The cannabis industry is currently the fifth largest and fastest-growing consumer industry in the U.S. More than 200 million Americans – about 70% of the population – now live in states with legalized medical or recreational cannabis use. However, despite medical and recreational use likely being the two things that most readily come to mind when mentioning cannabis, the industry encompasses so much more. Expanding legal access has resulted in record levels of investment capital pouring into the industry. And all this investment leads to product growth. The first half of 2021 alone saw $7.9 billion invested in cannabis deals according to New Frontier Data.
Consumer perceptions around cannabis are shifting. These days, it is found in everything from beauty products to machinery lubricants. In addition, larger brands are beginning to experiment by incorporating CBD and hemp into their products. Recently, PepsiCo in Germany made their first foray into the category with the launch of their Rockstar Energy+Hemp beverage (which does not contain any THC). Some additional examples include Unilever subsidiary brand Schmidt’s Naturals, which sells a line of hemp-oil deodorants and Colgate-Palmolive’s recent acquisition of Hello Products, which offers a CBD oral care collection.
As more mainstream brands test the waters, it’s likely that shifts in advertising spend will follow. In fact, advertising spend is already growing in the category. In 2019, Kantar reported cannabis advertisers spent $370 million on digital display ads. That’s an increase from $238 million the previous year. Brands and marketers are eager to expand their advertising presence beyond just the endemic sites. However, they are struggling to find platforms and partners willing to help them spend their budgets.
Lost in the weeds
Because cannabis advertising is still new and quite complex, it’s understandable to feel a bit confused by it all. The rapidly evolving regulatory landscape can pose potential risk, especially as each state has established their own set of laws and regulations. Ensuring an ad is run only in the state it was created for is often the first and largest concern when it comes to accepting cannabis ads. Add in the challenges of age gating and privacy compliance and things get tricky fast.
Running cannabis advertising on your sites may also present some reputational risk. It’s important to realistically consider the potential impact the decision may have on your brand. There’s always a chance that running these types of ads may deter other brands from working with you. Certainly, there’s still a lot of consumer education needed around cannabis, CBD, and hemp before the messaging becomes truly mainstream. This will take time. But soon enough, any digital publisher not accepting cannabis advertising will be in the minority.
Preparing as a publisher
If you’re not quite ready to accept cannabis advertising, begin by researching and building relationships with advertisers in the meantime. In this fast-growing market, it will be beneficial to stay informed on the latest category innovation and regulation. This way you will be able to more quickly and effectively craft a strategy that supports your revenue goals when the time is right for you to enter the category.
For those who wish to begin accepting cannabis advertising, identifying the right tech partner is an important first step. A provider who understands the nuances of the space and is willing to work with you is critical to navigating the sea of state laws which vary widely. The right programmatic partner can help you easily and confidently ensure that you meet compliance standards. They will also provide access to a unique stream of demand in order to get your share of revenue in this rapidly-growing market.
With the amount of marketing dollars at stake in cannabis, there’s no time to lose to make sure you’re prepared to embrace the revenue opportunity when it’s right for you.
The discussion and debate about measurement in online advertising is rife at the moment. However, one thing is clear: For too long viewability has been used to paint an incomplete picture of ad impact.
We’ve known for a while that viewability is an imperfect metric. And, while standards have improved, the next step in online measurement for brands has been overdue. Media agencies have been working on this problem for a while. They rightly seek to build more sophisticated models in order to spend their clients’ ad dollars within environments that are truly delivering value.
Though some studies have been done, dentsu international has just released one of the most comprehensive to date. Their Attention Economy research is the product of a three year study involving multiple media partners. The goal is to truly understand the drivers of attention and create a real metric for advertisers to use going forward.
What delivers attention
Critically, the study demonstrated that attention is three times better at predicting outcomes than viewability. They uncovered four key factors that deliver attention:
1. User choice
Forced ads gain more raw attention vs. ads that are easily ignored. However, when a consumer voluntarily views an ad, it results in a significant impact on brand lift metrics, whether they viewed for 2s or 20s. Formats that earned attention yield better, and much quicker, outcomes than outcomes than forced formats.
2. Creative
The importance of creativity on ad effectiveness has been well documented. However, it was important to measure its impact within their Attention Economy framework. The study showed that ads optimized for the Teads platform gained a 49% boost in attention vs the original. This is a result of optimizing TV ads for a mobile experience. These grab attention from the start through use of techniques such as contrast, addition of text, animation, or bold colors.
3. Relevance
The dentsu study showed that placing ads within relevant context for the reader gives an uplift of Attentive Seconds Per 1,000 of 13%. Recently, IAS conducted a study with Neuroinsights in the U.S. that demonstrated 23% more detailed memory and 27% more global memory for ads that were aligned with the contextual content, compared with those that were not. We have also observed superior branding impact for ads that are contextually aligned.
