Login
close
Login is restricted to DCN Publisher Members. If you are a DCN Member and don't have an account, register here.
Search

Digital Content Next logo

Menu

Tags containing: "programmatic"

Advertising | Perspectives | Revenue | Supporter Spotlight

Viewability + engagement = highly valuable impressions

Imagine that you’re driving down the highway and many of the billboards you pass are facing in the wrong direction. Advertisers paid for their messages to be displayed. However, some percentage of these ads have no chance of being seen.

If you were an advertiser, would you be willing to pay a higher price for only those that were guaranteed to be viewable? Or would you rather pay a lower price to buy all the billboards and roll the dice? Perhaps this is a simplistic way to look at the programmatic landscape, but I hope it makes the point. Ads that have a low probability of becoming viewable have little or no value.  

In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is King

If the above makes any sense, then why does the Media Rating Council

continue to enforce such a low requirement for viewable impressions?  The MRC deems that an impression counts as viewable when only 50% of the pixels are in view for one second. If your answer is that “it is what it is,” then perhaps we in the industry should raise our expectations. Let’s consider setting a higher standard for ourselves and our advertisers, AKA, the lifeblood of our businesses.

Viewable impressions are more valuable to advertisers, command higher CPMs, provide a better ROI, and increase publisher income. So, let’s find a sustainable way to increase supply without jeopardizing the quality of our content, degrading user experience, or resorting to disruptive devices.

Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose

You spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars annually creating exciting, informative, entertaining, beautiful, provocative, and inspiring content for your audiences. Your goal is to engage readers in this content so they spend more of their most precious resource, time, on your site. They read your stories and move from the home page to below the fold with deeper dives into your content. And ad units scroll into view and are revealed during these engaged user sessions.

Intuitively we already know that an ad you can see is worth more than a non-viewable one. However, logically, one that is viewable while you are engaged in consuming content that is of interest is even more valuable than the billboard you cruise past at 70 mph.

When I was a magazine publisher, ad buyers regularly asked for their ads to be placed “far forward on a right-hand page.” They believed that these were more likely to be seen than those within stories in the magazine. The reality was then as it is today: that an ad adjacent to content where a reader is engaged is far more likely to be seen and effective.

And the cookies came crumbling down

While Google’s recent announcement has given all of us a reprieve, we know that the times are a ‘changing. So how do we respond now that publishers have bought some time and tech companies have a longer runway to build alternatives?

There is no question that there will be dozens if not hundreds of “better” data mousetraps in the marketplace during the coming months. Yet the fact is that we already have many of the tools necessary to enhance the value of our websites for advertisers. Your sites already have the right target audiences. You capture their attention and interest with your content. And they’ve come to right place to enjoy that content. Maybe the missing link is that some of your billboards have been installed facing the wrong direction.

So, here’s the big idea. Serve ads only to readers when they are engaged in content and continue to serve them viewable ads for as long as they remain engaged.  It can be done. It is being done on hundreds of sites. (Check out Inc.com or Rightmove to see.) You can do it too. And when you do, your programmatic ad revenue will increase by 20-40%.

About the author

Bruce Brandfon is Chief Media Officer of Duration Media. Prior to that he was EVP of Webspectator, and before that VP and Managing Director at Publicitas. Before joining Publicitas, Bruce was VP and Publisher of Scientific American. He has also held leadership positions at The Philadelphia Media Network, Newsweek, and Time Inc. Bruce is Director of the Board of Advisors at Planet Forward, and an Adjunct Professor of Media Studies at Westchester Community College.

Perspectives | Revenue | Supporter Spotlight

Putting the value back in our industry’s opaque VAT

As 2020, without a doubt the most challenging 12 months in our lifetimes, stumbles to the finish line, one undeniable lesson learned for all publishers is the need to focus on the sustainability of revenue streams. The turbulence of the market, the unexpected upheaval from factors that are unanticipated and entirely out of our control may well have become the new normal. So now, more than ever, publishers need to choose AdTech partners wisely and select those who can demonstrate the ability to deliver a tangible contribution to the bottom line.

Value chain drain

Earlier this year the UK’s ISBA (the Incorporated Society of British Advertisers) released their Programmatic Supply Chain Transparency Study in association with the Association of Online Publishers and conducted by PwC. This groundbreaking examination of the digital industry’s programmatic advertising supply chain shines a bright light on the lack of transparency shrouding AdTech costs levied against publishers and advertisers. Estimates of these fees range anywhere from 15% to 51% of revenue lost by publishers and of non-media expenses paid by advertisers. Graeme Adams, head of media at BT Group, took part in the investigation and branded the lost cash “a big hole in the value chain.”

These unattributable “taxes” are slow leaks in the plumbing of our ecosystem. They expose both the opaqueness inherent in the marketplace and the lack of trust in advertising technology third-parties. Certainly, we all agree there needs to be a greater level of transparency and accountability throughout what has now become the world’s largest advertising segment. And studies such as these are necessary to facilitate adoption of broadly applied standards and practices. However, painting all AdTech providers with the same negative broad brush runs the real risk of our “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”

ROI vs. ROWe

Clearly there are technology vendors out there whose contributions to the efficacy of your programmatic advertising investment or a publisher’s bottom line are rightly suspect. Indeed, there are companies whose primary goal is self-serving. While they may promise to do no harm, they often fall short of guaranteeing measurable results and fully transparent visibility into their operations.

Their compensation is not directly tied to your ability to generate incremental income. Their tools are available for you to activate without the guarantee of a return on your investment. On the other hand, there are a select group of AdTech software providers who receive compensation only when their solution delivers measurable incremental revenue and income. That’s the ultimate measure of accountability.

Vendor or partner

Therefore, working with the right AdTech third-parties can make the difference, not only on your ability to “make your numbers,” but actually become the deciding factor between the survival of your business or its demise. We would modestly suggest that one way to decide who your best options are is to understand the nuanced differences between a vendor and partner:

Vendor: A party in the supply chain that sells goods and services to companies or consumers.

      A vendor is a general term used to describe any seller of goods or services.

Partner: A person or organization you are closely aligned with in some way.

                To partner is to join with another organization in a shared activity.

In summary we recommend a very careful evaluation among the myriad of third-party solution providers. Seek partnerships based upon full transparency, a shared commitment to mutually beneficial results, incremental revenue and income contribution to your bottom-line, and a guaranteed return on your investment.

About the author

Bruce Brandfon is Chief Media Officer of Duration Media. Prior to that he was Executive Vice President of Webspectator . He was Vice President and Managing Director at Publicitas. Prior to joining Publicitas, Bruce was Vice President of Sales for the Philadelphia Media Network. He has also held leadership positions at Scientific American, Newsweek, and Time Inc. Brandfon is Director of the Board of Advisors at Planet Forward. And he’s an Adjunct Professor of Media Studies at Westchester Community College. He contributes frequently to industry publications.

Advertising | Innovation | Perspectives | Revenue

How machine learning improves header bidding

If you have worked in the digital space in the past few years, you’ve likely encountered the term Machine Learning (ML) in some context. For those of us who aren’t tech experts, this buzzword may be a little daunting. However, these technologies are actually widely used across industries including digital advertising.

So, what exactly is Machine Learning? To explain that, let’s take a step back and talk about Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI describes a computer program’s ability to conduct a task that would normally require human intelligence, such as drawing conclusions based on data or recognizing patterns in a dataset. Machine learning is a step above this. A subset of AI, ML is the ability of programs to “learn” and self-improve as they get more data. This allows them to make more accurate decisions and predictions over time. This greatly reduces the human input required in performing crucial tasks.

How is machine learning positively impacting header bidding

Many publishers across the world rely on header bidding as the most efficient way to boost programmatic revenue. However, the technique in itself has undergone significant advancements. Initially, the majority of publishers used client-side header bidding to maximize yield through multiple demand partners. But it had its own challenges such as latency. 

Then, server-side header bidding arrived. It helped publishers combat latency issues but had its own shortcomings. Publishers now use a combination of both, which is generally known as hybrid header bidding. 

Among all of these advancements, one thing has remained constant: the use of machine learning in improving header bidding for all publishers. Therefore, the future of header bidding relies on how well technology companies can incorporate ML into improving header bidding tech. This will ultimately yield a robust solution that does not require any workarounds for its peripheral issues. 

Impact of machine learning on header bidding dynamics

Automatic selection of demand partners

One of the key challenges that publishers dealt with before heading bidding was a lack of control over demand partners. That is key to optimizing revenue. Without knowledge of demand partners, the entire system would lack critical transparency. 

Through the use of ML in header bidding, publishers get access to multiple demand partners. In fact, the selection process ois automatic, while simultaneously providing maximum yield. This massively benefits publishers as it saves them time for other activities while ensuring a consistent increase in revenue.

Timeout management 

For every publisher, managing timeouts is a tricky process. Timeouts can often result in lost revenue and publishers need to spend some time troubleshooting. However, ML has completely altered the game. Publishers can now use managed heading bidding solutions that utilize machine learning to fine-tune timeout settings in a way that maximizes yield but reduces latency.

