On September 14, Search Engine Land reported that Microsoft Advertising had published guidance for AI-generated, AI-manipulated and other synthetic ads. It says advertisers remain responsible for accuracy, permissions, disclosures and the use of a person’s likeness or voice.
That puts the final review back with the advertiser. The tool can make the asset. Someone still has to decide what the finished ad says, shows and implies.
The report says Microsoft recommends keeping watermarks, metadata and other information that records how an asset was made. That record can matter if the creative is edited, reused or questioned later.
The report covers Microsoft Advertising. Other platforms, markets and formats can apply different rules. Disclosure depends on the content, placement and requirements for that campaign, so check the current rules before launch.
Separate the policy check from the quality check
Start with the policy questions. Is the ad accurate? Do you have permission for each source asset and for any likeness or voice it uses? Have you handled the disclosure required for this content, placement and market?
Then read the finished ad like a prospect. A generated technician can look like an employee. A polished project image can look like work from the company’s portfolio. A line about price, timing or results can sound like a firm business promise.
The prompt cannot answer those questions for you. Record what the finished asset appears to claim and what supports that claim. A policy review and a quality review do different jobs, so give each one its own line in the approval record.
Keep a short record with the asset
Provenance means a record of where an asset came from and what changed. Search Engine Land reports that Microsoft’s guidance calls for preserving machine-readable provenance information. Keep the useful parts together:
- The original photo, video or audio, when one was used
- The AI tool, creation date and edit notes
- The generated file with its metadata or watermark intact
- Any license, release or permission record tied to the asset
- The disclosure decision and final approved version
Keep it short. The next reviewer only needs to trace the asset without relying on somebody’s memory.
Read the landing page next
The ad and landing page should agree on the service, location, offer, timing and proof being shown. Put them side by side and write down two things: the claim in the ad and where the page supports it.
Check the page on a phone. Then submit a test inquiry so you can see what happens after the click.
In Glory’s paid campaign and landing-page work, we do this at the handoff: compare the approved creative with the page copy, then save the version that actually runs.
Review each final variation. A new image or voiceover can change what the ad implies even when the headline stays the same.
Give the finished package one owner
One named person should approve the final ad and page together. That reviewer checks the people and places shown, the business claims, permissions, disclosure decision, landing-page match and saved files.
Tools can flag differences. The reviewer still makes the call.
Before launch, put the ad beside the page and ask one question: what will a reasonable prospect believe after seeing both? Save the support for that answer with the final files, and fix any unclear point before the campaign goes live.
Source note: Microsoft’s official guidance was unavailable to a logged-out browser on September 15. Policy details come from Search Engine Land’s September 14 secondary report; Glory wrote this review process.