4. Time in view
Finally, viewability on its own isn’t enough. However, time in view has been confirmed as an important factor for attention by the study. Both video and display ads quantifiably benefit from quality, viewable time.
Good news
All of the above is fantastic news for publishers. The study clearly shows that premium publishers drive high engagement of users with quality content. and that induces a slow scroll speed. When this is tied in with in-article, outstream video ad formats, it delivers an average of 12.2s of time in view (even higher than instream) and twice the amount of attention compared to social media.
Ever since viewability became a priority, publishers have suffered. They’ve also been forced to include ad formats that provide sub-standard user experiences, purely because media buyers are focused on it as a metric. But the quantification of attention can shift this balance. Ad buyers will increasingly be able to focus on media plans that are based on attention and deliver clear business outcomes.
This will bring back to the center stage not the importance of the quality of the content. It also aligns ads within the context that they’ve been placed.
There are many factors of digital media that are changing for the better. Advertisers, agencies and media owners are all embracing an online ecosystem that’s free from third party cookies. They are aware of its impact on both society and the environment and focused on the quality of ad experiences, rather than the quantity. Attention can be a cornerstone of this new landscape, where a range of brand metrics can be more clearly attributed to certain campaigns.
This is where premium publishers can excel, showcasing greater value to brands than ever before and securing a greater portion of online ad revenue that is currently held in silicon valley. This can be done whilst simultaneously creating even greater trust with their engaged readership and therefore helping develop a truly sustainable media ecosystem.
Privacy is rewriting the rules of adtech, causing seismic shifts to the way media is bought and sold.
Over the past 10 years, digital advertising has run on personal data and identifiers that connect consumers across domains. Today, tightening privacy regulation and heightened consumer awareness about how their data is being used has triggered global changes. We already see the effect. The third-party data that fuels digital advertising is continuing to disappear. And Snap’s shares dropped by 25% because of Apple’s App Tracking Transparency (ATT) feature in iOS 14.5, requiring consent from users to track them across apps and websites. It’s also reported that Snap, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are set to lose nearly $10bn due to ATT.
As privacy disrupts the way digital advertising has operated for years, we’re seeing two seismic shifts in the ecosystem. Firstly, there is a transfer of power in digital advertising towards first-party data owners. Secondly, there’s a move to processing data on-device. Digital advertising increasingly requires privacy at its core. Therefore, first-party data owners will need the infrastructure to control, connect and scale their data while planning and buying campaigns.
The shift to first-party data and on-device
Data that was once accessible by ad-tech is now deprecating because of privacy. Control of this data has returned to its rightful first-party owners. This includes publishers, advertisers, and other businesses that have first-party data.
First-party data owners are able to build businesses from their data because they have a direct relationship with their users. Publishers such as Penske, Insider, Future plc, and others are launching successful first-party data platforms and packaging up their consented audiences for advertisers. For example, Future’s first party-data platform, Aperture, has increased the addressable inventory sold to advertisers by 150%. And Insider sees 19 out of its top 20 advertisers using its first-party data platform SAGA, at a 95% renewal rate.
Advertisers are also bringing their first-party data to publishers to match and model audiences and businesses like Instacart, Doordash, Uber, and Amazon see tremendous advertising opportunities because they have first-party data.
First-party data is made useful by on-device technology, but not at the expense of people’s privacy. This is because on-device makes it possible for data processing to happen in real-time. And user data stays on the user’s device instead of being sent to the cloud. It’s the direction of travel for the industry, moving adtech from an era that leaks data to a privacy-first era that protects it. In fact, other tech companies such as Apple, Facebook, and Google have and are re-architecting their technology for on-device processing.
Rebuilding for privacy
We believe that privacy is a force for good in advertising, and on-device is the future of digital advertising. However, we need to rebuild and provide first-party data owners with the necessary tools to scale.
For advertisers, the supply paths can be inefficient today because they need to build it publisher-by-publisher. Publishers also have no consistent way of making their data available to advertisers in a privacy-compliant and sustainable way. To seize the opportunities ahead of them, first-party data owners require a privacy-first infrastructure for digital advertising to be immune to any dramatic regulatory or browser-level changes,
This infrastructure will help publishers and advertisers to connect safely. It’s a way for personalized advertising to continue for first-party data owners, a place where digital advertising can continue to thrive — without the data leakage we see happening today.
Building on a privacy-first infrastructure is a long-term, sustainable strategy for publishers, advertisers and other first-party data owners. It will bring much-needed transparency, scale and privacy to digital advertising. It’s no longer the time for band-aid solutions to the impact of privacy on digital advertising. Any solution that isn’t grounded in privacy won’t stand up to oncoming regulatory, browser changes, and consumer scrutiny.