Server-side header bidding

Server-side header bidding was introduced to reduce the latency issues associated with client-side header bidding. Instead of a user’s browser, the auction takes place on a server. Many publishers have gravitated towards a combination of client-side header bidding and this to get the maximum out of their investment. 

The credit however, goes to ML for helping the ad tech industry in advancing this technology. Machine learning helps in tracking deal performances through automated systems. All this is done in real-time with multiple demand partners in place.

Price floor optimization

Another added advantage with using ML in header bidding is optimizations of price floors. As mentioned above, ML is what makes algorithms smart. With a consistent tracking of data, patterns, trends, demand partners, ad requests, and related factors, ML can help in automated price floor optimization. Over time, this can considerably improve header bidding performance. 

Why machine learning is here to stay and scale

ML capacity to learn and improve is uncapped. This means that with time, as the programs amass and go through more data, their predictions will only become sharper, quicker, and more accurate. While ML may not replace humans anytime soon, these tools can definitely help marketing teams free up time to focus on high-level strategy, instead of repetitive data analytics.

Advertisers across the world are already witnessing increasing returns on their ad spends, thanks to ML-based optimization of everything from creatives, targeting, and bid values. However, advertisers are not the only ones who stand to benefit from the adoption of ML tools. Publishers typically receive a percentage of the revenue (through CPM, CPC or other models) and more effective advertising campaigns mean a chunk of a larger pie for publishers. 

However, publishers can by no means afford to be merely passive bystanders in the ML revolution. Thanks to the data at their disposal, advertisers, today, have a clearer picture of how, where and when their ads work best. In contextual advertising, for instance, publishers need to continually create content. However, they must also evolve based on their audience’s changing consumption patterns. This requires knowing your target audience deeply, and often working with advertisers to create a synergistic experience for the audience. Publishers, too, can leverage ML solutions for layout optimization to create greater value for advertisers, and by extension for their own platforms.

Overall, AI and ML tools offer an opportunity for all parties involved in advertising technology. Early adopters of these solutions will likely see the best outcomes and returns, and given that these tools are based on the premise of self-improvement over time, it is likely that those who adopt a wait-and-watch approach will face an uphill task of catching up.

About the author

Ankit is the CEO and Co-Founder of AdPushup, a leading technology company which helps web publishers and e-commerce companies accelerate their revenue growth. At AdPushup, he has led the product development, market strategy, and business development efforts, which has allowed the company to scale to 4 billion+ monthly impressions for over 300 publishers worldwide.

Advertising | Industry-Research

ISBA’s new research challenges the programmatic supply chain

The promise of programmatic advertising has always been its ability to target the right audiences, in the right context, at the right time. Buy and sell side participants look to maximize advertising opportunities, at the best possible price, leveraging technology to efficiently and smartly manage decision making in a dynamic environment. Unfortunately, the truth is far from the promise. Today’s programmatic ecosystem is far from delivering on trust, transparency, and efficiency across the digital marketplace.

A groundbreaking new report from ISBA, the British advertiser group, Programmatic Supply Chain Transparency Study, offers an end-to-end analysis of the programmatic supply chain that uncovers many of the reasons programmatic is failing to deliver on its promise. ISBA, in partnership with UK publisher organization AOP, commissioned PwC to conduct this two-year-long study that outlines the deep complexities of the ecosystem and the revenue impacts on advertisers and publishers.

The findings overwhelming speak to the complexity and the need to reform the programmatic advertising supply chain.

Complex ecosystem generates tracking chaos

The study set out to track every impression. However, only 12% (31 million) of the total 267 million impressions were effectively identified through the supply chain.

In total, there were more than 1,000 distinct supply chains detected across the 15 advertisers. The 31 million tracked impressions were matched end-to-end across 290 supply chains to the 12 publishers. The multitude of supply chain combinations adds opaque layers and complexity to the programmatic marketplace.

Publishers receive only 51% of all advertising spend

The waterfall of advertising spend shows 34% of all ad dollars goes to agency fees, DSP and SSP fees, and tech fees. Unattributable costs account for 15%.

The 15% unknown delta – nearly one-third of the supply chain costs – represents winning bids in the DSPs that could not be matched to any gross revenue recorded in the SSPs. There are many possibilities for the unknown delta, such as DSP or SSP fees that aren’t visible to post-auction, bid shading or post-auction financing arrangements, foreign exchange rates or reseller participation. However, no data provided mapped to the 15% delta

The study included 15 advertisers, 12 agencies, five DSPs, six SSPs and 12 publishers and represents approximately £0.1 billion of the UK’s programmatic ad spend or nearly two-thirds of the AOP’s digital ad revenues.

