[ElongatedMusket]

This comment on the post sums up the issue quite clearly: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2024/03/google-demands-that-...

His commenters are saying too many "bad words" that google ads doesn't like. It's been like this for over a decade, but from my perspective the "bad word list" has grown out of control to where people can't have anything more than kintergarden conversations on pages hosting Google ads. I kind of wish they would just ban every word in the dictionary so we can move on from their control of the web.

If HN had google ads, the URL list in this spreadsheet would reach the moon.

[marcosdumay]

> I kind of wish they would just ban every word in the dictionary so we can move on from their control of the web.

You know, when a company doing stupid things cause the entire world to self-censor, it means there's something very wrong with the intended democracy where it's hosted and the other ones letting their people being preyed upon.

[JKCalhoun]

Seems that when you go to bed with advertising you forfeit thinking for yourself and therefore your humanity.

[freedomben]

This is the one area where Google's massive power on web advertising could be used for good. If they would push back against this stuff to advertisers, the advertisers would (for the most part) just lighten up.

What really happens is that both Google and the advertisers want it to be this way. Many Google employees hate the idea that their search engine "surfaces harmful information," and they define "harmful" in a much more broad way than most people do.

So no, Google doesn't get to use this excuse about "we're just hamstrung by the advertisers!"

[Cthulhu_]

This is the danger of hosting your own comment sections; by the powers that be (be it companies like Google or coporations) you are the end-responsible for user generated content. There's some leniency of course, since you didn't write it yourself.

Personal anecdotes. Members posted porn gifs on my old fashioned forums 20 odd years ago, Google did not appreciate that.

Members posted stills from an unreleased game on my current forums; we got DMCA takedown notices from at least three separate legal people associated with the company that published said game. If we didn't do the takedowns ourselves, they probably would've gone to the host and have our site shut down.

TL;DR, if you use a 3rd party (host, service), your content has to comply to their terms and services.

[pixl97]

Are we also not sure that this is a danger of letting one advertizer become dominant on the entire internet and controlling a large part of human discussion?