced by this site having the same problems, was just a little bit more to make me have to say something. If this really is the case, then I agree, it’s pretty poor. Have we actually established that the rules really _are_ being enforced unevenly? It’s easy to have an impression of the general level of profanity on this site vs that, but that impression could be wrong. Do we know how it’s measured, and whether the other sites that seem to be getting away with it aren’t just below the radar? > [@](#): > > Finally, I have to admit I was just peeved in the first place. I’m sure all of y’all wouldn’t say “Well, that’s what happens” if I were to go to Google right now and report us and get our Google ad revenue taken away (which, according to the policy and precedent would happen.) And so I detest that you would say “Them’s the breaks” as if it’s no big deal. I’m not sure that’s what I meant by ‘them’s the breaks’ I have a website of my own and I use AdSense on it. I am acutely aware of the requirements imposed by the scheme - it just seems odd to me that people can be surprised when they fall foul of the policies, which regardless of whether they’re draconian, are abundantly clear. > [@](#): > > I made this thread for the people who care about the site. If you think it’s no big deal, why come into the thread at all? Because this is a message board, where people discuss their diverse viewpoints. My viewpoint is based on first-hand experience of Google Adsense, and my experience happens to have been entirely positive. I think this thread needs the balance, frankly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/tv-tropes-is-in-trouble/558943.md?page=6)