The ISBA research demonstrates a clear need to reboot. The starting zone needs to include contractual reviews, standardization of taxonomies, definitions and data protocols with an overarching focus on transparency across the board for all participants. Further, if the digital marketplace is to thrive, the industry must find ways to drive a higher percentage of advertising spend to publishers.

Advertising | Perspectives

Now is the time for publishers to take back control

The forces that were already turning the publishing world upside down have been accelerated by the ongoing global pandemic. And publishers have been busy battening down the hatches as best they can. However, as the conversation shifts from sheltering in place to returning to some form of “normal,” publishers have a unique opportunity to shape the “normal” to which they’ll return on the other side of this crisis. 

Right now, as business-as-usual operations take a temporary pause due to the lockdown, repercussions reverberate across many industries. This offers publishers an unprecedented chance to roll up their sleeves and reset their course within the media landscape. Publishers know the direction they need to head. They’ve just lacked the break in the daily grind (and quarterly revenue expectations) to implement the course correction that they know is necessary for long-term sustainability. A pause in “business as usual” was sorely needed. 

Now is the time. This opportunity may not come again. Let’s look at how publishers can use this “pause” to take back control of their own destinies. They can use their collective power to transform the ad tech and media landscape for the future. 

Game changing

There’s no winning a direct battle against the triopoly. But publishers can still flourish in an ad world dominated by Google, Facebook, and Amazon. They simply cannot do it on their own. And they can’t do it by continuing down the same path they’ve been on. Banners and programmatic media represent the (same) game being played by the major platforms, only publishers are not as good at it. It’s time to play a different game, and at a scale that truly matters. It’s time for publishers to unite around the engagement and influence that define their value to consumers.   

When it comes to industry-wide collaboration, consider it a form of “herd immunity.” Coming out on the other side of the pandemic, publishers need to start working together to influence the media and ad tech landscape. It’s time to act as one and take some of the control back that has been willingly relinquished over the years. To do this, they need to focus on four key areas that they must influence in order to change the landscape: technology, data, inventory, and KPIs.

Cooperation and collective action

A healthy media business is characterized by healthy competition. But let’s face it: Covid-19 has the industry reeling. So, now we must re-evaluate what is best for our companies, and for the industry as a whole. We have an opportunity to reimagine the consortium mindset for a new era. We can look at DCN’s own TRUSTX as an example. By collectively providing premium inventory at scale, we create a technology backbone we can build upon.

Publishers don’t need to split their attention to become tech companies in their own right. They shouldn’t try to recreate Facebook or beat the existing walled gardens at hyper-targeting users with direct response ads. Publisher power lies in engagement and influence — changing minds and informing with trust and credibility. To capitalize on that power, they must work with partners that are incentivized to act in the publishers’ best interests and don’t work against these traits. 

They need partners that can help them unite to achieve a level of differentiation that has impact at a scale that matters. A big part of that is seeking out technology that can improve the speed, experiences, and ad quality on their sites. Lest publishers forget, ads are part of their content, and the quality of their ad experiences reflects on their brands.

Take control of your data

With a collaborative foundation to support them, it’s time for publishers to get their data back in order. Much as the Covid-19 pandemic offers the pause publishers need to hit the reset button, we’re also at a unique once-in-a-decade crossroads that will allow publishers to push back on the external data sources that have undercut their opportunities for the past decade. 

The world has been awash in third-party audience data for years now. And the providers of that data have been capturing a large part of the media value chain, diminishing the importance of the supply itself and publisher context. However, with the shift to cookieless environments and rise in privacy regulations, many of the tactics of these third-party data vendors have been rendered unsustainable. And this, in turn, opens up new opportunities for open web publishers to reclaim that value for themselves.

The problem is that many publishers are going down the same path of either fragmented homegrown solutions that will not matter in the long run or outsourcing everything to a new vendor. No matter how much more publisher-friendly those new data vendors are than the last ones, this individual outsourcing puts publishers at risk of losing their influence again down the road. Working together changes this. Publishers can aggregate their influence to serve the needs of the industry versus only those of the most demanding publishers.

Take control of your inventory

If publishers can come together to bring collective scale to their advertising opportunities, they’ll also be able to accomplish another much-desired initiative to increase sustainability: They can pull their inventory out of exchanges. It’s no secret that the backdoor access these exchanges have to publishers’ premium inventory is undercutting the value of their inventory. Programmatic success by third parties works against publishers’ interests. But of course, simply pulling your inventory from these third parties is not enough. Buyers do want ease and accessibility, which is why cooperation is key. Publishers must give them a way to buy that’s easy and exclusive.  

