• http://www.mattcollins.net Matt Collins

    The other side to this is the false positives when Google permanently bans a legitimate small advertiser.

    Currently, Google’s policies in this regard are extremely draconian, leaving well-meaning people suddenly cut off and unable to access Google’s monopolistic share of paid search impressions. This can be devastating for someone’s business and career, yet in many cases Google won’t discuss their decision or allow any kind of appeal.

  • terilg

    I completely agree with Matt’s comment above. Google’s automation generates a high number of false positives leading to long delays in getting legitimate campaigns launched. One typical problem area is health care, where hospital ad texts routinely get flagged as violating the Pharmaceuticals policy, despite having no pharmaceutical-related content in the ad text, keyword or on the advertiser’s websites. I’ve seen this problem over and over with a variety of clients. It is also a frustrating and time consuming process to appeal disapproved ads that Google’s systems think violate trademark rules. Maybe they are doing a better job of keeping the bad guys out, but they are keeping a large number of good guys out as well.

  • http://twitter.com/philsegal Philip Segal

     I worked with a shady affiliate type early in my career and had direct experience with the advertiser being shut down and discussing this with Google representatives. In my personal experience, they are fairly proactive in shutting down advertising that they think are harmful to the user experience.

    The “we spend $XXXX with you every month” argument did nothing to sway them against policy.

  • Fosti Nosti

    thanks for your valuable sharing news with us



    car lease take over