From violation to termination
What typically happens after a search feed publisher breaks a rule: review, warning, traffic cap, clawback and, at the end of the road, loss of the feed.
From violation to termination
1/8
A feed comes with a rulebook
A search feed is lent, not owned. The engine’s AFS and RSOC policies, plus the provider’s contract, say what the ads, pages and traffic must look like. Compliance is the price of keeping the tap open.
- A feed comes with a rulebook: A search feed is lent, not owned. The engine’s AFS and RSOC policies, plus the provider’s contract, say what the ads, pages and traffic must look like. Compliance is the price of keeping the tap open.
- Something breaks a rule: Typical causes: a misleading ad that promises what the page does not deliver, search terms unrelated to the article, an unapproved traffic source, or wording that pushes people to click ads. Each is a policy violation.
- It gets noticed: Automated checks, manual reviewers and advertiser complaints all feed a review. The provider is watching too, because the engine holds it responsible for its publishers.
- First rung: a warning: For a first or minor problem the usual result is a notice naming the issue and a deadline. Fixing the ad or page, and showing it, normally ends the matter. This is the cheap exit.
- Second rung: limits: If issues repeat or quality looks weak, the feed may be throttled: a feed cap on daily volume, fewer ads per page, or a ban on one traffic source. Revenue falls immediately while ad spend may still be running.
- Third rung: revenue taken back: Earnings tied to the violating traffic can be withheld or deducted, sometimes for weeks already reported. If $28,000 was estimated and $8,000 of it is judged non-compliant, that Clawback (revenue deduction) alone wipes out the month’s profit in our example.
- Last rung: termination: Serious or repeated breaches end in the feed being switched off, often without a second chance, and unpaid balances may be kept (feed suspension). Severe cases can skip every earlier rung. This is platform risk at its plainest.
- The damage travels: A terminated publisher rarely gets another feed quickly: providers share the same few engines and ask about history. And a provider with too many bad publishers risks its own contract, which is why approval is slow and monitoring constant.
Step by step
- A feed comes with a rulebook (Rules)A search feed is lent, not owned. The engine’s AFS and RSOC policies, plus the provider’s contract, say what the ads, pages and traffic must look like. Compliance is the price of keeping the tap open.
- Something breaks a rule (Breach)Typical causes: a misleading ad that promises what the page does not deliver, search terms unrelated to the article, an unapproved traffic source, or wording that pushes people to click ads. Each is a policy violation.
- It gets noticed (Review)Automated checks, manual reviewers and advertiser complaints all feed a review. The provider is watching too, because the engine holds it responsible for its publishers.
- First rung: a warning (Warning)For a first or minor problem the usual result is a notice naming the issue and a deadline. Fixing the ad or page, and showing it, normally ends the matter. This is the cheap exit.
- Second rung: limits (Cap)If issues repeat or quality looks weak, the feed may be throttled: a feed cap on daily volume, fewer ads per page, or a ban on one traffic source. Revenue falls immediately while ad spend may still be running.
- Third rung: revenue taken back (Money)Earnings tied to the violating traffic can be withheld or deducted, sometimes for weeks already reported. If $28,000 was estimated and $8,000 of it is judged non-compliant, that clawback alone wipes out the month’s profit in our example.
- Last rung: termination (The end)Serious or repeated breaches end in the feed being switched off, often without a second chance, and unpaid balances may be kept (feed suspension). Severe cases can skip every earlier rung. This is platform risk at its plainest.
- The damage travels (Knock-on)A terminated publisher rarely gets another feed quickly: providers share the same few engines and ask about history. And a provider with too many bad publishers risks its own contract, which is why approval is slow and monitoring constant.