In our quest for the perfect keynote speakers for AdMonsters Ops, we wanted industry leaders who were not afraid to expose what’s going on behind the curtains, and James Rosewell does just that. So, who is James Rosewell? He’s not your average entrepreneur. He’s the guy who caught the attention of the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in January 2020 with his razor-sharp insights on digital markets.

With one bold move, through his B2B data business, 51 Degrees, Rosewell’s submission to the CMA sparked a series of events leading to the formation of Movement for an Open Web (MOW). This not-for-profit aims to educate regulators, industry players, and standards bodies about the need for stable interoperability in the digital realm.

Our discussion with Rosewell was a whirlwind of wisdom and revelations. In a short amount of time, we covered a range of privacy concerns. Now, let’s unpack the key highlights.

Collaboration Among Regulators is Key: James discussed engaging with various regulatory bodies like the UK’s CMA, the European Commission, and the Department of Justice to address digital monopolies and the need for market regulation to ensure fair competition and innovation. 

Recent actions by the US Department of Justice and the EU signal a coordinated effort to address antitrust issues in the tech industry. With investigations into major players like Apple, Alphabet, and Meta, the focus is shifting toward ensuring fair competition and consumer protection. The road ahead may be complex, but the goal remains clear: to promote innovation while safeguarding user privacy.

The Future of Cookies: Our conversation dove into the regulatory whirlpool of challenges facing Google before it fully phases out third-party cookies. Rosewell suggested that based on the CMA’s findings and ongoing reports, the complete removal of third-party cookies by 2024 seems uncertain. 

The CMA’s most recent report highlighted concerns about Google’s practices, with at least 39 regulatory issues to address before third-party cookies can bid adieu. The timeline for the cookie’s demise is not set in stone, but regulatory bodies are closely monitoring Google’s proposed changes and their implications for privacy and market competition.

One key takeaway from our conversation was the importance of industry feedback in shaping regulatory decisions. The CMA encourages all businesses to voice their concerns and provide input on the impact of regulatory changes. Anonymity plays a significant role in this process, allowing businesses to share insights without fear of repercussions. 

Privacy Sandbox and Market Concerns: Diving into the heart of the concerns over Google’s Privacy Sandbox are as real as they get. It’s a scenario brimming with self-preferencing issues and the risk of technologies tipping the scale in Google’s favor, leaving other players in the digital dust. Rosewell advocates testing these technologies, especially in environments like YouTube, to ensure they are beneficial and fair to the market before broader implementation.

As we look towards the future, Rosewell emphasizes the need for competition to drive innovation for the best privacy solutions. Rather than relying solely on Google or Apple’s approaches, we need diverse solutions tailored to the entire ecosystem’s needs, making it a more equitable and dynamic open marketplace. As we navigate these complexities, collaboration, industry feedback, and a focus on competition is essential. The future of digital innovation hinges on our ability to adapt, evolve, and embrace new solutions that prioritize user privacy and drive technological progress.

The post AdMonsters Ops Reveal: Keynote James Rosewell on Disrupting Digital Monopolies and the Future of Online Privacy appeared first on AdMonsters.

In the United States, the cookie replacement talk is all Privacy Sandbox this, Privacy Sandbox that, but in the UK, they seem to move to the beat of a more skeptical drum. 

There is no doubt that Google dominates the open web. Whether you’re an ad tech company, publisher, or buyer, you will transact with the tech giant in some capacity. 

When it comes to big tech entities like Google, there is no competition, regardless of what they might tell the Department of Justice. They have the pipes, infrastructure, and the audience to garner the majority of ad spend.

Following the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) report on digital markets in July 2020, the Movement for an Open Web (MOW) started in September 2022. MOW was encouraged by the CMA, as they needed someone to come forward to do their job. MOW is comprised of a mix of media, advertising and technology businesses.

MOW doesn’t see itself as a general services company. The organization was the original body that complained to the CMA, leading to the commitments that delayed the rollout of the Privacy Sandbox. Without MOW’s complaint and the CMA, Google’s Sandbox may have rolled out long ago.

“I think the fact that we exist is a testament to the fact that established trade bodies are not able to represent victims’ interests for various reasons adequately, some of which are the membership of Google in those organizations and the financial dependency that those organizations have on Google,” said James Rosewell, co-founder of MOW. Rosewell is also one of the leading voices of SWAN (Secure Web Addressability Network), a community-operated and open-source replacement for many use cases supported by third-party cookies.

Uncovering the Truth Within the Sandbox

The CMA’s current commitment to Google is that the entity exists to judge whether competition will be preserved once Google makes a series of changes. The highlighted modification is the end of third-party cookies, but other components, like IP protection, bounce tracking, and more, are set to change.

The test is twofold: one, does the design give the possibility of equivalence, and two, does the testing provide the evidence so that the CMA could make a decision that would stand up as a minimum for other regulators?

MOW believes the Privacy Sandbox fails on both of those tests. The design can’t achieve equivalents with third-party cookies, and we also see testing woes. We are just throwing things at a wall to see what sticks, which is not scientific enough, according to Rosewell.

In a perfect world, Google would have tested this technology on their properties. As a suggestion, MOW strongly feels that Google should have applied the Privacy Sandbox across YouTube for at least a quarter and then reported the revenue impact to the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC). Then, they could prove the revenue uplift associated with its usage. Upon publishing their findings on the market they would have achieved a high standard of SEC reporting and showed the market what worked, giving the CMA more of a leg to stand on.

