So I had this $25.00 gift certificate for Google AdWords, and — foolish me — thought that I might use it to advertise my site. After a few hours in the big leagues, however, I got this e-mail greeting in my mailbox:

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:12:57 -0800

From: <adwords-support@google.com>

To: …

Subject: Your Google AdWords Approval Status

Hello Charles,

Thank you for advertising with Google AdWords. After reviewing your account, I have found that one or more of your ads or keywords does not meet our guidelines. The results are outlined in the report below.

…

SUGGESTIONS:

-> Content: At this time, Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain language that advocates against an individual, group, or organization. As noted in our advertising terms and conditions, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site.

Well, that’s fine. Google has the right to determine what they will or won’t run ads for. But I’m a bit puzzled by the application of the standards being cited. My reply:

Dear Google AdWords Team:

Thank you for your recent e-mail concerning my account with Google AdWords. While I understand that you have every right to determine what will or will not be advertised through Google, I have to confess that I’m a bit mystified by the reasons you have given here for suspending the ad campaign for my weblog, http://radgeek.com

On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:12:57 -0800, you wrote:

SUGGESTIONS:

-> Content: At this time, Google policy does not permit the advertisement of websites that contain language that advocates against an individual, group, or organization. As noted in our advertising terms and conditions, we reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the advertising we accept on our site.

Again, you’re fully within your rights to choose what you will or won’t advertise. But I’m having trouble understanding what it is on my website that constitutes language that advocates against an individual, group, or organization. Of course, my website carries a great deal of political content; and since it carries political content it contains some entries that are critical of other people and organizations. For example, lately I have carried items criticizing Samuel Huntington’s and David Brooks’ writings on immigration, condemning Virgin Airways’ plans to install urinals in the shape of women’s lips in the JFK Airport clubhouse, criticizing President Bush and condemning the terrorist bombing in Madrid, and encouraging people to attend the pro-choice march in Washington DC in April. All of these items might be construed as advocating against some individual (such as the President or David Brooks), some organization (such as Virgin Airways or al-Qaeda), or some group (such as misogynists). But what is the line between merely disagreeing with someone or some group, and presenting views in opposition to theirs, and language advocating against that person or group? I would understand if AdWords simply did not accept political ads, or ads from sites trading in political criticism. But THAT is surely not the case. Consider the following typical AdWords results from a search for the keyword republican:

“The Passion of Clinton”
and other Democratic nonsense
New & Satire: We report You despair
www.affunnystan.com

Build a Stronger America
Support the RNC and the President’s
Compassionate Conservative agenda.
www.RNC.org

The Right Wing Conspiracy
Proudly become an official member.
T-shirt, free newsletter, and books
RightWingConspiracy.org

John Ashcroft Gets Sexy?
The Ashcroft Sex Film Contest
Celebrity Judges – Win $1,000!
nerve.com/promos/videocontest

All of these sites carry strongly-worded political content, and all of them criticize specific individuals and organizations. Or consider the following AdWords search result for the keyword feminism:

Feminist Fantasies
Essays on feminism in the media,
workplace, home, and the military.
www.eagleforum.org

(This is an ad that leads directly to a page containing a great deal of advocacy against feminists as a group, and advertising a book which is devoted to the same.)

I’m not writing to suggest that these sites should be suspended. Rather, I don’t understand what the salient differences are between the content at these pages and the content at http://radgeek.com/ such that the former is acceptable content for advertisement through Google AdWords and the latter is not. Could you explain to me further why this is so–or perhaps give some specific example of the nature of the problem? If so I would be much obliged. I really appreciate the service that Google makes available through AdWords, but I don’t understand the policies and if I don’t understand them, I fear that this will leave me unable to choose to advertise events or products through your service in the future. Since I would like to have as productive a relationship with you as possible, I hope that you could either make clear to me what the problems with my site are, or — if there are not such problems — reinstate the account.

Thank you very much.

Charles Johnson
Rad Geek People’s Daily

Of course, I am not an impartial observer of my own website. Is there something that I’m just not getting here? Is it because I called the President a dickhead? Is it because my recent slam on John Ashcroft wasn’t accompanied with a snarky porn video contest? What is it? If you know, help me out here–if I’m going to be too offensive to The Powers That Be to run on Google AdWords, I’d at least like to know what it is that I’m doing right….

