Google to Ban All Payday Loan Ads

[TacoD]

Source: The New York Times

Google announced Wednesday that it would ban advertisements for payday loans and related products on its website, saying that they often lead to unaffordable repayment terms and financial harm to consumers.

David Graff, the director of global product policy at Google, made the announcement in a blog post that said the global ban would apply to loans for which repayment was due in 60 days and for loans that carry an annual percentage rate of 36 percent or higher.

“This change is designed to protect our users from deceptive or harmful financial products,” he wrote. “Ads for financial services are a particular area of vigilance given how core they are to people’s livelihood and well being.”

Mr. Graff said that the ban, which takes effect on July 13, was in line with the web giant’s effort to keep off the site any ads for products or services that are potentially harmful to consumers. He said the company would continue to review the policy, “but our hope is that fewer people will be exposed to misleading or harmful products.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/12/business/google-to-ban-all-payday-loan-ads.html

[Boomer]

1. Bravo!

Now if we could just get DWS and the Democratic party to act with similar integrity.

[Attorney in Texas]

18. It's nice to see that Google is more progressive than the DNC and its lobbyists

[BadgerKid]

2. I applaud it, but it's also a slippery slope. n/t

[jhart3333]

3. Actually, it's the other way around. This tries to avoid the slippery slope of spiralling debt.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. I think Badgerkid is referring to the slippery slope of censorship

(It's censorship whether government or corporate or individual.)

If a company starts censoring some things, there will be pressure to scrutinize everything closely, and it becomes hard to draw lines and hard to hew to them. That's the slippery slope.

(I don't have any love for payday loan companies. They are predatory.)

[Sam_Fields]

24. The payday loan industry are like child pornographers.

They should be censored and outlawed.

[greiner3]

4. That's funny

Nowadays Everything can be called by that moniker Google is not government and can limit any ads they believe are harmful to the public except political ones. Although to be real. Those are the ones that do the greatest harm

[Bernardo de La Paz]

7. I am confused by your missing words and your extraneous punctuation & capitalization. . nt

[Pacifist Patriot]

12. That ship has sailed.

Companies are expected to have policies about what they will and will not do. Companies that utilize advertising revenues all have guidelines regarding the types of ads they will accept, and generally have those policies from the very start. It's simply expanding upon something that already exists.

[Politicub]

14. Slippery slopes are logical fallacies - not arguments.

You are predicting the future based on your opinion - not fact.

Unless you have the evidence to show what Google has in mind is eliminating all banking ads or something.

I take it on face value and think curtailing ads like this is a good move by the company.

[Roland99]

5. Guess Debbie Wasserman-Schultz will have to start using a different search engine

[Omaha Steve]

25. FIRE DWS! Donate to Democratic Underground for Tim Canova FL-23 here

Donate here: https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/du4timcanova

[Roland99]

26. +1!

[christx30]

6. But how will people find out about

new and exciting ways of turning a $300 loan into years of spiraling debt?

Bravo to google. I'd love for other advertisers to do the same. "We love money. We just don't want YOUR money."

[LiberalLovinLug]

8. "Say what!?"

[Bernardo de La Paz]

10. The excerpt is well written. What do you not comprehend?

[LiberalLovinLug]

15. I think you did not comprehend

my attempt at humor.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. You are correct. I do not comprehend your attempt at humor

Is it victim-blaming 'humor'?

[Jesus Malverde]

17. Maybe this will help provide context...

[Bernardo de La Paz]

20. Thanks. Not everyone can be expected to recognize DWS on sight. I didn't. . . nt

[Attorney in Texas]

19. Is DWS a victim? If so, are you sure it's a matter of victimization and not just karmic balance?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

21. I did not recognize the picture as a public figure. My fault for reading and not having a TV. . .nt

[Attorney in Texas]

23. that's understandable

[TacoD]

22. That is a picture of Debbie W-Schultz who has been criticized for siding with payday lenders (nt)

[jtuck004]

11. I think a bunch of comfortable people are misled if they think this is gonna slow down anyone's

usage of payday loans.

People in poverty and without jobs aren't sitting around reading google and waiting to be sold a loan.

They are trying to pay off some usurious health care bill (or perhaps onerous student loan debt) and avoid bankruptcy while still feeding the kids. What they need are better jobs, health care that doesn't break them. The food banks are becoming overloaded with people who work, who can't get enough hours. These people have little or no other choice.

What will help the least is feel-good marketing tactics by companies who pay H-1B workers to come here and complain about homeless people from the comfort of their air-conditioned bus.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/25/us/backlash-by-the-bay-tech-riches-alter-a-city.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[Doc_Technical]

13. If the powers that be actually cared about real live people

(instead of corporations),
parasitic companies such as payday loans, tow truck/storage yards,
furniture and appliance rent to own, and some insurance policies,
would be outlawed.