Google ran a very small test, where they continued to use third-party cookies for everything except segmentation. They only tested the Privacy Sandbox solutions for attribution and tracking, but that was only one aspect. Big G claimed that the test ran on their owned and operated properties, but that just wasn’t enough according to MOW. The nonprofit organization strongly feels that if the Privacy Sandbox were this saving grace that Google claims it to be, YouTube would have made much more money using it. 

For publishers using the Privacy Sandbox, MOW warns that you won’t be able to measure advertising on your websites. This can only be accomplished by using Google’s algorithms to measure it at an aggregate level with noise.

“If you’re a massive advertiser like Nike or a massive Publisher like The Washington Post or the DailyMail, then the noise in aggregate reporting may be tolerable for you, but if the same amount of noise is added to a chain of three hairdressers in a local community’s website or a small local publisher, then it might not meet the threshold to come up and be surfaced as a report,” Roswell pointed out. 

Smaller businesses are restricted by the technologies that Google provides, he says. There is also no auditing and independent auditors like the Media Rating Council to determine whether or not Google’s code, the way it’s working, and the way it’s deployed is accurate. That is going to be a real problem. 

Is the Future of 2024 Bright?

2024 is going to be different because the dialogue will move to remedies. MOW is working on a summary of remedies in discussions with the organization’s participants and industry regulators. 

We need to see the browser regulated just as we would regulate traditional telecommunications. “AT&T does not have the power to tell a consumer that they don’t like a particular phone conversation they are having on the network; they wouldn’t ask to interfere in your conversation,” Rosewell added. 

He explained that digital advertising is about 25 years old and we must see regulation. The browser should be limited to access and navigation as it was originally intended. According to MOW, if standard bodies are regulated, they can’t disadvantage other participants as they do now by preferring the web browser and giving the web browser vendor preferential status. 

The post Google’s Privacy Sandbox: A Solution, or A Shiny Object? The UK’s MOW Weighs In appeared first on AdMonsters.

For better or worse, Publishers are always left bearing the brunt of industry shifts. With addressability shifting into something different, many wonder how we will continue to target and reach our audiences.

The cookie phase-out process is here, and word on the street is that Chrome will be obfuscating the IP address (the cookie of CTV) real soon.

During a panel titled “The Future of Addressability: The Portfolio View,” Anthony Katsur, CEO of IAB Tech Lab, sat down with Shobha Doshi, SVP of Programmatic Strategy & Operations at Raptive, Ryan McConville EVP of Ad Platforms & Operations at NBCUniversal, and Mike Nuzzo, SVP of Hearst Data Solutions at Hearst Magazines. Each panelist outlined how they are approaching addressability today.

One thing we all know to be true is that there is no one solution; publishers should instead consider the “patchwork quilt” of solutions that are at their fingertips. With a catalog of over 5,000 publishers, Doshi highlighted that Raptive is currently in the test iterative stage. She encourages publishers to continue testing and exploring to see what works and what doesn’t.

At NBCU, they are rebuilding their signaling around first-party identity. With Peacock and their other digital endpoints totaling around 300, they had to find a way to coordinate those varying identities across everything. Having recently launched the NBC Unified identity platform, their strategy is to elevate it to live primarily on first-party identity signals.

When asked how Hearst thinks about the future of addressability, Nuzzo kept it simple. “We’re doing a lot of testing, learning, and just making sure we’re following the law,” he shared. From his perspective, the onus has been on publishers to solve for innovation. Innovation and identity are increasingly challenging because, again, there is no one solution.

Future-Proofing Alongside Hefty Privacy Constraints

Privacy regulations are evolving in Europe, and while a handful of states with state-led privacy regulations are already in place, three more states will be enforcing privacy sanctions next year: Montana, Oregon, and Texas. India also just passed a privacy law. 

What alternative solutions are publishers seeking to maintain an addressable ecosystem while complying with privacy regulations? 

“I think it’s hard, and that’s why I said the legal piece earlier,” Nuzzo explained. “Consent management platforms are in a good place right now, we need them contextually.” At Hearst, the focus is on understanding common taxonomies and how they apply that to their audiences algorithmically. Gen AI is also something they are pushing towards. 

For McConvile and NBCU, the product team is essential to maneuvering the privacy landmine. Media and entertainment companies have privacy product managers who enforce all privacy regulations. Rather than creating nuances for each state’s privacy laws, they look to the states with the most conservative ones and use those as a baseline.

Privacy and big tech are the two big bad wolves of the industry, but which one is scarier? 

It’s no surprise that Nuzzo from Hearst says it’s the legal side. No publisher wants to come out of pocket and pay off the government for not having the right privacy policy. McConnvile went with big tech, considering the different platform policies that publishers must abide by. 

“Operating system policies like Apple’s override our terms and conditions, so if you sign up for Peacock on an Apple device and agree to NBCU’s terms and then opt out of Apple, it overrides our terms and conditions completely. I don’t think users actually understand that they’re making that choice,” McConvile explained. 

The IP Address Is the Cookie of CTV

While CTV doesn’t operate on cookies, it does use IP addresses for audience targeting. This makes IP addresses the cookies of CTV. One or both will put a velvet rope around the web and obfuscate the IP address.

What will happen next as the IP address becomes effectively deprecated by big tech?

Doshi, SVP of Programmatic Strategy & Operations at Raptive, thinks the IP address signal loss would reduce graph strength for everyone. “It makes regulatory compliance hard, especially if there are different state-by-state regulations that may conflict,” she explained. “There are no good solutions right away, and solutions will differ per environment since regulations differ per environment. We may see some advantages on desktop, but the long road ahead is to figure out how to make it work.”

Nuzzo had an opposite opinion, “I think the IP address for us opens up an opportunity that we haven’t explored as publishers,” he said. Also, stating that there are actually a lot of good use cases for the deprecation of the IP address that we haven’t thought of. “I hope the industry allows us to explore that before they cut off at the knees,” he said. 

The IP address powers a lot of how performance TV works since viewers don’t click on their televisions to buy something. The IP address connects the devices in your household. “You have a smart TV that lives on an IP address, and you have a mobile phone that lives on that IP address,” McConville explained. “So if you see an ad on Peacock on your smart TV, you can buy the sneakers from that ad on your mobile phone.”

The industry will have many holes to fill if the IP address is deprecated because, aside from targeting, the IP address is crucial for cross-device measurement. There is also some interesting work on an Internet service provider level to future-proof the ability to tie IP signals to a deterministic household in a privacy-compliant way.

From a fraud vector perspective, the IP address is used for many fraud detection and data security issues as you start to proxy through a single IP address or VPN on the web. This opens up many fraud and data security issues for advertising and health, tech, finance, and national defense implications. 

In short, IP addresses have many uses in the advertising ecosystem beyond targeting. Many publishers will have to think through and plan for the many implications.

Is First-Party Data the New Oil in Our Industry?

When it comes to first-party data, we are somewhat in a world of the haves and have-nots. The walled gardens have had identity for many years, but everyone outside of them had an alternative architecture through cookies they could function on. 

 Publishers and brands have to create a value exchange to get the data. There are tons of data-rich companies, like Amazon, for example. You are unable to use any Amazon entity without logging in. Publishers need to make sure that their consumer product teams are creating a system for authenticating users and communicating the value exchange to garner more logins. 

Now is the time, more than ever, for companies that have not traditionally collected first-party identity signals to figure out smart ways of doing it. “On the cohorting side over at NBCUniversal, they have done some really interesting tests with seed data using AI and content. 

“We fed our content into an AI engine, scanned all the contextual metadata for all the content, and then created lookalike models using that more granular data set. By using this AI deep contextual metadata, which is also our first-party data, we found that the segments performed much better,” said McConville. 

At Hearst, there are tiers of data assets at their disposal, so it doesn’t have to be explicit logins. They collect 4 trillion data points on their users monthly, which is precious data. Recently, they conducted a study and saw a 140% increase in click-through rate when they applied both contextual and behavioral into one segment for the advertiser. 

“We’ve lived on this behavioral journey for so long, where the mentality was just follow the consumer around, and they’ll buy my shoes,” Nuzzo said. “This may be true, but when you serve 5000 impressions to them versus if you serve them the right content, you’ll have to do far less of that, and the interaction rate will improve.”

Where Do We Go From Here?

As an industry, we have a nasty habit of waiting until the last minute before we react to changes. We have built a solid muscle on the third-party cookie, so is there a sense of urgency in Q1 of 2024? Probably not. 

Patrick McCann, SVP of Research at Raptive, also led a main-stage discussion highlighting how more publishers need to start testing the Privacy Sandbox. Raptive hopes that we will discuss how the buy side is ingesting and understanding some of that data next year. 

Clean rooms were also discussed, and McConville predicts that we will see some real commercial action coming out of Clean Room integrations because there was a long time when they weren’t being utilized. With Amazon and Google PAIR, we see real commercial examples of bringing first-party data service into these data clouds.

Nuzzo thinks we will talk about gen AI in the spring of 2024 and finally have some real learnings from it. We will finally have some metrics to see what works, and what doesn’t work. 

The post Addressing the Future: Publisher Perspectives on Data, Privacy, and the Road Ahead appeared first on AdMonsters.

Then, about four years later, the universe allowed her to bump shoulders with Amber Bracegirdle (Mediavine Co-Founder and Chief Brand Officer), and the two connected over personal and professional philosophies.

When Bracegirdle described Mediavine to Lieberman, the pair realized they had many of the same values, and helping content creators make money online was a core concept for both. Mediavine grew quickly, and it became apparent that it was time to bring the legal function in-house. Lieberman was honored when Mediavine asked her to join full-time as SVP and General Counsel. 

In her current role, Lieberman is responsible for all aspects of the company’s legal operations, including providing legal counsel and coaching on policies and procedures, intellectual property, contract negotiations, and compliance. She is Mediavine’s chief advisor in refining and enhancing corporate standard operating procedures with a focus on compliance to ensure Mediavine continues to provide innovative solutions, offerings, and services.

We talked to Jamie about running an all-women legal team at Mediavine and how she strives to promote diversity daily.  

Yakira Young: A small percentage of women run in-house counsel at tech companies. That percentage is even smaller for ad tech! At Mediavine, you run an all-woman legal team. How did that happen?

Jamie Lieberman: I started my law firm because I saw a problem in the Legal world that needed to be solved. I was a new mom who felt frustrated that I was being told there was no way to work full-time practicing law while being a mother. So, in response, I started a virtual law firm to do both without sacrifice. I think it naturally attracted other female professionals, not by design but because women found they could practice law, find support, and work in a balanced way.

In working as Mediavine’s external counsel, I saw how much the company cares about the health and well-being of its employees. When asked to join as in-house counsel, I knew the women from my firm transitioning with me would be well cared for in culture and benefits. We were really excited to keep the team together at Mediavine.

 YY: Since your start at Mediavine in December 2022, how have you helped implement positive change at the company?

JL: Mediavine really celebrates innovation, as evidenced by their ad tech. When I joined late last year, I wanted the company to experience that same innovation with regard to our legal department. I aimed to integrate our team so that legal was a welcomed partner in all business discussions. As lawyers, our role is equal parts counsel and education, and we set out to begin educating and meeting with employees to help them understand this. My team and I are here to collaborate across all business functions and streamline processes. 

The legal team has also centralized our contract management system and hired a new Director of Privacy and Compliance to create a new compliance program. We have made massive strides in a short period.

 YY: What are the core experiences from your career experience that helped prepare you for where you are in your career today?

JL: I didn’t begin my career practicing law, but I had a great mentor who suggested I go to law school. I worked while going to school full-time, so my work ethic was solid. Once I graduated, I began working at some large law firms. Through problematic encounters in those firms, I quickly realized what was missing in those working environments. I started to understand how vital a strong manager is to the growth of young attorneys. Before I started my law firm, I searched for an inclusive workplace that values its employees and had strong managers, but I could not do so.

This is a male-dominated industry, and unfortunately, in my first few jobs, I experienced all forms of harassment. I almost left the practice of law because of it. Still, instead, I’ve taken the negatives and have been able to use them as a learning experience so I could create a better working environment for my employees and be a better manager. I love practicing law, and when I started my firm and was able to remove some of these pain points, I began to love my job again. Joining Mediavine was a natural next step as the values of my law firm aligned with those here at Mediavine.

 YY: What unique challenges do you face as a general counsel in the ad tech industry?

JL: As general counsel in ad tech, I am often the only woman on an external phone call or meeting. It can be challenging to work in an industry when no one looks like you. To that end, my mission is to mentor others so they can find it in this field.

At Mediavine, the growth of our business has been extraordinary. Coupled with the fact that privacy laws are constantly changing, means my team and I need to be agile. We are lucky to work at a company that values innovation. It’s fun to solve problems and to be a part of this type of working environment that values diversity and collaboration. 

 YY: How do you ensure diversity and inclusion within your team and the company?

JL: I’ve dedicated over a decade to supporting and guiding content creators through my law firm’s work. Early on, I recognized that influencer marketing and content monetization on the web was critical to a free and fair Internet. I have used my legal expertise to help clients, usually women or underserved communities, understand the complicated and ever-changing content and privacy laws online. Mediavine also values helping small business owners create and maintain sustainable businesses; that type of inclusion resonates with me.

YY: What are the most pressing legal issues facing the ad tech industry?

JL: The most pressing legal issue facing ad tech is privacy compliance. The legal and regulatory landscape is constantly changing due to new laws and technologies. Because the internet is global, we must be aware of the constant updates to privacy laws, state-by-state regulations, changes to GDPR, and similar measures from international bodies. The size and speed of the programmatic ad space are immeasurable, so my team and I take Mediavine’s compliance very seriously. We are privacy forward and constantly dedicating more resources towards it.

YY: How does your legal team stay up-to-date on industry changes and developments?

JL: We prioritize involvement in industry events and trade groups like the Interactive Advertising Bureau, International Association of Privacy Professionals, Association of Corporate Counsel, and Tech GC. My team and I actively carve out time to ensure we can attend educational events that align with our interests and department goals. Mediavine prioritizes investing time and energy in training, which is helpful in an ever-changing industry.

 YY: Can you walk us through your approach to balancing legal compliance with business goals and objectives? 

JL: I view the legal department as a key partner to internal stakeholders. Our job is to assess risk and to work collaboratively to balance compliance requirements with the needs of our business. Legal should never be a roadblock but instead one part of a larger equation in making larger business decisions.

 Education comes into play here too. Suppose my team is involved with new initiatives from the beginning and can have meaningful conversations with the right people early on. In that case, we can lead from a place of collaboration as we assess risk versus return. 

YY: What advice would you give to women aspiring to become general counsels or lead all-female teams?

 JL: It’s really important to be true to yourself. Know your strengths, and don’t apologize for trusting your instincts. Women have been experiencing Imposter Syndrome for decades, but you rarely hear men talk about it. Advocate for yourself!

 In addition to knowing and understanding yourself, having a group of safe, trusted people around you is crucial. Find a mentor. Surround yourself with people who support you and your strengths. Women connect differently in business, and that should be celebrated. We should lift each other up.

The post Jamie Lieberman Opens New Doors With Her All-Women Legal Team in Ad Tech appeared first on AdMonsters.

Consumer data privacy concerns have already begun to reshape the internet’s future infrastructure. And as the US government leans closer to passing federal privacy legislation, the reshaping will only continue.

These privacy concerns — AI innovation, the impending cookiepocolypse, Big Tech vs. DOJ, revolving ad spend slowdowns — all promise to shake things up further. And along with the new internet will come a new advertising ecosystem. Are publishers equipped to handle what’s coming next?