Incidentally, I recently got a box full of CDs by feminist artists for resale. If you’re interested in CDs of Ani DiFranco, Bitch & Animal, Le Tigre, Alix Olson, or Margaret Cho, I have just gotten several in. let me know, and I’ll give you a bargain rate.

Cheers! — RG

If you’ve been to my website in the past couple days, you may have noticed something new: I’ve added some of those ugly little Google AdSense text ads to the navigation bar. In light of this, there are a few things that ought to be obvious about the ads run on this site; but, pedant that I am, I figured that it would be a good idea to explicitly say them, too:

1. If an ad you see interests you, by all means click on it. There’s some good stuff that comes up, and your click-through will kick a few cents back to the Rad Geek People’s Daily. What could it hurt?
2. The ads are generated directly by Google. Not by me. I don’t take responsibility for any wacked-out or repulsive sites that Google mysteriously decides would be a good match for readers of this website.
3. Nevertheless, I do try to use Google’s internal tools to filter out ads that I notice coming up which are wacked-out or repulsive. So if you see something in the sidebar that you think comes under this category, feel free to contact me with the URL, and I’ll see about filtering it.

Finally, it’s worth noting that, thanks to something of a cash crunch (being freelance academic just doesn’t pay as well as it used to), these ads will probably stay up for the near future. But like all matters of the human will, this is a future contingent; it is in your power to change it. If you would like to make a small contribution to support the Rad Geek People’s Daily I’ll be glad to take the ads down for one week for each Supporter contribution, or one month for each Sustaining pledge, that I receive.

That’s all for now. Happy surfing!

— The Editor

Today, March 15^th, 2004 CE, is the 2,047^th anniversary (give or take the relevant calendar adjustments) of the assassination of Gaius Julius Caesar–the butcher of Gaul, the annihilator of the Republic, the destroyer of the Great Library of Alexandria, the harbinger of five centuries of absolutist tyranny, and the explicit archetype of every brutal prince, absolute monarch, and fascist dictatorship in the ancient, medieval, and modern history of Eastern and Western Europe. At last, as dictator-for-life Caesar increasingly threatened the elevation of his coup d’etat into an explicit monarchy, a group of Senators led by Marcus Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinus rose up, taking the title of Liberatores, and stabbed Caesar 23 times in the Forum.

Today is also only two days after (again, give or take the relevant calendar adjustments) the 123^rd anniversary of the assassination of Czar Alexander II of Russia, an autocratic self-styled Caesar who, in spite of making a tremendous step forward for freedom by emancipating the serfs, also fostered the ultra-reactionary Three Emperors League with Austria and Prussia, began his reign with the senseless and devastating Crimean War, continued to pursue vigorous warfare against Turkey and conquests in the East, and imprisoned and murdered hundreds of liberal, socialist, and anarchist students. On March 13, 1881 he was killed by a bomb thrown by an anarchist in an act of Propaganda by the Deed.

In honor of the event, I’d like to suggest a new holiday. Let’s celebrate March 15 as Tyrannicide Day (observed)! Two tyrants’ deaths bundled together into one day of celebration; it’ll be just like President’s Day, except cooler.

One of the great unintended consequences of the Internet is that it makes it easier than it ever has been to make fun of politicians. Thanks to the vast numbers of press photographs put online every day, and especially with the aid of Google Image Search, I have at my fingertips a nearly endless supply of photographs of prominent public figures looking like complete doofuses.

Consider one of my recent favorites. Is it just me, or does Donald Rumsfeld bear an uncanny resemblence to Evil Lord Skeletor?

Bonus points: Dick Cheney as Hordak, the ruthless leader of the Evil Horde:

And I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the Joe Lieberman / Palpatine connection (as pointed out by Roderick Long):

Of course, for some people, you don’t need any snarky look-alike comparisons; it just comes naturally:

P.S.: Bill Clinton really shouldn’t have Rush Limbaugh pose his press shots for him:

P.P.S.: Donald Rumsfeld actually just shouldn’t ever consent to be photographed at all: