Publishers have enough to juggle without worrying about sketchy ads sneaking in through video inventory. But with malvertising on the rise — especially those sneaky auto-redirects infecting VAST tags — EX.CO and GeoEdge are joining forces to shut it down.

This partnership is grounded in ad quality to safeguard user trust and ensure publishers’ revenue keeps flowing without the hassle of bad ads ruining the party.

The post EX.CO and GeoEdge Team Up to Shut Down Video Malvertising appeared first on AdMonsters.

This recent political season has been full of twists and turns, and that doesn’t seem to be changing anytime soon. We’re all looking for ways to contextualize this presidential election cycle to keep our heads wrapped around what’s happening. 

A recent analysis by GumGum sheds light on how the media portrays Vice President Kamala Harris and Former President Donald Trump in political discourse. Utilizing their advanced contextual advertising tool, GumGum examined over 5 million pages of political content from late July to uncover trends in media coverage and sentiment. 

The findings reveal a significant disparity between mentions and sentiment: the media mentioned Donald Trump more than 1.7 million times, while Kamala Harris was mentioned around 1.36 million times. Notably, Kamala Harris’s media presence surged by 388% on the day of her candidacy announcement.

We chatted with Hailey Denenberg, VP of Strategic Initiatives, Data at GumGum, to explore these findings and how contextual advertising can help political advertising campaigns.

Leveraging Contextual Analysis for Political Campaigns

Andrew Byrd: Why did GumGum decide to conduct this study? What were your goals, especially in relation to your contextual tool?

Hailey Denenberg: Our contextual technology, developed over the past 15-16 years, uses computer vision and natural language processing to understand content as a human would. With the upcoming political campaign, we wanted to leverage this technology to track trends over time.

Given our extensive programmatic integrations with large platforms like DSPs and SSPs, we have a vast amount of classified content at our disposal. Following Kamala’s presidential announcement, we found it particularly interesting to analyze how the open web and editorial content discussed Kamala versus Trump over the last two weeks in July. We focused on mentions and sentiment, aiming to understand how each candidate is perceived and discussed in content.

Understanding how different editorial voices and platforms perceive and talk about each candidate, especially in terms of sentiment, provides valuable insights into the broader public discourse. Our goal was to use this analysis to uncover trends and patterns in how content about these candidates is produced and consumed, ultimately offering a deeper understanding of the political environment through the lens of digital content.

AB: The upcoming election is full of unexpected developments, especially after Kamala’s recent announcement and the campaign’s strategic execution. Given this dynamic, can you explain how contextual analysis helps understand political coverage?

HD:  Contextual analysis has many applications, especially in presidential campaigns. Advertisers should stay updated on how content is trending, positively or negatively. Think of it as playing offense and defense. For instance, if mentions of Kamala’s opponent, Trump, spike negatively, her campaign can play offense by surrounding that content with positive messaging about Kamala.

On the other hand, they might want to avoid any negative mentions of Kamala to keep the messaging streamlined, which is more of a defensive strategy. Understanding these content trends as different announcements unfold allows campaigns to use advanced contextual targeting. They can target all positive or negative content that mentions specific candidates, leveraging this analysis to shape their messaging effectively.

AB: How can publishers benefit from these technologies?

HD:  Yes, publishers can significantly benefit from contextual technologies. For example, news publishers can strategically package their inventory by grouping positive political news and offering it to brands comfortable with political content but wanting to avoid association with sensitive issues like abortion or immigration. This allows them to monetize content that aligns with the advertiser’s brand safety requirements.

Advanced contextual technologies not only understand the sentiment of the content but can also identify and filter out specific sensitive topics that an advertiser may want to avoid. This capability is crucial for maintaining brand safety while still allowing advertisers to participate in positive, relevant conversations.

Addressing Brand Safety Concerns

AB: At our last conference, there was a significant discussion about brand safety. Advertisers naturally want to avoid being associated with certain content, but publishers face revenue challenges due to these restrictions. How does GumGum approach brand safety, especially in contextual advertising?

HD:  Brand safety has become even more critical recently, especially with the news around the dissolution of VM and GARM. While we align with the GARM framework, we’ve also developed our custom threat categories beyond the usual “Dirty Dozen” like violence.

This is important because while positive contextual targeting aligns with preferred categories, there’s a strong demand for blocking or negatively targeting specific categories. Where GumGum stands out is in video analysis. For instance, in political advertising, which is huge for TV and CTV, most providers struggle to analyze what’s happening within the video content. 

However, our advanced video contextual technology allows us to explore the complete audio transcription and perform scene-by-scene or frame-by-frame analysis. This helps us determine what parts of the video are brand-safe or suitable according to our established threat levels, ensuring more precise targeting and reducing over-blocking.

Reaching the Right Audience and Environment

AB: How does contextual advertising help political ads reach the right audience in the right environment?

HD: At GumGum, we focus on placing ads where they are most relevant, using a deep understanding of content. For example, if someone is reading an article about the election and sees an ad with positive messaging about a candidate like Trump, it aligns with what they’re already thinking about. 

This increases the ad’s effectiveness, especially when combined with geo-targeting in swing states. It’s all about reaching consumers at the moment they’re considering a topic, which can influence their actions.

AB: Does your approach to contextual advertising change depending on whether it’s on mobile, desktop, or other platforms? Or is there generally much overlap?

HD: Generally, there’s significant overlap, as reaching the consumer in the right mindset is often based on the content itself, which tends to be consistent across devices like mobile and desktop. However, attention models can vary depending on the environment. We have different panels for mobile and desktop, and we’re beginning to explore video. While I don’t have definitive data yet, it will be interesting to see if there are differences in optimal attention times across these environments.

AB: What final advice would you give to advertisers and publishers considering political advertising and contextual targeting?

HD: I advise them to gather as much data and insights as possible from various sources. This will help you uncover unconventional ways to position your brand or supply. Instead of sticking to obvious choices, explore new audience segments. For instance, while Nike might seem like a fit for sports content, insights might reveal it’s also popular in Home and Garden content due to a current trend. By broadening your perspective, you can enhance your targeting strategy and reach new audiences more effectively.

The post How Contextual Analysis Shapes Political Campaigns: Insights from GumGum’s Hailey Denenberg appeared first on AdMonsters.

What do you think is the biggest problem in ad tech? 

Some might say the loss of revenue, others might say privacy concerns that create increased signal loss and more difficult audience targeting, and I’m sure there are a host more issues to list off. However, many problems in the industry are linked to a lack of transparency in the supply chain, says Claire Atkin, Co-founder and CEO of Check My Ads. 

Digital advertising, long been plagued by a lack of transparency, allows bad actors to profit from spreading disinformation and extremism online. In a recent keynote session, Atkin warned that publishers and advertisers should address these issues and restore trust in digital advertising.

“If advertisers are given the opportunity to have control over their ads, we will actually have a media system that works for you,” shared Atkin. 

Without more transparency, advertisers don’t know where their ads are showing up, often supporting the very things they want to avoid.

Beyond supply chain issues, Atkin highlighted how digital advertising hurts quality journalism by diverting funds to low-quality, disinformation-filled sites. To address this, she encourages publishers to build direct relationships with advertisers and boost their brand strength, aiming to restore trust and realign incentives in the industry.

Check My Transparent Supply Chain

The opaque nature of digital advertising has devastatingly impacted publisher revenue. As Atkin pointed out, many advertisers are blissfully unaware of their ad placements. “Our ads are off the asshole of the internet,” one executive confessed after Check My Ads audited their campaigns. 

This lack of visibility and control has allowed unscrupulous actors to profit at the expense of legitimate publishers. “Hundreds of thousands of dollars could be in your bank account daily, but it’s not — it’s going to fund chaos, not just disinformation, but useless stuff,” Atkin said. The systematic defunding of quality journalism results from advertisers’ inability to monitor and govern their ad placements effectively. 

Atkin urges publishers to build direct brand relationships to combat this trend rather than relying on intermediaries. If advertisers control their ad placements, Atkin believes publishers will have a media system that works for them. By strengthening their brand equity, publishers can attract advertisers willing to pay a premium to be associated with trusted, high-quality content — a strategy that could help realign incentives and restore financial viability to the news industry. 

Check My Disinformation

Unfortunately, digital advertising has inadvertently become a breeding ground for disinformation and extremism. The very structure of the ad tech industry has created perverse incentives that allow bad actors to profit from the spread of harmful narratives, explained Atkin.

“Around every politician that is politically advancing due to disinformation and hate, there is now a donut of Grifters making money off those same narratives,” Atkin said.

Since brands lack visibility into some of their ad placements, they have unwittingly funded websites and individuals peddling conspiracy theories, hate speech, and outright lies. Atkin’s organization, Check My Ads, works to identify and defund these malicious actors, successfully targeting prominent figures like Dan Bongino and Steve Bannon.

Addressing the root of the problem, Atkin argued that the ad tech industry must embrace a new era of accountability and transparency. She advocates for hourly log-level data and “know your customer” requirements to empower advertisers and help them monitor their placements, ensuring purveyors of disinformation are not co-opting their brand messaging. 

By realigning the incentives within the supply chain, publishers and advertisers can start reconfiguring digital advertising from a conduit for misinformation to a force for supporting quality journalism and democratic discourse. 

All in all, this will create a healthier supply chain that allows publishers and advertisers to get the most bang for their buck.

The post Check My Ads, Check My Transparency, and Check My Disinformation: Notes From AdMonsters Publisher Forum Boston appeared first on AdMonsters.

When it comes to ad tech, Jack Smith is no stranger to innovation. With over 25 years of experience and seven patents in AI and machine learning, DoubleVerify’s Chief Innovation Officer knows a thing or two about navigating the digital wild west. In DoubleVerify’s latest Global Insights Report, they uncovered a nearly 20% surge in MFA sites, fueled by the rapid rise of AI-generated content.

The report reveals that MFA impression volume increased by 19% in 2023, with a staggering 73% jump in “Low-tier” MFA impressions. These sites, which blend MFA and non-MFA characteristics, are reshaping the internet faster than a Netflix show drops spoilers.

Using advanced AI technology, DoubleVerify analyzed over three dozen “High-tier” MFA websites, finding numerous instances of likely AI-written content, including examples like HeroInvesting’s Clint Eastwood aging article and Noteabley’s Best Steakhouses list. These sites often bombard users with ads, making the user experience as pleasant as navigating through a maze of pop-up ads in the early 2000s.

In this Q&A, Smith breaks down the complexities of distinguishing high-quality AI content from the low-tier junk flooding the internet. We dive into DoubleVerify’s sophisticated blend of AI and human review and explore how advertisers can protect their investments amid the explosion of MFA sites.

Join us as this ad tech luminary shares his insights and strategies for staying ahead in the ever-evolving world of AI-driven ad tech. Whether you’re an advertiser looking to make the most of your budget or a publisher striving to maintain quality, this conversation is packed with valuable takeaways.

Lynne d Johnson: Your report touches on the surge in MFA sites. However, the digital landscape often sees legitimate sites misclassified as MFAs due to their ad strategies or content distribution tactics. Can you explain DoubleVerify’s criteria for distinguishing true MFA sites from legitimate content sites that might superficially appear similar due to high ad-to-content ratios or aggressive monetization strategies?

Jack Smith: This is a great point, and thank you for raising it. When it comes to MFA content, we believe nuance and surgical categorization — not blunt, one-size-fits-all lists — are key to safeguarding advertiser investments and supporting quality publishers and, more broadly, the open internet.

We were the first verification vendor to really define MFA content in an effort to create a common yardstick from which to evaluate. While we have a clear overall definition — DV defines MFA sites as those whose sole purpose is to deliver advertisements — our definition also considers nuance. MFA sites can be identified by analyzing several factors across their ad monetization activities, ad traffic sources, and approach to content creation. That combination of criteria needs to be robust to properly distinguish content in a way that’s fair and equitable for content creators. 

With that in mind, DV’s approach allows for the deepest and most nuanced level of analysis, preventing miscategorization and false positives. For example, a website may feature a significant number of ads while still registering high rates of direct and search-enabled traffic. In this instance, the publisher would not meet our definition of MFA. For sites we do classify as MFA, we have a tiered system of high (more egregious examples), medium, and low. Advertisers can then make decisions on the tiers and how they best fit or don’t fit into their campaigns. For DV to classify a site as MFA, it really needs to consistently show high signs of arbitrage both in terms of heavy reliance on paid traffic and arbitrage traffic.

For DV to classify a site as MFA, it really needs to consistently show high signs of arbitrage both in terms of heavy reliance on paid traffic and arbitrage traffic.

Also, just as an inclusion or exclusion list-only approach doesn’t allow for nuance in categorization, we don’t solely rely on AI for classifying content. Algorithms can be biased just like people and are not infallible. To ensure protection and support publisher monetization, we blend AI with expert human review to help ensure that sites that don’t ultimately qualify as MFA content, including those owned by underrepresented groups or news publishers, are not incorrectly flagged. We also regularly audit our categorization criteria, which is critical as the space evolves quickly.  

As a result, publishers have embraced and supported our MFA solution. We also developed it with feedback from the community to ensure responsible and thoughtful categorization.

LdJ: With the report highlighting a 19% increase in MFA sites largely driven by AI-generated content, how does DoubleVerify differentiate between low-quality AI-generated content and high-quality AI content that might also be prolific in ad placements? Are there specific markers or technology you use to make this distinction clear?

JS: AI-generated content is an interesting topic because there is often a rush to judgment. Just as many rush to say all MFA content is fraudulent or bad, we’ve seen the same about AI content. Ultimately, AI-supported content can range from high to low quality. We’ve seen trusted publishers in the financial space, for example, rely on AI for quality reporting for years. AI can be an additive tool for quality journalism. 

At DV, for these reasons, we don’t automatically or bluntly label AI content as “bad.” However, we do believe it’s problematic when AI is used to create low-quality content at scale, while coupling that with a heavy reliance on paid and arbitrage traffic to take in ad dollars that would otherwise go to quality publishers. For instance, DV has found some sites that publish in excess of 1,000 pieces of content per day, powered by AI. That level of output usually comes at a cost to quality. We factor these considerations into our evaluations of MFA and quality more broadly.

As new Gen AI tools have emerged, tracking AI content can be a difficult task given its growing volume. To help us with this process, we built our own proprietary AI to detect and analyze replicated and AI-generated content across the web. In doing so, we also gain so much more data and signals to help better understand the use of AI in MFAs, but also fraud and other areas.

LdJ: Given the significant growth in ‘Low-tier’ MFA impressions, could you elaborate on the real-world impact this surge has on publishers and advertisers? How do these ‘Low-tier’ MFA sites specifically dilute the efficacy of digital advertising campaigns, and what measures can advertisers take to safeguard their interests?

JS: The growth of low-tier MFAs really speaks to the earlier topic you raised about nuance and categorization. What we classify as “low-tier” covers sites or sections with a blend of MFA and non-MFA content — for example, sites where only a section or a subdomain exhibits MFA content or characteristics. These publishers make up the highest percentage of MFA publishers, which highlights the need to have different tiers so they can be treated differently. 

Ultimately, we classify, and it is up to the advertiser to determine if MFA inventory aligns with their own performance outcomes and is suitable for their brand. However, by having this nuanced categorization, brands have the freedom and tools to decide if and to what extent they want their ads to be served on MFA sites.

LdJ: As AI technology evolves, so too do the strategies for generating and monetizing content on MFA sites. What are DoubleVerify’s plans for staying ahead in this technological arms race, particularly in terms of improving detection mechanisms and helping advertisers avoid these pitfalls?

JS: We heavily invest in R&D at DV, more than any other verification provider, and most other technology companies in our space. This emphasis on innovation has given us a substantial lead in the market, providing an edge over tech advancements that may negatively impact advertiser investments and transparency. This strategic focus ensures we anticipate future developments and adapt quickly.

Beyond the tech, the arms race in AI isn’t just about countering the technology itself — it’s also about aligning with a brand’s preferences for how advertising is incorporated into an environment. Effective policy plays a critical role in maintaining this alignment, ensuring that our solutions continually meet the evolving needs of advertisers.