The short answer is no, but that doesn’t mean they can’t get ready. We spoke with James Avery, CEO and founder of Kevel, a cloud-based ad server development platform, to learn more about what’s ahead and how the industry can prepare.

The New Internet

Yakira Young: Of all of the changes happening in ad tech right now — ad spend slowdown, privacy regulations, big tech implications, third-party cookie deprecation, AI and automation, and the rise of PMPs — what do you think will have the biggest impact on the new Internet and how will that transformation happen? 

James Avery: Ad spend slowdown isn’t anything new to the industry, which always has ups and downs. This is a crucial time for industry players to pay close attention. It’s the best time to learn where advertisers are getting the best ROI on their spend versus where they are spending experimentally.

In terms of privacy and the death of third-party cookies, this realm will have the most dramatic changes on the Internet, with lots of companies trying to put the genie of various ID solutions back in the bottle. However, none of them will recreate the third-party cookie and the massive amount of data syncing and leakage happening for the last decade.

Privacy and the deprecation of third-party cookies will lead to the growth of PMPs. As the value of random internet traffic goes down, the value of buying on specific properties with proprietary first-party data will increase.

AI and automation have always been a part of ad tech, and the rest of the world is just now catching up.

 YY: Some say Web3 and user control will dominate the new Internet. Is that how you see things evolving? 

JA: People always think users care enough to customize their ad experience or share preferences, but at the end of the day, users just want to read a great article, use a great app, and not be annoyed by advertisements. 

YY: With all this talk about a return to first-party data, do you see the industry reaching the same scale they are accustomed to, or should we be talking about new metrics now?

JA: The differences will become more extreme. As advertisers flock to ad platforms with true identity, they can target in ways they are already accustomed to, but with less fraud and at a smaller scale.

They will be able to reach the same scale as before but with less fine-grained targeting. They should be able to match or exceed their current performance between the two.

Preparing for Change

YY: Is the current ad tech infrastructure equipped for the advertising ecosystem of the future and the new Internet? 

JA: Current technology is absolutely not equipped to prepare the advertising ecosystem for the future of the Internet. The majority of publishers are ill-equipped for the massive disruption that is coming to our industry. They continue to assume that someone like Google or TTD will solve this problem for them. These platform giants are investing in building their ad platforms around their first-1st party data, uniquely positioned to sell to brands. The rest of the industry will be left out of the equation.

 YY: What are some things industry leaders should do to get ready and adapt successfully? 

JA: Everyone hopes it will be business as usual and the identity systems will maintain the status quo. However, I think leaders should rethink the entire stack — how to cut out the middleman and better optimize their stacks in terms of performance and sustainability. 

The post Thriving on the New Internet appeared first on AdMonsters.

Recently, President Biden signaled how important privacy legislation is by addressing it at the State of the Union for the first time. We all recognize that state privacy laws are here, with many more to come. At this point, we desperately need universal privacy legislation that supersedes state laws to create a level playing field for credibility, stability, and protection for consumers and businesses. 

At RampUp 2023, “Stay on the Forefront of Privacy Legislation” was a session where Washington D.C.-based ad tech counsel and a VP at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce shared their perspectives on what’s happening right now and what the industry can do to streamline the process. One common denominator among the three session participants was that now was the time for one federal privacy law. 

The Time Is Now

Data is highly regarded because it helps to deliver impactful services to consumers and customers. It unlocks the potential of the information economy to communities and helps ensure that consumers have access to important and useful information for free. It makes the open web a lot like the public library. Also, with the right data, consumers can access personalized apps and services that make life easier.

And, for the ad tech ecosystem, it powers the pipeline, bringing the right message to the right consumer at the right time. However, this all goes out the window if we do not establish a reasonable and well-thought-through national policy for data.

In a study conducted by Privacy for America, we learned that consumers enjoy over $30,000 a year in subsidized content and services online. A law restricting that flow of data availability could increase what we consider an online tax by over $30,000. 

We must ensure we continue to provide consumers with this same access. This isn’t just an ad tech issue. With six state data privacy laws already on the books and many different bills under consideration, delivering the impactful information and services consumers expect grows harder and harder.

“Without a preemptive national standard, we risk that the policy, and how we can engage with consumers and build audiences, will be left to just a handful of companies,” explained Michael Signorella, co-chair of the Technology and Innovation Group at Venable law firm. “They will decide how we can address media to consumers online, think of ATT.”

The Tragedy Associated With State-led Privacy Legislations 

According to a recent U.S. Chamber of Commerce report, 80% of small businesses stated that tech platforms, ads, and payment apps enabled them to compete with larger corporations. So limiting access to data and the ability to use data will constrict their business operations. 

“There are currently about 20 states that have introduced bills being considered now,” said Jordan Crenshaw, VP at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. “The problem is that we’re seeing multiple models emerge, and even when we have very similar models, they are still somewhat different. If you’re a food truck with about 270 customers daily, complying across state lines would be nearly impossible.”

The California Consumer Privacy Act was the first comprehensive law in the U.S. to go into effect. It gives consumers the right to delete data, opt out of data sales, and know what data companies hold about them. Nonetheless, the private right of action associated with this act could be problematic when it comes to data breaches. 

Virginia’s Consumer Data Protection Act, which went into effect in January, gives consumers the right to opt out of data sales and targeted advertising. Like California, Virginia consumers can also delete data, but they also can correct data and opt-in for sensitive data. There is no private right of action in Virginia, which is good because it leaves enforcement up to the state’s attorney general. It also doesn’t allow for broad rulemaking authority to any agencies in the state, keeping the terms and conditions concrete. 

When it comes to federal privacy, the Chamber of Commerce currently sees states embracing the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA) and opt-in frameworks where businesses have to get consent to use data outright, like in Oklahoma. All these differences are a huge red flag for compliance for small businesses. 

Where Are We Seeing Specific Privacy Regulations?

Health Data: Since the Roe v Wade decision, there has been a call to create privacy protections around abortion data or data that might lead to that. The problem is that now that issue has worked into massive health bills creating an even larger issue. In Washington, the state has a bill in review that would require consumers to opt-in for data usage, thus harming data flows for things like health research, clinical trials, for example. That bill also has a private right of action.

Children’s Data: States are proposing updates to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Utah even has a social media bill that would shut off social media usage after 10 pm, substituting the role of a parent with a private right of action and age verification.

Biometric Data: An example of this is facial recognition technology. States like Illinois already passed laws related to biometrics, whereas a company could be subject to private lawsuits if it failed to get consent to use biometric data. 

Convos on Capitol Hill

As Principal at Emergent Strategies, a Democratic government affairs firm in Washington, DC, Michael Claunch spends much time on Capitol Hill. While conversing with Congress, he knows they are working to solve many of these privacy issues, whether conflated purposefully or unintentionally. 

On the Hill, they are working on complex issues like privacy, whether online markets are competitive enough, and Section 230 reform. Members of Congress feel extremely passionate about these issues, but if they try to address each silo, they will affect the other; privacy is a great example. 

“When I interact with Congress, I’m very consistent in my message that a federal privacy law will be the competition law for the next decade,” Claunch explained. “There will be winners and losers as some entities will have better access to more rich data and be able to use it. Market impacts need to be taken into consideration.”

Why Not the ADPPA?

While the ADPPA is an admirable attempt, it’s just not it for many reasons. Experts see many weaknesses regarding its impact on competition and the fact that it has an overly broad definition of sensitive data. It can eliminate the ability for brands and third parties to use data to get a complete look at the consumer and target them across the web. 

The ADPPA presents unequal treatment between first and third-party marketers; as we know, if a company has a first-party relationship with a consumer, it’s way easier for them to get opt-in consent on that sensitive data.

Currently, the way the ADPPA is written, third parties are at a significant competitive disadvantage compared to first parties. Thankfully the three legal professionals on this session — Jordan Crenshaw, Vice President, U.S. Chamber of Commerce; Michael Signorelli, Partner, Venable LLP; and Michael Claunch, Principal, Emergent Strategies — are working to change that. With a new Congress in place, it presents an opportunity to reset and build up the good work regulators have done. It also gives them ideas to ensure that a federal privacy law considers all stakeholders.

The post Privacy Experts Convene on the Need for Federal Legislation at RampUp appeared first on AdMonsters.

But this time, it seems to be a step in the right direction towards unifying compliance across state privacy laws called the Multi-State Privacy Agreement (MSPA).

As of late, IAB and the IAB Tech Lab is committed to encouraging the advertising ecosystem to put consumer privacy first. Along with that goal, they updated their privacy protocols and agreements to support publishers, advertisers, and ad tech companies. For months, we’ve speculated there would be just one contractual framework to ensure privacy compliance across all the current state-led privacy legislations, and this may be it.

“The patchwork of state regulations creates an increasingly complicated compliance landscape for the digital advertising industry,” said Michael Hahn, EVP, General Counsel, IAB, and IAB Tech Lab. “The IAB Legal Affairs Council has been focused on meeting this challenge for the past year. We believe the MSPA – the product of collaboration from stakeholders across the industry – is a crucial tool to solve this challenge.”

The Multi-State Privacy Agreement (MSPA) supplies a refurbished framework to ensure privacy compliance across five new state privacy laws. It works alongside the IAB Tech Lab’s US State Signals initiative, also recently released as an extension of the Global Privacy Platform (GPP). Both are available for public comment until October 27, 2022.

How Will the MSPA Help Streamline Privacy Concerns?

Think of the MSPA as the big brother of the Limited Services Provider Agreement (LSPA), which was initiated to guarantee compliance with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). 

The great thing about this agreement is it serves as a watchdog over all privacy legislations. The CCPA, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA, coming January 2023), and all the others going into effect in 2023; the Colorado Privacy Act (CoPA), Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CDPA), Utah Consumer Privacy Act (UCPA), and Virginia’s Consumer Data Protection Act (VCDPA).

This agreement and its partner in crime, IAB Tech Lab’s GPP, including its state-level signaling, will assist member companies in handling the ever-so-complex global privacy compliance landscape and managing the different consent signals from multiple jurisdictions.

“The MSPA does four things. First, it provides a scaled way of incorporating terms in the service provider contracts and agreements covering third-party “sales” of personal information,” Hahn explains. 

“Second, it covers contractual gaps in the digital advertising distribution chain where parties will need contracts covering “sales” of personal information. However, no such contract type presently exists between industry participants. Third, it provides a legal framework for service providers to measure ads and set a frequency cap. Fourth, it provides an optional “national approach” to find the highest common denominator in the privacy requirements across the five new state laws.”

Will Implementing the MSPA Serve As a Gift or a Curse to Publishers?

