• http://twitter.com/MichelleObama7 Clifford Bryan

    I agree with the obvious dichotomy in Google applying rules as they see fit. Small players have to grind it out for their very lives with an algorithm. While companies like BMW just pick up the phone. From a business stand point I understand but from the “transparency” side of things it seems quite odd.

  • http://www.bizzspotblog.com melissabizzspot

    BP is another recent example of big companies somehow bending the rules while Google claims “system error.” AdWords ads with display URLs unrelated to their destination URLs are, at least in my experience, noticed and disapproved accurately and speedily. Somehow BP managed to subvert that rule for days and Google wants us to believe their system just didn’t catch it. I don’t have a problem with allowing some slack and I don’t believe most rules or guidelines are absolutes, but I do think that if Google is really trying to “Do no evil” and play fair, the least they could do is be up front and honest when they make exceptions.

  • http://www.onlinematters.com Arthur Coleman

    On this one, I don’t quite agree with you Danny. I do agree that process should be fair, based around intent, and clear with warning steps before removing pages from the index. Google should publish a set of guidelines that not only have a stepped process with escalation and differing penalties depending on the intent of the company if they do not act on the warning, but also have a moderation element where Google commits to review the issue at each step within a specific number of days, respond in writing, and/or make available an ombudsman who can be called by phone to resolve the issue.

    On the other hand, things like help ages for users on a site like Google where millions depend on the information to “survive” online and the event was unintentional should be given an accelerated hearing and allowed a quick return to good graces. You should not punish users in order to have an overly high sense of fairness.