AdSense Premium Publishers have always negotiated custom ToS. And rates.

Those who pay to play have different rules than those who do not. That's the nature of the universe.

Yep; when you are a Premium Publisher, you have your own set of terms and conditions that are negotiated. The rules and terms that apply to the 'regular' publishers do not apply to them, so they probably breaking no rules.

The funny is that the "rules" set by Adsense, are to protect Advertisers, and also offer a better user experience. This is understandable. For example misleading or disguised placements. However, if this is not good for advertisers and users on our "normal" sites, this is thousands of time worse, when it's on big sites with millions of pages views per days.

Regardless of rules, I think this is a completely idiotic design. You work really hard to get the user to convert, that is sign up. Finally the user goes to the sign up page and then you distract the user with an ad that will take the user to another site never to be seen again. Brilliant! I hope they spend the 25 cents they earned wisely!

It's like going to a store, picking up a bunch of products and getting to the cash and being forced to wait while the employ stocks some shelfs.

It's a log-in form, not a sign-up form. As such, it's likely to be one of the most popular pages on their website, so it makes sense to try to monetize those eyeballs. There are no ads on the sign-up page.

It's indirectly related, but the two things I'd like adsense to change (for everybody), would be the possibility to have a floating side bar ad slot (it looks like they allow it for some accounts on request), and I'd like that Ads to open links into a new window (in fact a new tab nowadays).

As for ads on login page, they might not produce good clicks , but they can represent significant earnings from impression. Even if CPM is low, multiplied by hundred of thousands of users or more, this can end being good money.

@robzilla, you are correct my mistake, I checked the site yesterday when this thread was first posted and only commented this morning.

But it still sucks IMO, it may not be as critical as sign-up but it is still a sign of the user's intent to contribute or interact with the website. I don't know how the customer service is with the Telcos in the UK but if anything like it is Canada, these company probably do not want you to login or sign up in the first place, as long as you pay the bill.

Also I am seeing 2 ads 1, 300 x 600 and 1, 300 x 250 side by side.

but they can represent significant earnings from impression

I'm not sure about that. It would really come down to how the login process is designed. If you are encouraged to log on once and stay logged in, like facebook (where they hide the logout) then users will rarely land on the login page.

I have seen that too. And in some cases I can't imagine that they negotiated rule changes to allow for the violations.

I have wondered if someone could be using doubleclick. And then on those pages not allow adsense to backfill.

I have not researched doubleclick enough to know if their TOS are the exact same as adsense.

About opening a new tab or window just use Google DFP where you can overwrite opening after a click into new window.

The big boys have always played by different rules and always will. It is how the world works, fair or not.

There appears to be a weird lack of understanding of how the mercantile world has always worked amongst webdevs who are ? themselves in business. For a common B&M example: when you walk into your local supermarket - the biggest brands made deals to be where they are shelved,medium brands dickered over what was left, and small brands were simply happy to be stocked. Retail grocery is a vicious cutthroat business. Actually so is most business one way or another.

So why is it [example.com] seem to get away with having a 300 x 600 ad right next to the login form?

You sure Google AdSense knows this is happening?

These premium publishers are forcing people to install adblockers.
Sometimes it's like dodging a minefield to get to content you want.

@Edge:

You sure Google AdSense knows this is happening?

Only AdSense knows what it knows :)
And only AdSense and the Premium Publisher know what behaviours have been agreed.

I suspect that AdSense in toto is simply chasing revenue without thought to consequences until it bites them; over the years we've seen a number of AdSense suggestions that run counter to what the Web Quality/Spam side recommends/enforces...

Unfortunately, many/most PP are of the 'too big to' so that they may get their knuckles rapped but it's relatively minor and of short duration while the majority of Content Publisher infringement punishments are long unto terminal. As usual fair doesn't apply.

Yes, a premium publisher earning $1m+ a year (25-32% of which goes to Adsense) will be able to push the envelope more than Jack Spratt and his $1k a year hobby site. Google can do without Jack Spratt but PP is another story.

I've received two policy violation warnings since December for a section of my site that does NOT even run any Adsense units.

The violations advise me to remove the content or keep the content but not run any Adsense units on the page with the violations - but there are NO units running there.

It's made me paranoid now of everything that goes on my site.

It depends on the violation, I guess. You can't put pron on one page and expect to get away with it because it doesn't have AdSense on it.

(They should, in this case, do a better job of communicating that, of course.)

Rob, it wasnt for pron, technically.

One violation was because someone posted a link to an adult site (seven years ago no less).

The other was over a bikini photo (posted six years ago) - which they said I didn't even have to remove, but had to make sure I wasn't running Adsense units on that page (which there havent been any units since 2010).

Sounds like only an advise, just so you be careful.

In "real" violation warnings, they give you 3 days to "fix" the problem, otherwise ads will be disabled for the whole site. (or the account can be banned, depending of the severity and repeat of violations).

@Peter, there was no three day warning.

To ensure I don't have future problems, I had two mods created. One mod restricts the viewing of images unless someone is a registered user. And the other has the same function but for links. Since we have 60-80K posts per month in our forum, I don't want to risk missing something.