Only time will tell if MSPA will serve as a gift or a curse to publishers. As we all know, a few IAB-initiated privacy measures have fumbled, but everything is trial and error in this industry. 

We know this is the first privacy agreement we are seeing that kind of puts all the new state laws under one umbrella to simplify things seemingly. 

The GPP spec provides a mechanism for encompassing all current & future privacy rules through a smart and mechanically effective encoding process I tested myself as well as an API pattern. But better compressing of data on to a string is not really what we need from this spec…

— Aram Zucker-Scharff (@Chronotope) September 6, 2022

Still, there’s reason to pause. None of us can forget how the Belgian Data Protection Authority (BDPA) went after IAB Europe’s Transparency and Consent Framework (TCF) for breaching GDPR rules.

And some ad tech experts have a profound uneasiness about the Tech Lab’s GPP about a month ago, implying that it causes more harm than it will help the ecosystem. In particular, Washington Post Engineering Lead, Aram Zucker-Scharff, is concerned that “GPP fails to provide any real change over TCF, besides this bolt-on of new string encoding methods.”

“GPP does not represent a significant technical change from TCF, and it is hard to see how it could meet the basic objections from EU courts,” he tweeted last month. He also questioned the IAB’s push towards vendor list specification and the potential fingerprinting risk it opens up. And he doesn’t seem to be alone in his worries. 

Crawling before walking might be the mantra here.

The post What is IAB’s Multi-State Privacy Agreement (MSPA)? appeared first on AdMonsters.

The disruption in digital advertising over the past year has certainly felt like a crisis. On top of the iOS privacy rule changes, market volatility, and the emergence of new platforms, marketing budgets are being scaled back, and brands must be much smarter with their dollars.

But within any crisis, there lies opportunity — and the advertising world is no different. Publishers and ad platforms have a chance to offer new, more effective strategies and technologies to help brands reach their desired audience.

When brands are equipped to take calculated risks, seize the power of data in all its forms, and adapt to the changing environment, they can find effective ways to innovate and grow. Here’s how you can help them evolve in today’s changing landscape.

Be Prepared to Explain the Pros and Cons of Broad-based Advertising

In response to the iOS privacy rule changes, platforms like Meta lowered CPMs and encouraged brands to broaden their targeting since more precise targeting is no longer available.

Engagement is now prioritized over conversions, forcing advertisers to refine their approach and continuously iterate their creativity. While broad-based advertising casts a wide net to reach a larger audience, diluted targeting is inefficient. It can degrade brand equity — potentially alienating consumers with the wrong messages and limiting advertiser learnings from interacting with those that see their ads.

Support Advertisers in Making Calculated Risks by Offering New Approaches

Brands can balance out broad targeting efforts by experimenting with new media platforms and marketing tactics. Work with clients to establish how much risk they’re willing to take on and allocate the majority of the budget toward proven channels, even if it means accepting slightly lower returns at scale.

It’s easy to generate a great return at low spend, but the key is determining how much budget to put through a channel before performance erodes.

Encourage the Use of Trusted, Third-party Anonymized Data Sources

In the absence of quality first-party data, a new solution for targeting consumers is to leverage aggregate third-party data with AI-enabled datasets. This creates a wall of compliance between the advertiser and the data, which protects consumer privacy while still providing brands with crucial information to acquire the right customers.

It benefits advertisers by giving them:

•   access to more data, which can help them identify new high-quality customers
•   the ability to refine their paid marketing strategy and allocate budgets intelligently
•   better prospecting performance and ROAS
•   lower acquisition costs

Implementing this approach has the potential to revitalize targeted marketing for brands and is likely the future path for digital marketing.

The dramatic changes to the ecosystem have made this moment a critical inflection point, making it more important than ever to maintain a growth mindset.

As Einstein also said, “A ship is always safe at the shore, but that is not what it is built for.”  Partnering with advertisers to widen their perspective, commit to experimentation, and seize the opportunities that lie within the chaotic waves of the moment will ultimately help them thrive throughout this tumultuous chapter of digital marketing history.

The post Disruption in Targeted Advertising: How to Turn Crisis into Opportunity appeared first on AdMonsters.

Their data will give rise to new opportunities for brands, agencies, and publishers to collaborate earlier on in the campaign planning process. Some publishers even argue that they should be included as a brand develops its go-to-market plan for new products.

Is there a case to be made for including them that early?

Publishers Have Unique Data for Campaign Planning and Assessment

When we think of publisher data, we tend to focus on the information they collect at registration. It’s valuable data, as many inquire about household information that would be actionable for brands. For instance, Monique Watford, VP of Operations at Spiceworks Ziff Davis, says her company can supply information related to specific types of software and hardware a company uses, when their licenses will expire and if their hardware is aging.

But even publishers that don’t require registration bring a lot to the table. One such publisher, Love To Know Media, has a trove of contextual data that can offer very interesting options for advertisers.

“Our visitors come to us for an answer to specific questions, which allows us to understand a lot about them. If they land on an article about dog ailments, we know they’re a dog owner, and they are concerned about their dog,” explained Marc Boswell, Love To Know Media’s CRO. “We can understand our readers from multiple angles based on the content and the contextual flags on each one of the pages.”