Take control of your KPIs

Should publishers really be judged on how well they get users to click off their sites?  If you’re looking to drive conversions, hit an audience or drive low-cost clicks, throw in the towel now.  Publishers will never beat a Facebook on user data, an Amazon on capturing commerce intent or Google on capturing search intent — never. Pardon the bluntness, but trying to beat the giants at their own game is like choosing to be the team that plays against the Harlem Globe Trotters. Don’t play a game you can’t win. 

Publishers are great at driving engagement, influence, and deeper thought across a smaller, more selective audience. The ad experience and the KPIs around them should reflect that. As powerful as the large platforms are, they are still largely built on direct response. Digital branding and mid-funnel influence is still nascent and a game that publishers are better equipped to play and win. 

Covid-19’s derailment of the daily business treadmill offers a unique opportunity for publishers to hit the soft reset button on their current paths and unite for a more sustainable future. If they seize this chance, they have the opportunity to wield far greater control over the post-pandemic world into which they emerge. They simply need the courage to not go back to “normal.”

The time is right. Let’s move.

Advertising | Featured Post | Perspectives | Revenue

We need the news. And the news needs us.

“In a pandemic good info saves lives.”  

– Dr. Marc Lipsitch, professor of epidemiology at Harvard University

Like much of America, I was introduced to Dr. Lipsitch in the early weeks of our education on COVID-19 when he became a fixture of news coverage. His credentials are certainly impressive. However, it was also significant that Dr. Lipsitch was being presented as an expert by some of the most trusted news brands – from CBS News to The New Yorker, The Atlantic, and CNN.

On a normal day, I probably wouldn’t have been quite so attuned to his CV. (Hey, a Yale->Oxford->Harvard resume isn’t what it used to be!) But this was different. It was late February 2020, a period in which rumors and false information were running rampant across social media and our President was well, being our President, while the actual experts were warning about the seriousness of the pending pandemic. I was growing more and more uncertain and feeling vulnerable. Like many people, I was trying to figure out who I could trust to provide the closest thing to the truth in a rapidly evolving situation. In this case, Dr. Lipsitch earned my trust.  

“It is universally recognized that trust can only arise under conditions of uncertainty and vulnerability, i.e., when the trustor encounters risk, and when there exists a state of dependence between the trustor and trustee.”  

(Kelton, Fleischmann and Wallace, 2008, Trust in Digital Information, p. 3)

Big picture 

Most people have a favorite news source, be it their local news brand, syndicated news outlet, or a national news organization. And really, regardless of our personal preferences, they each have different strengths.  

For national and international news brands like The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, BBC, and their ilk, consumer trust is anchored by their reliability, consistency, and reputation established over time. This includes taking accountability when they fall short. Even the finest media brands occasionally make mistakes and self-correct as they pursue the truth. (“The truth is hard to find” and “worth it” ad campaigns from The New York Times brilliantly remind us of this.)  

In local news, an area hit hard over the past decade, the journalists are part of the same community as their customers. They overwhelmingly share the same impact as their readers and viewers when they report the latest news and work to get to the truth.

For Seattle news reporters covering the ongoing tragedy in Kirkland, the risks are real in a way that is akin to working in a war zone. There is no doubt that the public appreciates the work they are doing, now more than ever. If it weren’t for the need for social distancing, it would definitely be “hug a local journalist day.” We’ll save these hugs for another time and deliver them when we can. 

A higher mission

But today, we need much more than hugs. We need this trust to turn into funding for the costly work being done across the news industry. While these reporters are dealing with the same issues as the rest of America – shelter-in-place, vulnerable family members, work-from-home mandates, job and financial insecurity, and personal health risk – they’re not missing a beat in making sure we all stay informed.  

At no time in the past century has the news industry been more vulnerable, for both the humans and the news organizations informing the body public. Trust has value. And we need to support the individuals and organizations in which we place our trust.  

There is hope, signaled by the impressive growth of trusted brands’ subscription numbers over the past few years. Even in a world ruled by the attention economy, in which low quality and false information proliferates according to algorithms, the public’s willingness to invest in reliable valuable information is growing steadily. 

We applaud the choice of so many media organizations to drop their subscription gates during times of crisis when getting trusted information out to as many people as possible takes precedence over the bottom line. The choice to make critical information freely available once again demonstrates how news providers feel compelled to inform the public, full stop.  

It is heartening to see signs that subscriptions are coming in, despite publishers lifting these gates. However, publishers have made this move knowing full well that the likelihood of a widespread international recession may force difficult choices for everyone needing to reduce their expenditures in the near future.

Missed opportunity

However, the subscription model is far from the primary revenue source for news organizations. Most digital publishers still heavily rely on advertising support. And right now, there is a great deal of uncertainty in the advertising business. That said, we know that people are turning their attention to news at record rates. And we know that people need to make decisions about how and where they are going to spend their scarce resources of both time and money. 

Normally, advertising follows audience attention. So, a surge in interest around a particular subject would lend itself to a nice uptick in advertising placements. News, unfortunately, does not always work this way. Overzealous, often blunt, keyword blocking, and avoidance have long been an issue around news content, particularly as automation and advertising exchanges delivering “blind programmatic” have taken off.

Advertisers are wise to be wary of the company their ads keep and should remain vigilant about the impact of context. However, now is not the time for advertisers to hide from so-called “hard news.” The fact is that news – now and always – is a critical component of consumers’ media diet. And right now, it is literally a lifeline. 

The trust “halo”

There is a significant body of research to support how association with high reputation and trusted news experiences creates a “halo effect” for the advertising brands funding it. There is also the inverse, which shows the damage to a brand that can come from association with low-trust environments, like social media newsfeeds. DCN’s subsidiary, TRUSTX, was built entirely on the concept that trust must be married to transparency, simplicity, scale, and automation for real success. 

On the local level, advertisers supporting their local news outlet is perfect karma. Local advertisers tap into the trust established by journalists who bring personal interest and community knowledge to important issues. (Contrast this with the “absentee ownership” of tech platforms with little direct experience or accountability to the local communities they serve.) Truly local advertising also helps keep these valuable publications alive and well to support communities and the businesses in them. It is a virtuous circle if ever there was one. 

On the national and international level, advertisers that garner the public’s attention in the context of valued, authoritative media will accrue trust in a way that is only possible at moments like these. These opportunities are uniquely offered by news outlets such as the Associated Press, USA Today, NBC News, Vox Media, and the many dozens of other DCN members.  

Step up, news matters 

I was struck by a statement earlier this week from an executive at one of the “big four” advertising agency holding companies on the planet, in response to advertising technology companies marketing their capabilities to block hard news and coronavirus reports.  

“I will say this again. Please, don’t block or harm news sites during this time under the pretext of brand safety. The Coronavirus topic is unavoidable, news impressions are increasing, and responsible brands should be there in respectful and meaningful ways.”  

– Joshua Lowcock, Chief Digital Officer at Universal-McCann 

I wasn’t being facetious earlier this week when I called on Google, the largest gatekeeper of advertising on the planet, to turn off the ability to block advertising against Coronavirus for the next six months in order to maximize funding of news organizations. Yes, by doing this Google could lose advertising business to their so-called competition. But a monopoly like Google could show the same sort of leadership for which Mr. Lowcock so beautifully advocated. We must support quality independent journalism because, as Dr. Lipsitch stated, “in a pandemic good information saves lives.”  

Perspectives | Revenue

Ad quality is content quality. And quality content needs better classification

As stakeholders across the digital media industry work to fine tune the programmatic market, the issue of ad quality continues to reveal new challenges. This makes sense. “Ad quality” is really an umbrella term, and under that umbrella we find ad security, ad performance, aspects of brand safety, and more. But ad quality is about even more than the ad itself. It’s about content – on the publisher’s page and beyond. Content quality is a deeply significant piece of the perceived quality of an ad, and it needs to be considered more closely and carefully in these conversations.

For the sake of clarity, when we say, “content quality,” we’re not accusing your editorial team of slacking. We’re talking about making sure content is classified accurately and specifically, so fewer off-message ads end up next to that content. And we’re certainly talking about where the user goes when they click on an ad: What is on that landing page? Does the content of that landing page send a message that feels inappropriate or unwelcome, compared to the publisher page they just came from?

Faking it

Another question: Does the ad’s creative accurately represent the content it leads to? Yes, we’re all familiar with “fake news.” But the problem of “fake ads” has also spread, more quietly but widely. These ads may be inconsistent with the publisher’s ad policies. They may also feature misleading creative.

Sometimes, the creative tells all you need to know, and the ad is simply the wrong ad for the environment in question. Unfortunately, though, often the only way you can tell it’s the wrong ad for this environment is to click through and see where you land. And for the unsuspecting user, landing on a clearly inappropriate page can wreck user experience.

It is impossible to fully separate the publisher’s site from the ads on that site, and in turn from any of the landing pages behind any of those ads. When the user clicks through a seemingly innocuous ad and is surprised to end up on a highly partisan page, or a page with adult content, they may close out that site in seconds. However, they will remember which publisher site they came from. Publishers have a responsibility to their users to provide positive, relevant experiences, and it’s a liability to the publisher when an ad links out to a site the publisher shouldn’t be associated with.

Creative opportunities

But let’s go back to the right ad creative for the right environment. Inappropriate creative can be instantly spotted. And, at this moment in digital, a lot of categories could be considered inappropriate. Political ads are an obvious case. Major digital players, including Netflix, Spotify, and Twitter, are now banning political ads, or at least election ads. The trend is to get ahead of potential brand safety and UX issues by blocking entire ad categories wholesale.

However, when you block, say, all political ads, you likely also end up blocking harmless ads as well. For example, ads about local politics, which could ultimately be more of a service to the user than a source of controversy.

The nuclear option should not be a publisher’s go-to. Publishers should step back and ask: Are our content categories too broad? Is that inadvertently causing ad quality issues? When we categorize content, are we representing our brand and our vision accurately? These are questions publishers can answer, and the answers will not only help publishers monetize, but enrich the entire programmatic ecosystem.

Collaboration

This requires collaboration between publishers and their supply partners. Together, they can clarify and codify more accurate content verticals for the publisher’s site. Passing keywords to SSPs and other ad platforms is old hat. We need to go deeper for a couple reasons.

First, platforms do have an interest in demonstrating their value to publishers by delivering monetization, and keywords are only effective if targeting around them is enforced. Second, buyers won’t always demand an exact match of keywords anyway, if the site is a high-end premium publisher. They may value certain sites for the publisher’s name and brand higher than the page’s content itself.

Ad platforms need to recognize that when they collaborate with publishers to classify content more clearly and specifically, they open the door to more business for the entire programmatic market. Brand safety concerns have long been a huge deterrent to brands increasing their investment in programmatic. Alleviating those concerns will lead to more programmatic spend, more supply – which in turn makes the platform more valuable to publishers.

Creative solutions

All stakeholders need to look at and classify not only the ad creative, but the landing pages. In programmatic, it’s essential to classify landing pages in real time, before the page renders. While this may seem technologically daunting, ad quality and security vendors (such as the company I work for, GeoEdge) have already the groundwork for this kind of real-time detection of and response to issues in the programmatic market.

For publishers and ad platforms, it will likely be necessary to introduce more content verticals – more specific content categories that can be allowed or blocked, for the ad creative and for the content of the landing page. This will take some effort upfront but will create efficiencies in the long run that are truly useful on the programmatic level.

Advertising | DCN-Research

New DCN report offers insights on programmatic marketplace

Digital Content Next (DCN) has released a strategic advertising report, TRUSTX Programmatic Market Insights Report, which offers learnings on the mechanisms, practices, and performance in play in the programmatic market. The report is based on interviews with publishers as well as insights from the teams at DCN and TRUSTX – DCN’s cooperative and private marketplace launched in 2016. It gathers insights from publishers and distills best practices to help educate and drive a positive industry discussion in the programmatic ecosystem.

Publishers report that there is an overall institutional resistance to adopting a cost-per viewable model at scale within a media ecosystem predicated on low CPMs and often low-quality content. The report also uncovers some high-level insights into the programmatic market and offers an insider’s view into programmatic practices.

Supply-Path Optimization (SPO) and Demand-Side-Platform (DSP) Throttling

Two specific industry practice noted by publishers include:
Supply-Path Optimization (SPO) and Demand-Side-Platform (DSP) Throttling

This practice occurs when DSPs exclude an SSP’s bid based on bidding history in order to increase the likelihood that a bid will win. DSPs favor the SSPs with the highest number of queries per second (QPS). This enables DSP supply path optimization intelligence to “learn” how to win.

These SPO algorithms can be a barrier for smaller, newer SSP entrants. SPO algorithms, as they are designed today, favor established, larger scale SSPs. Increased visibility into the opaque ad tech ecosystem was cited as one of the most valuable benefits of participating in TRUSTX. Publishers believe that transparency is critical to strengthen the digital advertising market.

Hidden Reselling

It is not uncommon for SSPs to leverage indirect buying channels (other ad networks and exchanges) to tap into unsold inventory. These additional supply-chain interactions, through what are known as resellers, increase non-working media costs to buyers (additional ad-tech taxes), and diminish revenue to publishers. Reseller routes to premium publisher inventory are typically invisible to buyers, and sometimes not visible to sellers. (Note that TRUSTX does not permit any resellers in its supply-chain; all buyers get a direct path to all publishers.)

