Well it’s legit in the sense that both the suspension and the lawsuit really happened, but does anyone actually doubt Google’s explanation?
If I were advertising on Google, I’d want it to automatically suspend my account if it suddenly detected thousands of bots clicking on my ads.
Timex
4179
If you’re putting up an ad on google, do you pay more per click on your ads?
If that is true, I will set up a dummy account, and click on every right wing add I can.
Generally it’s cost per view. I don’t recall offhand if Google has a CPC offering, or if it’s widely used.
They offered one to my organization a few years back (to appear above the fold). The higher the spot we wanted, the more per click. We declined.
No Virginia, Texas, or North Carolina, but they can have the deep South. (worst case, carve the Triad and Triangle out of NC and give them to VA)
I just worry that a rump Trumpistan would eventually use its nukes aggressively on another country.
Perhaps I should have said
Delho
4185
What Google explanation? The only explanation linked is a flag for “verify(ing) billing information and policy compliance”. Even if we accept it as the unvarnished truth, it still doesn’t change that fact that they broke a contract.
Google does not get to change its mind after accepting the purchase. They can choose any foolishness for a verification step beforehand, but once money changes hands they are committed. Furthermore, if Google didn’t contact the campaign to remedy the situation, then they failed to do their due diligence, and are responsible for any and all fallout.
Timex
4186
Google didn’t intentionally stop showing her ads or something.
What happened? I assumed Google anti-Russian bot algorithm kicked in.
Google explained that their automated systems for detecting fraudulent activity kicked in; these are covered in their TOS, so there is no breach of contract involved.
The automated systems are there to keep a bot attack from hitting you with an unexpectedly high ad bill.
jsnell
4189
Since you appear to be well informed on the matter, could you post the relevant bits of the contract that were broken?
Money had not changed hands. You don’t pre-pay Google for search ads. You set a daily budget, and get billed at some later point based on how many clicks there were. If the budget gets exceeded, your ad stops showing until there’s available budget again (e.g. by time passing, or by you going and increasing the spend).
If an ad account has a history of spending $1000/day on ads and suddenly wants to start spending $50000/day, is Google obligated to just accept that? What if they want to spend $1M/day? $10M/day? According to your theory it seems that once they’ve accepted a dollar they’re obligated to extend unlimited credit to any user.
(And not just to the real user. You’re proposing that if I hijack your Adwords account and start using your money to buy Google Ads, they can’t have any automation to detect the abuse and stop the bleeding.).
At 9:30pm?
This is the campaign screwing up, and trying to turn their incompetence into lemonade by getting some free publicity with a bogus lawsuit.
Over the weekend Harris announced a new student loan forgiveness policy that seems to be a hot bundle of arglebargle. No one can even figure out what it means, who it would help, how, or even what it might cost.
I don’t know why Dems make these sort of ‘own goals’ all the time with this penchant for taking real problems (some poor people have oppressive student debt loads) and ‘solving’ them with ridiculously complicated impossible schemes.
KevinC
4191
It’s to appeal to the “all important” middle. They are so afraid of being labeled “socialists” or the program as being a “handout” that they twist themselves into knots coming up with programs that they hope will appeal to Republicans. “Look! We require that they start a business! You business-loving Republicans will totally love that and treat this plan fairly in the media, right? Oh, and let’s throw a line in at the end about disadvantaged communities, that’ll protect our left flank!”. It’s the fucking worst sort of triangulation, leaving a policy that’s just a mess and highly unlikely to actually accomplish anything.
So, what, only business majors (or those who are capable of financing and running a business, in any case) are deserving of this? Screw teachers, chemists, nurses, social workers, engineers, or anyone else not starting a business?
Besides, are owners who successfully own and operate a business for 3+ years really the ones in need of the help here? What about their employees buried under student loan debt?
You can bet Warren isn’t wasting everyone’s time trying to do all that triangulation.
A little levity during shitty times - this made me laugh:
This is the kind of shit I expected from Harris given her record, and it’s why I’ve been sort of down on her this whole time.
I’m still on the Warren train full time all the way to the station. Toot toot, bitches!
Yeah. Loan forgiveness needs to entail more than, “I owe a lot of money, it’s related to college, everyone else pay it back.” But Harris’s proposal is ridiculous. How did this make it past any team of advisers? This doesn’t bode well for an election run.
Matt_W
4197
If you actually click the link and go to her site, this is part of a panoply of policies meant to close the opportunity gap in black communities. It’s not part of a college loan forgiveness program; it’s more part of a “business investment in black communities” program.
Her plan for addressing college debt involves loan restructuring, income-based repayment terms, and attacking costs through closing rapacious for-profits and regulating loan terms.