There’s another often overlooked pool of data: third-party data on engagement such as hover on ad rate and scroll impressions. This type of data goes way beyond CTR or video completion rates. It can help advertisers, and their agencies better understand how well their creatives perform so they can improve their creative strategy. It also sheds insight into which creatives work better on specific publications and why.

Earning That Seat at the Table

While publisher data is undeniably strategic to companies, publishers need to recognize the advertiser’s concerns, beginning with neutrality.

Advertisers, burnt by years of buying pre-packaged audience segments that woefully missed the mark, want assurances of fraud-free, high-quality inventory that a trusted third-party measurement company verifies. They’re wary of publishers grading their own homework. Impartiality, therefore, is key.

That impartiality will benefit the entire ecosystem, enabling buyers and their media agencies to trust a larger portion of the inventory publishers have to offer. And that, in turn, means publisher-defined audiences will be more actionable and will go a long way in easing general fears that digital advertising will lack sufficient data due to privacy regulations. It will also create a scenario where publishers work directly with agencies more efficiently.

A World in Which Publisher Data Is Scalable

What role can publishers (and their data) play in the post-cookie digital advertising world? As Ziff Davis’ Watford points out, publishers have always had a keen interest in seeing their advertisers succeed, as their success leads to repeat business. “The ideal time to engage a publisher is early on when a product is still in development.”

Boswell agrees. “We would love to be involved as early as possible [and to talk] to the agencies to help them understand how all of our data can help them drive value.”

Publishers also see a role for them in helping brands, and their agencies assess campaign performance. As mentioned above, publishers with access to impartial engagement data would like to see it incorporated into the agency’s wrap decks. Scaling will be an issue, of course. The industry will need standards that enable the agency to report on them unified across all publishers.

But let’s assume for a minute that these standards are developed and adopted. That media agencies have the tools they need to compare a deeper level of audience, quality, and engagement metrics across channels. Will agencies welcome the publisher’s earlier involvement in the planning process?

Agencies want the campaigns they launch for their clients to succeed just as much as the brands and publishers do. They have every incentive to incorporate quality and verified data as possible as the third-party cookie deprecates.

Agencies have leaned on cookies rather than engage in these more fruitful relationships with publishers. Brands will likely see sharper alignment between themselves, their agencies, and publishers as we advance.

The post The Rise of Publisher Data and Its Potential for Tighter Collaboration Between Brands, Agencies, and Publishers appeared first on AdMonsters.

Last week the Connecticut House of Representatives and Connecticut Senate joined forces to pass the Connecticut Data Privacy Act (CTDPA). The legislation, also known as Senate Bill 6 (SB6), awaits Governor Ned Lamont’s signature to make everything 100% official. The bill is expected to take effect on July 1, 2023. 

The CTDPA mirrors recently instilled state privacy laws, allowing consumers to opt-out of data sales, targeted ads, and profiling decisions that “produce legal or similarly significant effects concerning the consumer.” This new provision will also include protection for minors and biometric data.

I know your next question is, what types of pubs would this apply to?

• Pubs that do business in CT or produce products or services targeted at residents
• Pubs that control or process consumer data of at least 100,000 people a year or gain over 25% of gross revenue from the “sale” of personal data and control or process the data of at least 25,000 people a year.

The consumer side of me says, “Way to go!” Yet, the ad tech side is thinking, “Darn.” Each new state privacy law only adds more and more hoops for pubs to jump through.

Get in the Know About CTDPA

If you are wondering what aspect of “consumer data” will be guarded by CTDPA, it is the information connected to an identified person. This does not include any information about someone that is public or considered de-identified data.

This is the second stab at a privacy law by the “Constitution State,” remember, Connecticut tried it last year and failed. This go-round, the bill is coming on strong and will even include the “right to cure” clause giving pubs some time to do some damage control before getting hit with a lawsuit. If you are caught violating the rules? Forget about it. There will be no time at that point to fix the infraction, and you may even get accused of “soliciting user consent.”

Pubs have a 60-day fix-it period to figure out reported violations until December 21, 2024. Starting January 1, 2025, the CTDPA will only grant a cure period if the Connecticut Attorney General sees fit, so be careful.

With the CTDPA opt-in consent for sensitive data is a must. Racial origin, religious beliefs, mental or physical health condition or diagnosis, sexual orientation, sexual history, immigration status, genetic or biometric data, children’s data, and geolocation data are all included.

Speaking of children, pubs will have to get opt-in consent from consumers under the age of 16 before using their data to target ads or monetize. You have to keep the kids first because when it comes to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, you don’t want any problems.

Like privacy laws in Colorado and Virginia, CT consumers will have the authority to appeal a denial of a consumer request.

How Will CTDPA Affect the Advertising Ecosystem?

At the rate things are going, pubs will continue to be stuck in a cycle of scrambling to find new ways to identify consumers. While these state privacy laws are seemingly a step in the right direction for consumers, they sometimes create extra work for pubs and outsourcing vendors.

Many publishers feel they may go bald before Federal privacy legislation sees the light of day, but President Biden has been making baby steps in that direction after discovering a recent “national experiment” by big tech that utilized children’s data.

Potus said, “It’s time to strengthen privacy protections, ban targeted advertising to children, demand tech companies stop collecting personal data on our children.”

Whether it is a child or your great-great-grandma, pubs will continue to have to dip and dive through many loopholes when it comes to targeted ads and addressability because those violation consequences ain’t pretty.

The post What Is CTDPA? appeared first on AdMonsters.