LdJ: With the proliferation of MFA sites and AI-generated content, what are the broader ethical implications for the digital ecosystem? How does DoubleVerify envision the future of online content quality, and what role do you believe regulatory bodies should play in curbing the growth of low-quality, ad-centric platforms?

JS: This is a great question. AI-generated content is already subject to some regulation, and it’s inevitable that more regulations will emerge. As the technology improves, the regulatory landscape is likely to evolve and expand, which we support to help ensure the safety of the Internet.

Interestingly, these regulations often focus on end-consumer protection and enhancing transparency rather than directly curbing the creation of the content. This means that AI-generated content will continue to proliferate within the digital ecosystem. Even if it’s labeled transparently due to new rules or standards implemented by large tech companies, we, at DV, need to help advertisers navigate this growth. Our role is to support their ability to advertise safely and effectively alongside and around this content, but really any content, whether AI-created or not.

__

Jack is responsible for ensuring alignment between DV’s commercial and product organizations. He manages senior level product relationships with key customers, identifies new client-driven product opportunities and supports sales efforts. Prior to joining DV, Jack served as Global Chief Product Officer, Investment at Group M, where he developed products and platforms that empowered teams to make better decisions about where to invest over $80 billion of media spend. Previously, Jack co-founded the machine learning company Solariat, which was acquired by Genesys. He brings over 25 years of experience in executive strategy, technology, client and market insight to his role as Chief Innovation Officer. Jack holds seven patents in AI and machine learning for signal detection in natural language and the prediction of consumer media consumption.

The post The Rise of AI-Driven MFA Content: Insights from DoubleVerify’s Global Report appeared first on AdMonsters.

How do publishers plan to rev up their revenue in the coming years?

Share your insight in our 5-minute survey.

We want to understand where you see the biggest opportunities and challenges in the digital publishing landscape. Your feedback will help us identify key trends, innovative strategies, and potential obstacles in pursuing sustainable growth and profitability.

Let’s uncover where the opportunities are together, as an industry. Your contributions to this survey will help other publishers better understand the industry’s challenges, and learn the strategies to help them sustain, and even thrive. Results will be announced at Publisher Forum Boston, August 4-6.

The post AdMonsters Publisher Pulse Survey: Unlock the Keys to Ramp Up Your Revenue Strategies appeared first on AdMonsters.

The proliferation of low-quality, Made for Advertising (MFA) sites has been one of digital advertising’s biggest talking points over the past 12 months. It recently rose to the top of the agenda when Forbes — one of the world’s most respected publications — was accused of running ads on a secret subdomain.

The rise of MFA does bring up an old question: at what point will the industry stamp out these bad behaviors?

For the sake of a sustainable ad ecosystem, this clean-up needs to happen sooner rather than later. While change will come from multiple directions, a real driving force will result from all industry contributors adhering to and enforcing the guardrails. Specifically, those standards set by the Media Rating Council (MRC) and the Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG), ensure digital advertising practices remain above board.

The certifications and accreditations awarded by these organizations are not easily secured. Indeed, being independently audited by some of the highest authorities around, they provide concrete assurances about quality, care, and trust. If the industry can unite and back these initiatives to the hilt, it can focus on its most important task: delivering game-changing ads to consumers.

Setting the Standard

Founded in the 1960s as the Broadcast Rating Council, the MRC audits and accredits media measurement and data products across the entirety of the media space. It grants accreditation to those who, based on an independent audit, meet its set standards and guidelines around measurement. Notably, accredited services are reaudited every year to ensure standards are maintained.

Receiving MRC accreditation is a costly and lengthy process, and requires a significant allocation of resources. This is a testament to a business’s commitment to promoting trust and transparency internally and externally.

Meanwhile, TAG focuses on ad fraud, brand safety, transparency, and malware. The cost of TAG may be less than that needed for MRC, but certifications are still awarded based on an auditing process. Compulsory independent audits are specifically carried out for brand safety and ad fraud, but compliance with TAG’s other programs defaults to self-attested, although you can choose to be externally evaluated. If the industry is to clean up its act, having compulsory third-party reviews apply to all TAG’s programs would be beneficial.

In addition, the industry and bodies should continue to set new standards that address the evolving challenges and opportunities facing the industry. This includes signal loss, which the MRC recently issued guidance on, emerging types of fraud, such as low-quality MFA sites,  as well as growing technologies, like artificial intelligence (AI). Moreover, if the associated costs of these processes can be kept down, so as not to be prohibitive, more businesses would feel empowered to be accredited.

Creating a Cleaner Industry

These genuine indicators around the reliability of players within the digital advertising ecosystem are one of the first things brands should review when exploring partnerships. Moreover, with AI and increasingly sophisticated AI-driven scams and schemes, having safeguards in place ensures that these instances of non-compliance and bad practices are the exception.

Because of this, brands should see these certifications and accreditations as an essential hygiene factor when choosing partners. They should also pressure their existing partners to meet these levels of quality and care and threaten to seek more reliable and trustworthy partners if these standards aren’t met. Transparency should be the bare minimum that any advertiser expects from their partners.

By the same token, it’s up to legitimate vendors to evangelize for these certifications and accreditations, or the industry will never be able to leave behind its past and move toward a more sustainable, trustworthy, and profitable future.

Creating this trust can only be beneficial for the industry. It will lead to stronger partnerships between advertisers and vendors, more effective use of ad spend, and a better quality digital advertising ecosystem overall. This is especially pertinent for the Open Web, as without action advertisers will only be increasingly drawn toward spending in the relatively safe confines of the walled gardens.

Digital advertising’s next chapter should be one built on quality, care, trust, and transparency, and the standards set by not-for-profit organizations should be placed at the center of the story’s continuation. Advertisers need to create an environment where they only work with partners who are adhering to these standards, forcing the hands of vendors to fix up or lose out on business. It’s going to require every stakeholder to begin putting more emphasis on the importance of living up to certain standards.

The post Why Advertising Standards and Certifications Matter in 2024 appeared first on AdMonsters.

The digital advertising world stands at the cusp of a major revolution, poised to redefine itself as it phases out third-party cookies. A recent study by Deloitte Digital forecasts a striking $300 million annual loss for major sectors like CPG, Retail, and Financial Services, while the broader impact on long-tail SME advertisers suggests potential losses far exceeding $2 billion in Return on Ad Spend (ROAS). Further adding to the urgency, McKinsey & Company, in partnership with the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), predicts a daunting $10 billion revenue shortfall for publishers.

In the ever-evolving digital advertising landscape, privacy concerns and cookieless tracking have led advertisers and publishers to seek innovative solutions that respect user preferences and comply with stringent regulations. Enter contextual advertising — a strategy poised to redefine the engagement between advertisers and consumers in a privacy-first world.

The Reemergence of Contextual Advertising: A Timely Solution

Dotdash Meredith’s recent unveiling of D/Cipher, an intent-based targeting tool that operates without reliance on cookies, signifies a significant stride towards adopting contextual advertising. This method, further refined through their strategic collaboration with OpenAI, showcases the robust potential of privacy-safe advertising solutions that can effectively connect advertisers with their audience.

As digital advertising’s landscape evolves, OAO celebrates 20 years as a publisher-focused ad operations provider. Initially specializing in traditional trafficking and campaign management services, OAO has expanded its expertise to include programmatic monetization and data analytics, along with being a value-added reseller (VAR) for best-in-class sell-side technologies. Enhancing its suite, OAO introduces its partnership with Ops Mage, a revolutionary AI-driven contextual targeting solution with a strong focus on privacy-first policies. 

For Advertisers: Precision Meets Performance

Surpassing the limitations of traditional keyword block lists, Ops Mage provides a seamless AI-powered platform enabling advertisers to access over 750 IAB categories through advanced contextual and semantic signals. This robust tool delivers unparalleled insights with semantic sentiment analysis, brand identification, and safety, significantly refining targeting strategies.

Ops Mage significantly boosts media plan efficiency and scalability through direct integrations with publisher ad servers and DSPs, facilitating a seamless data connection between advertisers and publishers. With comprehensive omni-channel capabilities spanning video, audio, and display, Ops Mage equips advertisers with precise tools to optimize campaign outcomes through detailed contextual, sentiment, and competitive brand targeting.

For Publishers: Monetization in the Age of Privacy

Publishers now have the ultimate tool to boost ad revenue while adhering to privacy standards like GDPR and other regulations. Ops Mage offers no-code and low-code solutions that integrate smoothly with any ad server or analytics platform. By focusing on deep contextual and semantic signals at the article level, publishers can enhance the value of their inventory and achieve premium revenue through direct-sold ads, contextual PMPs, or bidstream enhancement.

The Ops Mage platform also respects the privacy-by-design ethos, making it an ideal choice for publishers aiming to minimize legal overhead and capitalize on their data in a controlled, transparent manner.

Ops Mage: Accessible Today

A key advantage of Ops Mage is its immediate availability to publishers, providing a ready-to-deploy solution that integrates effortlessly with existing ad ops stacks. This accessibility empowers publishers to proactively address the challenges of cookie deprecation and seize a competitive advantage in the rapidly evolving digital landscape.

Moreover, Ops Mage signals empower publishers to leverage their primary ad server to create and define their audience segments, putting control back in their hands while remaining independent from restrictive walled gardens. 

A Call to Action for Publishers

The brief reprieve of the Chrome cookie deprecation has extended the window of opportunity for publishers to begin exploring and embracing alternative, privacy-safe advertising technologies. As the digital advertising world braces for the post-cookie era, Ops Mage, in partnership with OAO, stands out as an innovative and accessible solution.

Contact sales@adops.com to learn more about Ops Mage.

The post Navigating the Post-Cookie Era: A Call to Arms for Publishers appeared first on AdMonsters.

According to Juniper Research, the global losses companies will face due to ad fraud will be about $100 billion by the end of 2024. And, as the digital world is changing rapidly, fraudsters are becoming more advanced and organized. They are already actively using artificial intelligence to create bots, and that’s not the limit.

The cybercriminal community is applying the latest technologies to test new and more effective ways to siphon money from advertisers’ budgets. The reason for this is simple. Advertisers place ads to build up their audience or customer base, and they are increasingly using mobile devices to access the Internet. This is what leads to the growing number of cybercrimes.

Fraudsters are also following technological developments and adapting the latest solutions for their own selfish and criminal purposes. Digital advertising fraudsters are rapidly increasing in number and are organizing themselves into criminal gangs to strengthen their attacks and implement new ideas.

But it’s not like ad tech is sitting idly by on this one. Let’s look deeper at the strategies that ad tech platforms are implementing to enhance ad fraud security in 2024.

Fraud Detection Algorithms

Ad exchanges and programmatic middleware solutions use strict verification procedures to ensure the authenticity of traffic sources and eliminate fraudulent impressions. This involves monitoring various metrics, including user engagement, traffic origin, and historical data, to distinguish genuine human traffic from bot-generated activity.

While it may seem complex, the crux lies in balancing security and profit preservation. A multi-tiered approach to traffic verification is indispensable in today’s landscape. Indeed, implementing a sophisticated verification system demands resource investment, yet ultimately yields benefits in the form of consistent profits and advertiser trust.

Advanced Analytics and AI

Today’s fraud detection tools leverage machine learning, data analysis, and pattern recognition techniques to assess the validity of ad impressions, clicks, and conversions, enabling advertisers and publishers to detect and block fraudulent traffic in real time. These technologies enable the analysis of vast amounts of data to identify anomalous patterns and behaviors indicative of fraudulent activity. 

Machine learning algorithms can glean insights from past data and adjust to evolving fraud schemes, thereby improving the precision and effectiveness of fraud detection systems. Real-time monitoring and automated decision-making empower advertisers, publishers, and ad networks to promptly address potential threats and mitigate ad fraud before it adversely affects campaign performance.

Ad Verification Partnerships

Teaming up with specialized ad verification companies can enhance fraud prevention efforts. Collaborating with these organizations provides access to advanced tools and specialized expertise tailored for detecting and preventing ad fraud. By integrating their solutions into the platform, ad exchanges can provide advertisers with heightened transparency and confidence in the legitimacy of their ad campaigns.

Moreover, these partnerships enable continuous monitoring of ad inventory, ensuring alignment with industry standards and best practices. Prioritizing such collaborations not only fosters trust with advertisers but also reinforces the integrity of the advertising ecosystem.

Industry Initiatives

Embrace collaborative strategies in the fight against ad fraud by forming partnerships with industry initiatives such as the Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG). Many ad exchanges have joined forces with TAG to establish standardized guidelines and protocols for fraud prevention.

TAG certification programs enable ad exchanges to showcase their commitment to ensuring transparency across all platform processes, a crucial aspect in the fight against advertising fraud. Initiatives like TAG enable the creation of a safer environment that benefits all participants in the advertising bidding process, ensuring satisfaction and preventing any grievances. 

The digital advertising sector grapples with an ongoing challenge posed by ad fraud. Consequently, ad exchanges are implementing stronger measures to mitigate this threat. They are amplifying their endeavors to implement advanced and resilient prevention strategies, aiming to counteract this problem and uphold a reliable ecosystem beneficial for both advertisers and publishers.

The post Safeguarding the Digital Ad Ecosystem: Strategies for Ad Fraud Prevention in 2024 appeared first on AdMonsters.

The advertising ecosystem relies on a delicate balance between user experience, publisher monetization, and advertiser reach. Ads keep the open web free, a reality most consumers recognize and accept. The publisher is responsible for curating user experiences that incorporate ads effectively. When your audience is fed overwhelming or distracting ads, they curtail that experience by using ad blockers or visiting other sites.

And when that happens, publishers lose out on potential revenue. Littering a user’s experience with excessive or disruptive ads is not the key to engagement nor does it create an effective campaign. Publishers who go this route end up producing a bad experience for their users and advertising partners, and they also take a hit on revenue. 

Making the user experience a top priority helps publishers succeed. “When you take the user-centric approach and respect their choices, you build a loyal readership base which leads to a profitable, long-lasting business model,” notes Jan Wittek, Chief Revenue Officer at eyeo. 

Ad Blocking Versus Ad Filtering: It Makes a Difference 

A new survey from Censuswide (on behalf of Ghostery) shows that more than half of Americans (and 912 million people globally) use ad blockers. Ad blockers might improve the user experience, but they can negatively affect many stakeholders in the digital advertising ecosystem.

For publishers, the average desktop adblock rate is 10-40%. The projected cost of ad blocking in 2024 for publishers is $54 billion, which is ~8% of the total projected global digital ad spend of $695 billion, according to eyeo’s 2023 Ad-Filtering Report. Without ad filtering and other mitigation tools this loss could have been as high as $116 billion.

Unlike ad blockers that block all ads, ad filtering technology filters out annoying and disruptive ads, leaving fewer, unobtrusive ads that are more likely to make an impact. Over 300 million web users choose ad filtering rather than ad blocking to ensure a more pleasant online experience. 

This technology, offered by eyeo, powers ad-filtering tools like AdBlock and Adblock Plus, and publisher solutions like Blockthrough. Built in compliance with the Acceptable Ads Standard, the tech empowers real-world users and industry stakeholders to determine which ads are in compliance with the standard based on user research and criteria including quantity, placement, and format. Users who would rather filter ads than block them all can implement AdBlock Plus or AdBlock browser extensions. Blockthrough ensures publishers are only serving compliant ads.

“In a typical ad block environment, the ad blocker stops the ad from running in the first place, which results in the publisher failing to earn any money from that user. But with Blockthrough, we can detect if there’s an ad blocker present and if it’s compliant with Acceptable Ads. If so, we can restore the publisher’s existing demand stack and re-run the ad auction in an ad-filtered environment,” explains Wittek. 

After analyzing each ad for compliance, Blockthrough creates a pool of bids, and the winning bid with the highest CPM is rendered on the publisher’s page. This allows ad tech companies to monetize ad block users without compromising their experience.

