In it we can read the following statement We want ads to be useful, varied, relevant and safe for users when we publish them through the Google network. A series of practices that are not allowed and examples are listed below, but none of them mention Double Serving. Again, within the prohibited content we find another example that could be related to Double Serving. The prohibition of Obtaining an unfair advantage is mentioned, but among the examples the case that concerns us in this article does not appear among the examples. However, we have to go to the Possible actions section before.
The Infractions To Find An Allusion
To promote the same or similar content from multiple accounts on the same query or similar queries. Finally some clarity on the matter! Wait, are you sure. Double Serving en Adwords Example of an advertiser occupying two France Phone Number List payment positions. In the image above we see two ads from different accounts displayed in the first and second, but surprisingly, in the footer of both landings we can read that both are registered trademarks of the same company. Also, if you continue browsing, both share a URL for the purchase process.
That We Can Relate To Double Serving
So is there any possibility of interpreting this rule? Just as judges have the ability to interpret laws when applying them, Google has the same Phone List competence with its policies. Oh Mother! Now that we were more or less clear. The truth is that similar content remains somewhat ambiguous. If contents refers only to web content , then it is clear. Nobody can duplicate a website with another domain and create another account to advertise it with the same terms. However, if the content is the product or service that is advertised on the web, it is the term similar that now makes us doubt.