Hi Greg,

I ran some tests and spoke with my colleagues today. Starting with v201806, 
some ad types will return a *PolicyFindingError* *instead of* a 
*PolicyViolationError* when there are policy issues. Here's the note we 
added to the Policy Exemption Requests guide 
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/guides/exemption-requests> for 
the v201806 release (yellow highlights mine):

*Note:* Starting in v201806, some ad types (including ExpandedTextAd 
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/latest/AdGroupAdService.ExpandedTextAd>)
 
will fail with a PolicyFindingError 
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/latest/AdGroupAdService.PolicyFindingError>
 instead. This new type of error indicates that the ad will certainly fail 
review again even if an exemption is requested. You can save these ads 
anyway by using the ignorablePolicyTopicIds 
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/latest/AdGroupAdService.AdGroupAdOperation#ignorablePolicyTopicIds>
 field. 
They will fail review, but could be approved later if you fix the 
underlying issue, for example by getting the correct certificate.

Therefore, if you're looking to handle errors specifically for 
*ExpandedTextAds*, you'll want to:

   1. Modify your error handling to instead check for *PolicyFindingError*.
   2. If you want to resubmit an operation even though it's likely to wind 
   up with policy errors, collect all of the policyTopicIds 
   
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/v201806/AdGroupAdService.PolicyTopicEntry#policytopicid>
 from 
   the error's policyTopicEntries 
   
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/v201806/AdGroupAdService.PolicySummary#policytopicentries>,
 
   add those IDs to the operation's ignorablePolicyTopicIds 
   
<https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/v201806/AdGroupAdService.AdGroupAdOperation#ignorablePolicyTopicIds>,
 
   then resubmit the operation.

You can see examples of ad text that will trigger these errors in this 
Advertising Policies Help page 
<https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/6021546#048>.