Giving Users the Best Experience Online

A recent survey conducted by eyeo and CCM Benchmark shows that many internet users (83%) would be happy to see non-intrusive, relevant ads online. These are younger, more tech-savvy users who understand that ads keep content on the internet free but do not want ads to affect their experience negatively. eyeo’s solutions keep the internet uncluttered for ad-filtering users while giving publishers the opportunity to reach agreeable users to increase engagement and grow revenue. 

“The ad tech ecosystem is made up of users, advertisers, and publishers and the reality is that they all rely on one another. Any time the pendulum swings too far in any direction, it jeopardizes the ecosystem. Ad filtering creates the most mutually beneficial balance between user experience, publisher monetization, and advertiser reach,” says Wittek. This gives users control over their experience and privacy and allows publishers to continue offering free, accessible content.

Currently, 96% of ad-filtering users are actively taking action to protect their privacy online. eyeo focuses on giving users control over their privacy while still supporting high-quality content creators. This provides users with an improved experience while publishers get incremental revenue and advertisers increase views.

Keeping the Internet Free Through Advertising 

Many users understand that the ads they see help to keep the content they access on the internet free, but they do not want to be bombarded with advertisements at every turn. Ad filtering can help achieve the right balance; ads on pages with less clutter are more memorable.

Users want a fair value exchange for seeing ads, with the keyword being “fair,” meaning the ads are unobtrusive, respectful, and relevant. According to eyeo’s 2023 Ad Filtering Report, 79% of ad-filtering users are open to seeing ads that don’t interfere with their content. So, placement matters. Smart publishers are revamping their websites to reduce the number of ads on their pages, not only to increase the speed of the page but to improve their visitors’ ad experience. And, it’s working. They’re seeing higher engagement and increased revenue.

eyeo’s ad-filtering solutions enable user control while serving ads, though these are fewer, less interruptive ads that meet an objective ad standard. According to the company, publishers can uphold a positive user experience while regaining 15-20% of lost pageviews and recurring, incremental revenue. Advertisers benefit too. They realize a higher impact in a less cluttered environment while also building brand trust. It’s a win-win across the ecosystem.

“In the ad tech space, we have the unique position of representing the user by giving them control. We see a huge potential in continuing to educate users and publishers about the online value exchange and how ad filtering can be beneficial to the ecosystem at large. We’re looking forward to more solutions that allow users to exercise choice and control over how and which publishers to support in a simplified way. Ads are a great way to keep the internet free but user-centricity has to be at the forefront when implementing,” Wittek says. 

The post Putting Users in the Driver’s Seat: How Ad Filtering Increases Revenue appeared first on AdMonsters.

“2024 is shaping up to be a crazy year for the advertising industry. Who knows what will come out of cookie deprecation and greater focus on generative AI.” — Terry Guyton-Bradley, Senior Director, Advertising Technology, Fortune.

2023 was a trying year for the programmatic supply chain, at least from a PR point of view.

It began with Bloomberg News saying it had enough of the open markets and to improve its user experience it would eliminate the channel entirely. Then Digiday published a series of articles, saying open programmatic markets are in a tough spot as the “lowest quality” publishers flooded the auctions. Publishers who continued to rely on them saw a decline in CPMs.  

But the real bashing came in June when the ANA released its Programmatic Supply Chain Transparency Study, claiming that inventory from MFA sites comprised 21% of the open markets.  

Transparency, a perennial issue for the open markets, continued to be a concern, and publishers sought to form direct relationships with SSPs to create a better, more privacy-centric, seamless user experience. 

But despite the challenges, the open markets are still a vital lifeline for publishers that can’t afford to maintain a dedicated sales force, and its revenue is still predicted to grow.

What will the next 12 months look like for the programmatic supply chain? To find out, we asked 4 experts about the issues — good and bad — that the sector will face. They are:

• Terry Guyton-Bradley, Senior Director, Advertising Technology, Fortune
• Justin Wohl, Chief Revenue Officer at Snopes.com and TVTropes.org
• Scott Messer, Principal & Founder, Messer Media 
• Chao Liao, SVP, Insider Advertising

Let’s dig in.

MFA Conversations Continue in 2024

Trend #1: Made For Advertising sites (MFAs) will continue to spark conversations, particularly around how trading desks spend advertiser’s budgets. Despite efforts in the second half of 2023, there is still a lot of confusion around what an MFA site is and whether they’re inherently bad. In 2024, both the buy-side and sell-side will need to work at articulating what they like and don’t like about MFA sites.

“MFA is the newest catchphrase in the industry. Sites stacked with ad slots have been around since the beginning of programmatic. All it goes to show is that more effort is needed by trading desks to ensure they are landing on reputable properties. There is nothing automatic about programmatic, and throwing your entire spend into the open markets to achieve scale isn’t going to cut it.” — Terry Guyton-Bradley

“In the 2023 MFA analysis and discussion, I never quite heard enough about the actual content itself, on the MFA sites, just the methods of traffic acquisition and the inventory representation to the buy-side. For further MFA scrutiny and cleanup, I implore the industry to start looking at the difference between buying traffic to sponsored/branded content, for example, versus misleading clickbait MFA.” — Justin Wohl

“There will certainly be more discourse, and more people (not me) complaining that Made For Advertising is a misnomer. Yes SSPs will continue to tout their MFA-free supply and DSPs will announce their ability to anti-target MFAs, but that’s just a lot of smoke and sledgehammers.  MFA is such a complex issue, that I think the Industry will only be able to trim the most egregious edges of MFA.  I encourage buyers to define precisely what they want to avoid, without using the amorphous term of MFA.” — Scott Messer

More Industry Consolidation on the Horizon

Trend #2: Industry consolidation in 2024 seems inevitable, driven by ongoing concerns about inventory quality, the deprecation of third-party cookies, and a demand for greater transparency.

