CALL TO ACTION: If you think these ads should be pulled from Google ads for "advocating against a protected group" and causing a "chilling and discriminatory effect" on Google employees and customers, please send Google an e-mail or call them at (650) 930-3555. Ask them to stop making money from our fight for equality. Remind them that - as Sergey said - this is "an issue of equality."
I've sat on
this story from Bilerico for a few hours, in order to get more information, and even possibly get the issue resolved quietly. No such luck.
In a nutshell, Google has an explicit policy for its advertising that says no ad may advocate against a protected class, and among those protected classes is "sexual orientation." Yet, Google is running ads from anti-gay forces advocating the repeal of gay marriage in California, and advocating against gays in Arizona.
That's a clear violation of Google's policy against advocacy ads targeted protected groups. Period.
I love Google. I love Blogger (belonging to Google). I love that Google, for whatever reason, decided to embrace an incredibly progressive ad policy, banning advocacy ads against minorities. What I don't love is Google acting like a typical bad American corporation, and shoving its explicit written policies out the window when things become uncomfortable.
It would be one thing if Google didn't have a policy banning such ads. But it does. And bully for Google for being so progressive. But don't tell me now that it's okay to run such ads when your own explicit policy forbids is. One argument I heard is that Google would permit ads for the anti-gays if the ads simply said "Vote YES on Prop 8" (that's the anti-gay marriage proposition that would repeal the marriages of thousands of gay couples and make their children instant bastards). That would be okay, per Google. But Google might not allow ads that say "Vote Yes on Prop 8, which would ban gay marriage."
What's the difference? They both advocate against a protected group, they both advocate for the same legislation - the first one is simply more sly about it. So ads for the Klan are fine so long as they don't tell you that the legislation they're pushing is actually to repeal the 15th amendment and a few more parts of the Constitution protecting blacks? Discriminatory advertising is fine so long as you don't tell anyone that's what it really is. Huh? One could argue that in fact it's more progressive to REQUIRE the anti-gay to tell people what the ad is about - to tell people that Prop 8 bans gay marriage, that would probabl get us more votes on our side than an ad stealthily seeking support for Prop 8 while not telling you what it does.
What is the point in having an ad policy prohibiting advocacy against protected minorities if you permit advocacy against those same minorities provided the advocacy is circumspect about its evil, bigoted, hateful intentions? We're not talking banning Wal-Mart's "buy our new clothing!" ad because Wal-Mart sometimes takes positions against the interests of the disabled - that does not per se make a Wal-Mart ad "advocacy against a protected class." But if Wal-Mart were to take out an ad advocating for legislation hurting people with disabilities, that WOULD be advocacy against a protected class. Google is trying to pretend that we're talking about generic ads since the ads don't specify what the Prop really does. That's a patently absurd interpretation of their no anti-minority advocacy policy.
I'm sorry, but this is weasely and creepy and corporate of Google. I'm frankly surprised that they have such an inclusive ad policy - I'm downright impressed in fact. And I'm heartened that Google execs are campaigning for Obama, and that they've come out against Prop 8. But how can Google come out against Proposition that Google says per se isn't advocating anything bad against gays? Would Google support Prop 8, provided the Prop8ers don't mention gays? The entire this is inconsistent.
In spite of its good work, if Google is going to start haggling over the definition of "is" when a simple mater of their own explicit civil rights policy arises, then maybe we need to reconsider whether the days of "good" Google are numbered.
Read More......