Cheers,
Josh, AdWords API Team

On Thursday, July 26, 2018 at 11:13:27 AM UTC-4, Josh Radcliff (AdWords API 
Team) wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Sorry for the delay. I've gathered some information but I need to work 
> through some of the finer points and run through examples myself in order 
> to give you a complete answer. Stay tuned!
>
> Thanks,
> Josh, AdWords API Team
>
> On Tuesday, July 24, 2018 at 5:11:51 PM UTC-4, GregT wrote:
>>
>> Hi, Josh.
>>
>> It's been a couple weeks. Just checking in to see if there's any update?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Greg
>>
>> On Friday, July 6, 2018 at 10:07:56 AM UTC-5, Josh Radcliff (AdWords API 
>> Team) wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Greg, Peter,
>>>
>>> Thanks for providing such detailed information on this issue. I've 
>>> passed this on to the policy expert on the engineering team and will let 
>>> you know as soon as I have an update.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Josh, AdWords API Team
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, July 3, 2018 at 11:20:56 AM UTC-4, GregT wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I just wanted to mention that we're experiencing something similar 
>>>> moving to v201806 and trying to test that things are working. We have 
>>>> tests 
>>>> where some should be exemptable ad text and some not exemptable, to make 
>>>> sure we handle things correctly. At this point, the only thing we can get 
>>>> to trigger any kind of policy violation in a test account with v201806 is 
>>>> multiple exclamation points, which trigger the new PolicyFindingError 
>>>> (which is good that we can trigger that). 
>>>>
>>>> But, using all kinds of other ad text that produce 
>>>> PolicyViolationErrors in production in v201802 and/or are explicitly 
>>>> mentioned as violating the ad editorial policy (like "work @home", "big 
>>>> big 
>>>> SALE", "FR33 ShiPPiNG", "buy hunting rifle", various brand names that 
>>>> produce trademark violations in production, etc.) don't produce any kind 
>>>> of 
>>>> PolicyViolationError against our test accounts in v201806, breaking our 
>>>> tests and making it very hard to make sure the code works.
>>>>
>>>> For us, and possibly Peter, if you could just give us some example ad 
>>>> texts that would produce both exemptable and non-exemptable 
>>>> PolicyViolationErrors in test accounts with v201806, that'd be good enough 
>>>> (rather than, for example, trying to make the test accounts in v201806 do 
>>>> identical policy violation checks as production).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>> Greg
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, July 3, 2018 at 5:51:44 AM UTC-5, Peter Lanser wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, we are currently migrating from Adwords API v201710 to v201806 and 
>>>>> we are observing an issue regarding policy violations / excemption 
>>>>> requests.
>>>>>
>>>>> Part of our test suite is the creation of an (expanded) text ad 
>>>>> triggering a PolicyViolationError. Everything is fine with v201710 - we 
>>>>> are 
>>>>> expecting this error (and creating an excemption request later).
>>>>>
>>>>> [INFO] 
>>>>> com.google.api.ads.adwords.lib.client.AdWordsServiceClient.soapXmlLogger 
>>>>> SOAP response:
>>>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>>>>> <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/";>
>>>>>     ...
>>>>>     <soap:Body>
>>>>>         <soap:Fault>
>>>>>             ...
>>>>>             <detail>
>>>>>                 <ApiExceptionFault xmlns="
>>>>> https://adwords.google.com/api/adwords/cm/v201710";>
>>>>>                     ...
>>>>>                     <errors xmlns:xsi="
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; 
>>>>> xsi:type="PolicyViolationError">
>>>>>                         ...
>>>>>                         
>>>>> <errorString>PolicyViolationError.POLICY_ERROR</errorString>
>>>>>                         
>>>>> <ApiError.Type>PolicyViolationError</ApiError.Type>
>>>>>                         <key>
>>>>>                             <policyName>weapons</policyName>
>>>>>                             <violatingText>Rifle</violatingText>
>>>>>                         </key>
>>>>>                         <externalPolicyName>Google 
>>>>> AdWords</externalPolicyName>
>>>>>                         <externalPolicyUrl/>
>>>>>                         <externalPolicyDescription>This ad or keyword 
>>>>> requires review before it can run.</externalPolicyDescription>
>>>>>                         <isExemptable>true</isExemptable>
>>>>>                         ...
>>>>>                     </errors>
>>>>>                 </ApiExceptionFault>
>>>>>             </detail>
>>>>>         </soap:Fault>
>>>>>     </soap:Body>
>>>>> </soap:Envelope>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, the error is not triggered when using v201806. The expected 
>>>>> error is not triggered:
>>>>>
>>>>> [DEBUG] 
>>>>> com.google.api.ads.adwords.lib.client.AdWordsServiceClient.soapXmlLogger 
>>>>> SOAP response:
>>>>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
>>>>> <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/";>
>>>>>     ...
>>>>>     <soap:Body>
>>>>>         <mutateResponse xmlns="
>>>>> https://adwords.google.com/api/adwords/cm/v201806";>
>>>>>             <rval>
>>>>>                 
>>>>> <ListReturnValue.Type>AdGroupAdReturnValue</ListReturnValue.Type>
>>>>>                 <value>
>>>>>                     ...
>>>>>                     <ad xmlns:xsi="
>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"; xsi:type="ExpandedTextAd">
>>>>>                         ...
>>>>>                     </ad>
>>>>>                     <status>PAUSED</status>
>>>>>                     <policySummary>
>>>>>                         <reviewState>REVIEW_IN_PROGRESS</reviewState>
>>>>>                         
>>>>> <combinedApprovalStatus>UNDER_REVIEW</combinedApprovalStatus>
>>>>>                     </policySummary>
>>>>>                 </value>
>>>>>             </rval>
>>>>>         </mutateResponse>
>>>>>     </soap:Body>
>>>>> </soap:Envelope>
>>>>>
>>>>> We are aware that there are some changes concerning policy violations 
>>>>> as mentioned in 
>>>>> https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/reference/release-notes/v201806#policy
>>>>>  
>>>>> and 
>>>>> https://developers.google.com/adwords/api/docs/guides/exemption-requests
>>>>> .
>>>>> However, we wouldn't have expected that no error is triggered at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are we missing something? Why isn't the policy error triggered when 
>>>>> using v201806?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your help,
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
-- 
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~
Also find us on our blog:
https://googleadsdeveloper.blogspot.com/
=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~=~

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum" group.
To post to this group, send email to adwords-api@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
adwords-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to adwords-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/adwords-api.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/adwords-api/c443493d-68e3-4d49-a1de-23af90edc03f%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
  • ... Peter Lanser
    • ... GregT
      • ... 'Josh Radcliff (AdWords API Team)' via AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum
        • ... GregT
          • ... 'Josh Radcliff (AdWords API Team)' via AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum
            • ... 'Josh Radcliff (AdWords API Team)' via AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum
              • ... GregT
                • ... 'Anash P. Oommen (AdWords API Team)' via AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum
                • ... GregT
                • ... peter . rietzler
                • ... 'Josh Radcliff (AdWords API Team)' via AdWords API and Google Ads API Forum
    • ... peter . rietzler

Reply via email to