There are a few key reasons why ads may initially be approved but then later rejected by advertising platforms like Facebook, Google, and others:
sudden Policy Changes
Advertising platforms are constantly updating their policies and rules. Something that was allowed yesterday may be prohibited today. Platforms like Facebook and Google regularly tighten policies around advertising in certain categories like politics, health, supplements, and more. If rules change suddenly, ads that were previously approved may suddenly find themselves in violation of new policies.
Policy Rollouts May Be Gradual
When platforms like Facebook introduce new ad policies, the changes are usually rolled out gradually. This means the new rules may catch some ads but not others initially. As the rollout expands over hours or days, more and more previously-approved ads are likely to get flagged.
Policy Enforcement Is Often Inconsistent
Human reviewers working for advertising platforms make mistakes and may enforce policies inconsistently. What one reviewer approves, another may flag as a violation. This inconsistency in human reviewers means the same ad may get rejected later even if rules haven’t changed.
Issue With Ad Content
There are a few ways issues with the actual ad content could lead to initial approval followed by rejection:
Hidden Violations
Some prohibited elements in ads may not be immediately obvious to human reviewers or automated systems. For example, an image may seem fine at first glance but contain hidden profanity or copyrighted material. As review processes improve, previously missed violations are more likely to be caught.
Reconsideration of Borderline Content
Ads containing seemingly borderline content sometimes make it through initial reviews if they don’t clearly violate any specific rules. However, on reconsideration a reviewer may decide the content goes against platform guidelines after all and reverse the approval decision.
Complaints Lead to Re-Review
If viewers complain to the advertising platform about an approved ad, this can trigger a manual re-review of the content. In some cases, the ad then gets rejected upon closer inspection prompted by user complaints.
Demographic Targeting Issues
Problems with how an ad is targeted can also lead to later rejection:
Targeting Expands
If an ad is initially run with very narrow targeting, it may not trigger any policy violations. However, if the advertiser later expands the targeting to a wider audience, it could then start violating policies around excluding or including certain groups.
Irrelevant Targeting
While platforms want ads targeted to relevant audiences, the relevance may not always be clear initially. After accumulating data on how the ad performs, the platform may determine the targeting set is too irrelevant and reject the ad.
Unwanted Overlap
Even if an ad targets two separately approved groups, there could be problematic overlap between them that violates exclusion policies. For example, targeting both teens and adults for certain products could be seen as encouraging underage use.
Review Triggers and Prioritization
When and how often ads are re-reviewed can impact rejection decisions:
Routine Spot Checks
Advertising platforms continually do spot checks sampling active ads to catch any policy violations. Even if an ad was approved originally, being randomly selected for one of these routine re-reviews could flag issues not initially caught.
Increased Scrutiny for High-Reach Ads
Ads with very high reach and visibility are naturally higher priorities for manual review. A previously approved ad spreading widely may encounter more intensive scrutiny and rejection.
Prioritization of User Complaints
Advertising platforms prioritize re-reviewing ads that receive user complaints. If enough complaints come in about a given ad, it jumps to the top of the list for follow-up manual review – which often results in rejection.
Advertiser Account Factors
Issues stemming from the advertiser’s account itself can also lead to ad rejection:
Enhanced Review for At-Risk Accounts
Accounts flagged for previous policy violations may be subject to enhanced review where new ads require manual pre-approval. This extra scrutiny means more previously approved ads are likely to get rejected.
Sudden Blacklisting
In cases of severe or repeated violations, platforms will completely blacklist advertiser accounts. Once blacklisted, all ads under that account are rejected even if previously approved.
Policy Violations in Other Assets
If the advertiser violates policies with other published content outside the ads themselves, this can potentially trigger rejection of the ads as well.
Ongoing Monitoring at Scale
Given the massive scale of platforms like Facebook and Google, enforcing advertising policies is an ongoing challenge. Even with advancing technology, new violations and borderline content constantly slip through. As companies pour more resources into compliance monitoring and iterate on review systems, ads once considered benign may cross new rejection thresholds.
Ambiguous Language in Policies
Advertising platforms often use somewhat vague or ambiguous language in their policy documents. Terms like “misleading,” “shocking,” or “excessive” are open to interpretation. An ad that barely passes muster initially may cross a subjective line upon re-review and sudden rejection under hazy rules.
Context and Public Perception Changes
What seems acceptable currently may not stand up well to shifting public opinions and future cultural context. Evolving social norms give reviewers justification to reject ads that previously met standards. Ads containing stereotyping or insensitive messaging provide examples where changing context renders past approvals obsolete.
Data Shows Negative User Response
Advertising platforms gather data and test user responses to ads using methods like A/B testing. If data starts showing an approved ad generates negative sentiment among users, this empirical evidence provides reason to re-evaluate and potentially reject the content.
Safety and Security Concerns
New threats and security issues prompt platforms to tighten policies around certain kinds of advertising content. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic led to increased restrictions on misinformation in health-related ads. In a similar vein, political events may trigger bans on previous ad types now deemed high-risk.
Campaign Optimization Gone Wrong
Advertisers often test optimizations to improve campaign results over time. But overly aggressive changes can backfire and cause rejections. For instance, dramatically broadening targeting or using emotional manipulation tactics may cross ethical lines that reviewers decide warrant takedowns.
Integrity of Review Process
Advertising platforms have a vested interest in maintaining high standards and integrity in the ad review process. Rejecting previously approved ads, while inconvenient for advertisers, helps reinforce policies and ensure consistent quality control.
Conclusion
In summary, a wide range of factors can lead to ads being approved initially but then rejected later on. Advertising platforms like Facebook and Google operate at enormous scale, constantly trying to balance policy enforcement with giving marketers creative freedom. Despite best efforts, mistakes and misjudgments are inevitable. As technology and procedures improve over time, more ads slip past the rejection threshold – even after seeming to meet standards earlier.
For advertisers, it can be incredibly frustrating to have ads rejected after being approved and running successfully. There is often a lack of transparency around why suddenly that content goes against policy. But in most cases, these platforms aren’t arbitrarily rejecting ads out of nowhere. Shifting policies, security issues, problematic targeting, or cultural context prompt re-evaluation of current standards. Maintaining the integrity of massive ad ecosystems requires evolving definitions of what content meets standards – even if that means contradicting past approvals. While advertisers must adapt messaging and targeting accordingly, these platform policy shifts ultimately aim to provide a safer, higher quality user experience.