About the author
Joe Root is co-founder and CEO of Permutive. Following a BEng Computing at Imperial College and MSc Computer Sciences at Oxford, Joe started Permutive with his co-founder, Tim Spratt, joining Y Combinator in 2014.
The classics are so well-known they’ve become punchlines: acai berry treatments, one simple trick to get rid of belly fat, get rich working from home. Newer scam ad verticals like bitcoin and crypto schemes, home solar energy savings, and nutritional supplements for diabetes sufferers are slamming consumers on every corner of the Internet.
And yet scam and deceptive advertising is simply accepted as an ugly part of digital media and advertising. And it’s only getting uglier. Since the beginning of 2021, The Media Trust has detected a 50% increase in scam campaigns hitting publisher properties. Still, too many AdTech companies and publishers look the other way as the scams roll through the programmatic pipes, hoping their audiences have the good sense not to be bamboozled.
The Media Trust detected unique scam campaigns ramping upwards throughout 2021 with a major spike in July.
Unfortunately, there have been virtually no consequences for sites running scam ads. There’s the occasional massive fine, like when the Federal Trade Commission came down hard on Clickbooth for its acai berry barrage. However, for the most part, scammers advertise with impunity and AdTech and publishers become their accomplices.
However, consequences may be coming—and the fallout may be dire—judging by the developing online regulatory situation in the UK and increasing attention elsewhere.
The scope of online safety measures
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has promised to present the Online Safety Billbefore Christmas. The bill would require publishers, social networks, and many communication/messaging apps to deter, remove, and mitigate the spread of Illegal and harmful content—particularly when aimed at children. The bill threatens fines as high as £18 million or 10% of global revenue, and possible criminal sanctions.
Beyond content that sexually exploits children (which must be reported to law enforcement), the harmful content in question includes malicious trolling and racist abuse—with the added goal of “protect[ing] democracy,” presumably through stemming online disinformation. The UK Office of Communications (Ofcom) will enforce the proposed law, which will also give the regulatory agency the ability to completely block access to a site or platform.
However, advocates like famed British personal finance advisor Martin Lewis think the bill doesn’t go far enough. That’s because it’s laser-focused on user-generated content and doesn’t regulate online advertising—most notably scams. Lewis, whose likeness is often exploited in scam ads pushing bitcoin schemes, has been on a crusade against online scam ads for years, including forcing Facebook to settle for £3 million over a 2018 lawsuit regarding more than 1,000 scam ads featuring his appearance.
Drowning in scam ads
The data backs up Lewis’ claim that the “The UK is facing an epidemic of scam adverts.” In 2020, 410,000 cases of fraud reported to the UK police represented a 31% jump from the year prior, according to consumer group Which?, with £2.3 billion fleeced. Including anxiety and psychological damage, Which? puts the actual total suffered by UK consumers at £9 billion.
And the greatest frustration among consumers and public advocacy groups is the lack of recourse and sense that scammers act with impunity—aided by AdTech and digital media. In another Which? report, 34% of consumers said a scam they reported to Google was not taken down, while 26% said the same of Facebook.
In 2020, The National Cyber Security Centre removed more than 730,000 websites hosting scam advertising landing pages featuring the likenesses of Lewis, Richard Branson, and other celebrities. Despite that effort, The Media Trust has seen a 22% increase in these types of scam (aka “Fizzcore”) content throughout 2021 that use similar landing pages.
Fizzcore attacks, which typically feature celebrities and hawk bitcoin scams, have grown 22% over 2021 despite crackdowns.
Fizzcore is more nefarious than other scams because it employs cloaking to hide malicious creative and/or landing pages from creative audits and other detection techniques. The vast majority of these have been pushing bitcoin investment scams, often with the same Lewis and Branson content.
Personal finance advisor Martin Lewis and billionaire philanthropist Richard Branson are common faces in scam ads directed at UK citizens.
Even if online scam advertising fails to make the final Online Safety Bill, a reckoning for scam ads could come in other forms. The UK’s Department for Digital, Media, Culture and Sport (DMCS) is developing the Online Advertising Programme (OAP), a framework that enables regulators to address potential consumer harms from digital advertising, including scam ads.
And just to pile on, UK. Home Secretary Priti Patel announced a relaunched Joint Fraud Taskforce on Oct. 21. Addressing the significant rise in scams during the peak of the coronavirus pandemic, the taskforce will focus on addressing scams and fraud through private-public partnerships and refurbishing of government reporting tools.
Fallout beyond the British Isles
The ramifications of all this regulatory (buildup) ought to make the industry anxious. The Online Safety Bill would put heavy new burdens on publishers and social media in moderating user content in the UK, but the inclusion of scam ads might directly affect revenue. In the absolute worst-case scenario, publishers would need to vet all specific advertisers running on their sites as well as be familiar with all creative to avoid liability. That could mean many risk-averse publishers shut off programmatic advertising.
Scam advertisers are notoriously hard to pinpoint. They use any and every buying platform available, and then tools like cloaking in code to hide their malicious motives. When it comes to rooting out scam campaigns, the proof isn’t completely in the ad code. While creative and domain patterns can be identified and blocklisted, finding scammers also requires investigation into the elusive end-advertisers, their motives, and their histories. It’s not impossible, but it requires dedicated teams always on the pursuit.
Beyond stopping scammers cold at the source, the next best way to stem proliferation of scam ads is to bring culpability to publishers and their AdTech partners. However, publishers are the low-hanging fruit. The website was where the consumer was attacked, so they’ll always be the prime regulatory target.
Despite the intense pressure in the U,K., regulators in other countries are also most definitely paying attention and looking for a potential roadmap. In the U.S., reform of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act—which shields online media companies from legal liability regarding user-generated content—appeals to both major political parties. Really, what politician would say no to the easy win of protecting consumers from online scams? According to the Federal Trade Commission, consumers lost $3.3 billion to fraud in 2020, up from $1.8 billion in 2019—and that’s only the 2.2 million reports filed.
Self-regulation to the rescue?
The IAB UK is conversing with the DMCS on the OAP, but ultimately the trade group believes industry self-regulation is the answer. While self-regulation on the data privacy front became a mockery of itself, self-regulation of scam ads doesn’t need to meet the same fate. First off, trade groups like the IAB need to establish stronger ad quality guidelines that offer standards for handling malvertising, scam, and other harmful ads.
In addition—or short of that—publishers need to take control of their own destinies regarding scam ads. Every ad quality provider should be identifying scam ads and enabling publishers to block them. Slapping down redirects simply isn’t enough for a bad-ad-blocker—a publisher serving scam ads is violating the trust of its audience and leaving consumers vulnerable.
Not only is blocking the scam ads the right thing for publishers to do, it is a way to get ahead of—or perhaps helping avoid—a regulatory onslaught that will have catastrophic revenue consequences. Failing to mitigate will come back to haunt the industry.
Search is a topic media companies often overlook. Most of us associate the word search with search engines like Google/Bing/DuckDuckGo. These organic channels are often how visitors (and at times internal team members), will search a content catalog. But it’s time to give some serious thought to your internal, on-page search.
There are many reasons to optimize internal search such as:
The way in which it reveals clear ROI as it complements social media and external search.
The way that it helps clarify user intent, which informs you about navigational issues and content needs.
How it allows you to reveal the depth of your catalog by exposing visitors to more content
The fact that optimized search empowers visitors to find solutions to their problems, meaning they are happier overall.
It empowers journalists to discover content on your owned channels as opposed to external ones.
The good news is that creating optimized site search may be easier than you think.
7 tips to achieve a best-in-class search and discovery experience
Tip 1 : Know your user’s intent
Your goal may be for users to consume content. However, before building the ideal path to that content, you must clarify their intent:
Are they looking to find a specific piece of content e.g. “yesterday’s premier league score”?
Are they researching a specific topic or theme e.g “eco-friendly lifestyle”?
Or are they looking for inspiration? Catching up on news?
Each user’s intent(s) are solved with different discovery patterns: search, guided discovery, or recommendations. It’s critical that you identify what your specific user’s intent and motivations are. Make sure that you spend time mapping this out, to then serve each user individually.
Tip 2 : Audit your content catalog
How many long-lasting pieces of content do you have vs. short lived items?
Among your live pieces of content, what percentage of content is actually being consumed today?
Are there opportunities to expose more content, perhaps resurfacing historical archives or adding in new partner content?
These types of questions will help you to define priorities for your discovery strategy.
On top of that, the quality of your metadata (date of publication, theme, topic, etc.) is crucial to ensure a good user experience. Be clear on the attributes that will determine how your content ranks when queried. Think about what uniquely differentiates your content catalog such as freshness, particular niches, short or snappy content, exclusivity, etc.
Tip 3: Identify your priorities, KPIs, and North Star metric
In order to build a great search and discovery experience, you need to be clear on your priorities and key metrics. Perhaps that’s to increase time spent, increasing engagement to support an ads-based model. Or it might be to increase premium subscriptions.
It’s not uncommon for media companies to run on several business models: ad-based, subscription-based, and even ecommerce. Also, priorities, goals, and primary metrics may shift and change over time. Common video industry on-demand models include AVOD (advertising-based video on-demand), SVOD (subscription video-on-demand), and TVOD (transactional video on-demand). Identifying your primary model(s) and goal(s) is critical to building great user experiences to achieve those goals.
To achieve your goals, consider:
engagement and discovery patterns like related content recommendations, or topic refinement with suggested tags.
building content discovery widgets that provide a glimpse of your content catalog from third-parties and partner websites.
personalized recommendations and other ways to engage loyal subscribers. Help them discover new content and gain more value from your platform.
Tip 4 : Build your discovery map
After identifying your goals and core metrics, you should then build a discovery map that reflects your objectives and specific needs. Here is a template and example to use.
On the X axis: describe your different content types: Fresh news and short reads, Reports and long-form, archives, niche content, etc.
On the Y axis : your various user’s or persona’s intents
In each content type box of this matrix, you then describe a “Discovery scenario”. For example, what is the preferable touchpoint (e.g “Search box” or “Discovery tab” or “Home Page”), or what is the most important ranking criteria for your content (e.g. “date of publication” and “topic”), and/or what is the CTA that compliments your North Star metric (e.g “read another article” or “sign in”)
Tip 5 : Evaluate your existing search and discovery
Next, audit your existing setup. Starting by evaluating your various discovery scenarios and note their pros and cons.
Below are examples of other items to evaluate throughout your audit. How do you manage:
typos? Ex: “I want to watch lalalnd”
broad queries? Ex: “I want to watch romantic comedies”?
natural language queries? Ex: “I want to watch Rom Coms”?
There are many more. Remember: The better you analyze your existing search & discovery shortcomings and opportunities, the better you can move faster on optimizing them.
Tip 6 : Find the right balance between AI-led and human-led curation
Curation strategies vary a lot across the media industry. While publishers often rely heavily on editorial teams, video platforms are often algorithmically curated. There is no right or wrong way to do this; finding your balance is key.
AI, for example, can be a way to surface what you have outlined in your content discovery map. Among the discovery scenarios that you have considered, think about how AI can help augment your team’s work. It can bridge gaps or free up editorial time. Finding this balance allows for increased efficiency and a focus on quality.
There are many different ways to leverage AI, here are a few. It can:
entirely power content blocks or rows leveraging various recommendation models
be used on top of manually curated blocks to dynamically reorder content, depending on their popularity
shorten the path to content by leveraging intent detection, and displaying personalized suggestions of content or categories
Tip 7 : Select the right solution for you
After following the tips outlined throughout this, you will be in a better position to select the right solution for your business and team. Your implementation may consist of building your own search and recommendation engine. It might consist of building from external platforms that are made for developers. Or perhaps you’ll buy off-the-shelf solutions.
In making these decisions, here are a few more considerations that are important at that stage.
Think through your unique requirements in terms of short- and long-term scalability. Not all solutions are equal in terms of a geographical footprint, expansion, and the ability to manage audience peaks, for example.
Similarly, understand your team’s unique situation when looking at how architectures and services selected will be built and maintained. If building things out in-house looks to be your best decision, consider what it takes to maintain, scale, and handle regular change requests and develop features and iterations.
Think about the future of discovery: What you have defined today in regards to your discovery map will likely evolve and change as quickly as consumer’s behaviors do. Consider a solution that will be future-proof, enabling you to consistently offer the most enjoyable and rewarding experience for your customers (and teams).
Our hope is that these tips will help you create the most optimized experiences for both your customers and your teams. Best of luck in planning, auditing, and creating your unique search and discovery experience. It’s worth it because effective search and discovery will help engage your site visitors and convert them into fans for the long-term.
Media disruption has become a fact of life in the digital age. Media disruption is a fact of life in the digital age.ons become more diverse, new channels are emerging more rapidly than most media companies can respond.
This pace places an extreme burden on media companies. They don’t want to throw money at every novel channel in our here-today, gone-tomorrow culture because they can ill afford to waste time and resources. Nor can they afford to overlook the next big trend and risk irrelevancy.
When an ad-supported model drove revenue, companies could risk complacency. With the depreciation of the cookie, there is a growing need to move fast to attract attention and leverage first-party data to drive engagement.
New channels, new strategies
Media companies and publishers have re-adjusted their revenue strategies to focus on subscriptions as per-page revenue from advertising has dropped. In a recent interview, New Yorker editor David Remnick noted that advertising sales in their print magazine largely subsidized the content in the magazine for most of its life. Now, digital and print subscriptions pay for the newest Borowitz Report.
Can a successful subscription service be enough for a media company to thrive in the years ahead? For the New Yorker and loyal reader base, the answer is likely yes. For many others, survival means embracing a truly omnichannel strategy that distributes content everywhere that content can be consumed.
The New York Times went through a tumultuous transition a decade ago as it dealt with substantial drops in print readership and revenue. Yes, they have done well with digital subscriptions. However, the Times has also developed a plethora of content products, built for the changing habits of their audience.
The Daily, a long form audio content for the passive Times’ listener, is an excellent example. It demonstrates how companies like The New York Times provide a range of content formats that meet the broad expectations of today’s audiences. Products like these also access emerging digital engagement channels, which offer new revenue streams and drive subscriptions.
New revenue: ecommerce and events
The definition of media is continually evolving. ESPN and Barstool Sports are content companies that also support new endemic opportunities such as sports-betting. Synergies like these not only create new revenue streams but drive ongoing multi-channel engagement. You don’t just read about or watch the game, you participate in the game along with your favorite content brand.
Ecommerce is also becoming a way to leverage brand recognition and build stronger relationships with consumers by supplementing information with a physical product. It may not be a surprise that HGTV sells doormats. But did you know that Barstool Sports now sells One Bite frozen pizza?
Media company events are nothing new. However, they are becoming an ever more common way to drive revenue, engagement and brand loyalty. ComplexCon, the event put on by Complex Networks, is an excellent example of meeting their Millennial and Gen Z audience how and where they want to engage. The New Yorker Festival just saw its second biggest revenue earnings ever in its new hybrid format.
True omnichannel lies ahead
What are some of the promising omnichannel opportunities going forward? As The New York Times has demonstrated, audio is proving to be quite popular. (As well as a bit of what’s old is new again). Given that audio is a fairly passive content channel, it can exist in the background without demanding focused attention from the consumer. In our multitasking culture, having the freedom to absorb ambient media while also exercising or mowing the lawn is highly valuable.
The once-taboo is now an opportunity for media companies looking to engage. As states begin to legalize online gambling and sports betting, there are opportunities to drive new branding and co-branding revenue streams, creating one of the most direct opportunities for the right media brands to surround and interact with the content. It is critical that companies keep their eye on changing trends and emerging opportunities that align with their brand and target audience.
The long game
Indeed, whatever activity a media company chooses to tap into, they must do it authentically and on-brand. The excellent podcast series on systemic racism Who We Are, created by Vox Media and Ben and Jerry’s, is an example of high-quality brand extension.
What direct revenue will these and other emerging markets create? That’s the billion dollar question. But it also misses the point. Creating a content ecosystem that authentically connects great content to your audience supports behavior that drives subscriptions and ultimately sustainable revenue. The key is being open to experimentation. And experimenting does not mean developing a TikTok strategy in 2022 to gain younger viewers.
Some (well, many) attempts will fail. However, those that succeed could become significant new revenue streams. The advent of 5G all but guarantees a turbocharged environment of innovative new channels for media companies to explore in the coming decade.
The future for media companies demands an omnichannel approach. While content is still king, customers now dictate how and where they will consume it. To win a battle fought on many fronts, media companies need to jump into the arena and embrace change. This means combining insight-driven experimentation with new emerging channels and technologies. That’s the kind of customer-centricity that will ensure content drives new revenue opportunities.
Dean Kamen, the brilliant engineer who invented both the Segway and iBOT once said that every innovation eventually becomes a double-edged sword. Initial positive outcomes will inevitably need to be weighed against future negative unintended consequences… the internal combustion engine, social media, Open RTB – for starters.
Our industry continues to pivot away from vendors who have contributed to unintended consequences (fraud, loss of publisher control, etc.). However there is an enormous risk to unilaterally severing ties with all your 3rd parties in a mad rush toward SPO nirvana. The culling of the herd needs to be done. However, it must be carried out with precision lest we cut off our noses to spite our faces.
Len Ostroff, SVP at Critero, had this to say about the programmatic supply chain in a recent article in AdMonsters:
Publishers are working with far more SSPs than they were in the past and we have seen a rise in duplicate bid requests, leading to an increase in infrastructure costs and multiple bids for a single impression. While there is typically value in seeing a few bid requests per impression, there is a point of diminishing returns which can cause a degradation in value and a drop in yield while also increasing fees and costs.
So, what are you going to do about it?
This legitimate observation about our ad industry’s Achilles heel has led to calls for Supply Path Optimization (SPO). Let’s face it: There are obviously too many cooks in the kitchen. Reduce or eliminate 3rd party vendors, say some industry leaders. Moreover, publishers don’t want to see nearly 50% of each programmatic advertising dollar slip through the cracks into the hands of redundant intermediaries. Nor should they allow themselves to be victimized by fraudulent activity.
Don’t throw every baby out with the bathwater
The fact is that SPO is not a zero-sum game. Certainly, there are bad actors whose main goal is to siphon off another point or two from your bottom line without adding value. However, there are also great 3rd parties whose entire focus is to increase income, and improve reader engagement, ad viewability, and UX for their partners.
Most of us remember when Marc Pritchard of P&G famously called for “the death of the crappy media supply chain,” at the 2017 IAB ALM. However, I don’t believe that his intention was for anyone to amputate value-added partners to eradicate the cancer that had developed in the ecosystem of our industry.
Rushing to judgement leads to errors that can be avoided with deeper due diligence. Ask your 3rd parties to articulate specifically what they contribute to your business goals, and most importantly to your income. Require that they provide you with data that supports their contribution. Consult with industry experts and ask your peers about their experiences working with partners and vendors. Look to industry award nominees from the various highly valued trade publishers whose evaluations are objective and authoritative.
It is incumbent upon all of us in the industry to seek higher ground and work with the best. With apologies to our friend Terry Kawaja, the LUMAScape does give some insight into the problem we have created for ourselves. Too much is just too much…and not of a good thing:
I’ve written about the “tyranny of choice” here before. There are simply too many players in the ad tech ecosystem. That’s part of the problem publishers face. My suggestion is to K.I.S.S. Identify those vendors who are not adding tangible value, then say bye, bye. Your ad ops and dev teams will thank you. So will your CFO, shareholders, and maybe even Dean Kamen himself.
The Internet is renowned for bringing out our worst instincts. When anonymous strangers with differing views converge in online community forums, the result is often heated arguments that can quickly descend into insults, threats, and abuse.
Once upon a time, that tendency to “pile on” seemed like a good thing for publishers. If strong emotions drive engagement, and engagement means more page views and ultimately more revenue, then stirring up angry debate must be good for business, right?
The risks of allowing online toxicity to flourish
Is it actually effective to sow controversy in an article, then sit back and let commenters fight it out below the fold? Based upon what we’ve seen over the past few years, not very.
For one thing, social platforms and publishers have had to contend with advertiser boycotts, as brands rush to distance themselves from hate speech and misinformation. Publishers like The Atlantic and Vice, meanwhile, have felt they had no choice but to shutter comments sections completely, cutting themselves off from their readership in the process.
There’s another, much more appealing option: building a safe and healthy online community of engaged commenters. Our research shows that quality conversations and respectful debate actively attract engaged users–and engaged users typically view 4.6x more pages, spend 3.6x longer on-site, and drive 3.2x more revenue than non-engaged users.
What drives incivility in online community forums?
So how can publishers turn heated arguments into quality discussions? First, it’s useful to understand what drives online incivility. Then these underlying drivers can be taken into account in audience engagement strategies. Here are three for starters:
People behave in a less inhibited way when they interact online with people they don’t know and are never likely to meet, in an environment where they can be anonymous and where there are few or no repercussions for behaving aggressively.
People get addicted to being right. Winning an argument can produce a flood of feel-good hormones, similar to winning a bet. As with gambling, that feeling can become all-consuming, leading to a greater focus on “winning” than on debating respectfully.
Comments without context get misinterpreted. While it may not be 100% true that 93% of communication is non-verbal, a comment can seem hostile when elements like body language and tone of voice are missing. And that, in turn, can promote an aggressive response.
How to shift heated arguments to meaningful discussions
There are several options open to publishers who want to elevate the quality of debate in the communities they host. Here are four approaches that we believe in at OpenWeb:
Encourage visitors to become registered users
When people feel they belong to a community, and get to know their fellow community members, the online disinhibition effect starts to fade. Interactions between community members become more civil as a result. But that’s not the only benefit. Registered users are also more likely to return more often, spend more time on-site, and deliver more revenue than non-registered users.
Have editorial teams join the conversation
Editorial engagement is a powerful way to increase the quality of online debate. Editorial teams set the conversational tone and guide discussion by responding to the highest-quality contributions. We’ve found that editorial involvement of this kind typically leads to a 17% decrease in toxic comments.
Define and reward civility
Most people don’t come to an online community forum looking for a fight: often, it’s the atmosphere they find on the site that tips them into incivility. Sophisticated moderation technology can help publishers cultivate a civil atmosphere. For example, you can:
Make it clear what kinds of language and behavior are encouraged, and what won’t be tolerated. For example, our OpenWeb Clarity Mode puts community guidelines front and center, ensuring everyone knows what’s expected of them.
Invite users to rethink their comment before posting, if it looks like it may breach the community guidelines. This draws on the “nudge” theory of behavioral economics, which holds that positive reinforcement at the right moment can spur more considered decisions. When we experimented with such prompts across some of our top publishers, we saw a 12.5% lift in civil and thoughtful comments being posted.
Use multi-layered AI and ML-based moderation to analyze, sort and highlight comments based on their quality rather than their propensity to incite hostility. That way, community members who post high-quality, thoughtful and expert content will be rewarded by seeing their comments highlighted and featured on the site.
Analyze and filter incivility
If rewarding quality conversations is the carrot, then filtering out incivility is the stick. For the most efficient moderation results, a hybrid approach using category-leading AI and ML moderation (combined with a healthy dose of intuitive, manual moderation) can reliably filter out a large proportion of toxic language–and analyze users to understand who are most likely to post toxic comments in the future.
Today, publishers no longer have to make a Hobson’s choice between enabling comments (and seeing them degenerate into petty arguments) and turning them off completely. With positive reinforcement, editorial engagement and multi-layered moderation, overheated arguments can become meaningful discussions–bringing healthier online communities, and higher reader loyalty, to publishers.
About the author
Andrew Sullivan is the Chief Product Officer at OpenWeb.
There are telltale signs that digital publishers haven’t embraced a user-first approach to monetization. Frequently, these unwelcome surprises come in the form of bad ads. There’s a subtle, yet crucial safety issue at play – that of the end user, and to publishers.
Bad ads have become more tangible in recent years. They range from offensive and unpleasant imagery to off-brand messaging. Unfortunately, they have a raft of negative effects. These include user churn, widespread user complaints, and a serious dent in monetization.
In 2021, 76% of publishers reported ad quality challenges affected user experience. Sixty-six percent of publishers reported that ad quality issues impacted their revenue, underscoring how vital it is to adopt a user-first approach.
User experience expectations are changing, and working practices must keep up. Considering fundamental recent shifts in user sensitivity and expectations, we can’t expect outdated approaches to remain effective.
The brand suitability question
With 35% of publishers experiencing worsening ad quality challenges, the pressure is on for publishers to consistently deliver on-brand experiences. In the last 12 months, the definition of brand safety has evolved. These days, the focus is on the distinction between brand safety and brand suitability. It’s no longer enough for publishers to wonder, “Is this creative acceptable for a premium publisher?” The question now must be, “Is this acceptable for my audience, my message, and the content on this page?” That is the philosophy behind a user-first approach.
Poor ad quality threatens the publisher-audience relationship. However, nearly half of all publishers say they lack the tools to control the ads that appear across their digital properties. Misleading links in ads are the primary type of low-quality ad publishers are seeing – 48% of publishers say they’ve seen such ads. Almost as many (44%) of publishers report witnessing fake news in ad content, 28% reporting links to sites with security threats (malvertising), 31% reporting violent content, and 27% reporting explicit or offensive content.
Publishers are brands too
To cultivate strong relationships with their audiences, publishers must deliver engaging, relevant advertising that works for their brand. And every ad counts towards retaining user loyalty, engagement, and ultimately, monetization.
Publishers require custom controls to maintain their standards and values because there is no universal guide for what counts as a “good” or “bad” ad. In fact, publishers are demanding customization, with 47% reporting they need “more control and transparency” from their ad quality tools.
Real-time protection against off-brand ads is essential to maintaining a positive user experience. Realtime ad quality protection enables publishers to avoid advertising that is inappropriate for their brand’s unique sensitivities and values but may be fully appropriate for another brand. Today, advertising must be alignedwith a publisher’s brand based on its sentiment, tone, and messaging.
A dynamic need
It is nearly impossible for a publisher to regain a user’s trust once the user has seen an ad that contradicts the publisher’s tone or looks suspicious, or especially if the user clicks through to a deceptive ad and lands on a scam website. In the world of brand suitability, it’s often “one strike and you’re out.”
While an overall approach to brand suitability, trending topics, and news or event cycles is a must, continual diligence is needed. A user-first approach requires that publishers roll up their sleeves and assess suitability on the ground to ensure their audience’s experience remains on-brand. In short, brand suitability is not static.
Publishers don’t have to start from scratch. Real-time ad quality tools that provide granularity exist to eliminate the heavy lifting. Setting content parameters and reviewing ads on a site is not merely a maintenance task for ad ops. It’s a vital component of a publisher’s business strategy.
The way forward
Publishers have devoted time and resources to assure brand-safe environments for advertisers. Now, publishers must remember to devote the same attention to brand suitability for their own brand and users. Going forward, a user-first approach requires publishers to align page content and ad content, and consider them holistically. That control requires full visibility into all ad content on each page, as well as granular customization for their unique audiences.
Boosting ad quality translates into revenue upside and enables a brand to stand out. When a user-first approach informs ad quality decisions, the benefits are felt by publishers and users alike.