“We’ll continue to see consolidation because it takes money to build the technology needed to be more transparent. Smaller shops are putting themselves on the sales block in order to raise money to continue to innovate.” — Terry Guyton-Bradley 

“Surely [consolidation] will be the case with the cookie-alternative providers, the identity vendors who have been jockeying for superiority since 2020. TTD’s UID2 and LiveRamp’s RampID hold the most promise.” — Justin Wohl

Digital Advertising Will Survive Cookie Deprecation

Trend #3: Despite the fret, the digital advertising ecosystem will survive the deprecation of third-party cookies. What will change is rather than one approach (i.e. cookies) to targeting and measurement, many will be deployed. Google will benefit (naturally), as will Amazon TAM in certain scenarios. Meanwhile, publishers may spend 2024 reorganizing their partnerships and shifting some advertising-related processes to server-side environments for better results.

“I venture to say that the advertising industry is one of those industries that is too big to fail. No one has consolidated around a replacement solution. Agencies are continuing as status quo and publishers are working to find individual solutions that will work for their data environments.  Although Google has hypothetically drawn a line in the sand, they are doing it in a way that will allow them to pull back if the results are not acceptable.  We won’t crash and burn.” — Terry Guyton-Bradley 

“Walled gardens will get stronger and money will depart the open web overall. Cookie deprecation will have its own slow-death effects in many areas, but solutions like Protected Audiences API (PAAPI) are poised to make tectonic shifts that will reshape supply chain topography entirely.” — Scott Messer

“The current distribution of buyers that publishers are familiar with is going to change with third-party cookie loss in Chrome, and the introduction of the Protected Audience API audience. I fully expect Google’s own Ad Exchange to be the emergent winner in Chrome, with AdX taking a much larger share (50%+) of inventory, in that browser, in 2024.” 

“If other SSPs don’t take their demand elsewhere, and start winning larger volumes than they did in 2023 in Safari and Firefox, I expect publishers will begin to lighten their prebid participants, or move more client-side bidders that aren’t driving meaningful contribution into server-only environments like prebid server and/or Amazon TAM.” — Justin Wohl

Programmatic Transaction Models Are Expanding

Trend #4: Programmatic transaction models are expanding, as The Trade Desk’s Open Path illustrates. This transformation is driven by dissatisfaction with the traditional programmatic exchange. As a result, buyers and sellers are looking for new ways to transact. 

“There are three trends that are closely related. The first is the SSPs going directly to buyers, the second is DSPs going directly to publishers, like The Trade Desk and Open Path. The third is publishers offering completely self-serve access to their inventory. We can look at these as three separate trends, but really, they’re tied together. What we’re seeing is that certain sectors of the industry are not happy with the game of programmatic exchange or the current types of setup with programmatic transactions. So they’re trying to create new ways to transact by cutting out intermediaries that may not be adding value.” — Chao Liao

Curated Marketplaces Equal Brand Suitability

Trend #5: With heightened concern over inventory quality, curated marketplaces will be seen as a strategy for ensuring brand suitability. But it’s not a panacea as the Programmatic Media Supply Chain Transparency Study makes clear. While 19% of ad spend in the open markets goes to MFA inventory, private marketplaces aren’t far behind at 15%. PMPs still have an element of “buyers beware” that will need to be addressed in 2024.

“Curation is certainly a major theme of 2024, but we won’t see any standards emerge here. Sellers can do a better job providing meaningful curation and measurement, but it’s unreasonable to think that there will be any standards for PMPs developed.” — Scott Messer

Sustainability as a Differentiator

Trend #6: More brands will start to ask about sustainability and the carbon footprint of campaigns in their RFIs in 2024, and the prevalence of MFA inventory will complicate those discussions. According to research by Ebiquity and Scope3, MFA sites generate around 26% more carbon waste than non-MFA sites due to the constant refreshing of ads, and numerous connections to various SSPs and resellers. 

“MFA sites are maximizing ad requests per page view as well as arbitraging traffic and cookies, which generate a lot of carbon. Brands that have set a goal of improving sustainability will be very keen to avoid them as a low-hanging fruit. I don’t necessarily see it as solely the SSP’s job to streamline the supply chain. This needs to be done in collaboration between the sell side and buy side.” — Chao Liao 

SSPs Reduce Scope1, 2, and 3 Emissions

Trend #7: More SSPs will follow OpenX’s lead by looking at their internal operations to see where they can reduce their Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions. 

“This year, people will ask, what does sustainability mean for me as an operator, and how do I improve my operations in terms of efficiency and sustainability? I think a lot of SSPs will look at OpenX as an example in the different ways they improved their sustainability and bottom line.” — Chao Liao

Final Words of Advice

“My advice is for publishers to heed the Ghost of Cookies Past.  Publishers must keep an eye on when and how to switch their deterministic identifiers into private marketplaces. For the past two years, publishers opened the floodgates of IDs in the bid stream, which was great for adoption and testing but is now a growing threat to the balance of seller power. Publishers cannot allow vendors to commoditize deterministic identifiers. These are coveted components of the digital supply chain–and ID owners should be rightly compensated for their investments and relationship with readers.” — Scott Messer

The post What Will the Next 12 Months Look Like for the Programmatic Supply Chain? appeared first on AdMonsters.