While publishers agree that TRUSTX has advanced the programmatic marketplace, they also see opportunity to further evolve marketplace dynamics. This includes marketing officers and agency executives directing their buyers to spend only in premium programmatic environments that are based on value-driven economics rather than auction-based systems predicated on cheap CPMs and cost

Advertising | Perspectives | Revenue

Spring is in the air for advertisers and premium publishers. But we need to cultivate the opportunity for revenue growth.

Maybe this is true everywhere. But in the northeast, we’ve reached the time of the year when nearly everyone has had just about enough of winter and is eager for warmer days. And, with OTT buds starting to bloom and brand safety and other concerns driving brands to invest with trusted partners, premium digital publishers may also be wondering if their long cold winter of online advertising could see signs of warming.

A recent report from MediaRadar, indicated that programmatic ad spend from a number of advertisers shrunk year-over-year from 2017 to 2018. While some brands may have become more reluctant to spend money in programmatic, directing funds out of the programmatic ecosystem is typically a temporary measure. Advertisers are building their internal expertise and seeking ways to get the benefits of programmatic (such as automation and the ability to leverage their increasing store of customer data) without the downside of low or unknown media quality. Emarketer has predicted increasing momentum towards private marketplace or programmatic direct deals through 2020. This reflects advertiser expectations that trusted publisher partnerships will best meet the demand for quality inventory.

Market Pressure

In addition to the growing sophistication of buyers, other trends in the marketplace are also conspiring to shift advertiser spend to premium publishers. Increasing consumer interest in privacy and data governance, kicked off by initiatives like GDPR and the California Consumer Privacy Act, will make it harder for lesser-known inventory providers to use targeting and consumer data to win brand dollars.

The rise of OTT gives premium publishers a unique carrot for digital ad buyers. This makes it difficult for lesser-known publishers to access inventory at scale across this new channel, unless there are significant changes to the ecosystem that empower smaller players. Given that publishers see the nascent OTT market as the first major bulkhead in winning the dollars currently devoted to linear TV, it’s unlikely that we’ll see the market open up to anywhere near the degree we have seen with mobile or desktop advertising. The winning platforms – companies like Apple, Amazon, and Roku – and the winning publishers – the major broadcasters and other household names for video content – are likely to keep the market under tight rein.

Value Matters & Values Matter

However, the wild card in this whole equation is the degree to which advertisers can feel confident that they are getting what they pay for. This applies not only to audience reach, but also a quality playback experience, meaning a viewable, brand-safe, and non-fraudulent impression. Without transparency on inventory quality, advertisers will continue to seesaw between investing in digital and pulling back spend to put it into other channels, as we have seen over the course of the last few years.

Transparency lays the foundation for trust between buyer and seller, and it is difficult for buyers and sellers to work together to establish this trust if they are relying on numbers from two different sources. All too often, publishers measure using one set of numbers while advertisers are using another. This inevitably results in discrepancies. It is difficult for publishers and advertisers to work together to support a transparent marketplace when they are measuring using two different methodologies. Standardizing on a single set of numbers on the buy and sell-side could also reduce the number of calls to supporting vendors’ ad code. It also makes it easier for buyers and sellers to work together to streamline the technology, reducing latency and other issues.

Standards and Issues

The good news is that the industry has never been in a better position to solve the problem of transparent cross-screen measurement. We as an industry have for the first time introduced measurement-specific ad standards. Most notably, these include the Open Measurement initiative, including the Open Measurement SDK, and Open Measurement for web. Prior measurement efforts piggybacked on technical standards like VPAID and MRAID, which were introduced to support rich media, not to provide accurate reporting on inventory quality. Having a standard designed expressly to support measurement that works across all devices is a great development.

We need to move the industry towards a single technical standard for measurement. We must get publishers and advertisers on board to utilize a common methodology to measure inventory quality. And we need to tackle measurement issues head on when they arise. This proactive approach is surely preferable to finger pointing and fighting over makegoods.

Now we are at the point where it’s either springtime or more cold lean years for publishers whose content deserves better. We can let dozens of competing proprietary approaches fragment the nascent digital TV ad industry. Or we can agree not to let that happen and work together to align the buy-side, sell-side, and the standards used for measurement. The outcome of that decision could mean the difference between five years to a fully digital ecosystem – or 15.

About the Author

Michael Tuminello is VP of Publisher Products at Integral Ad Science. He works to ensure premium publishers inventory achieves its full value potential. He plays an active role in helping to develop and improve industry standards. Michael is a two-time winner of the IAB Service Excellence award (2015 and 2019), as well as the MMA Smarties award for individual contribution to the mobile advertising industry. He was previously a Product Leader at Innovid, Sizmek, and Unicast. 

Advertising | Perspectives

Malware and redirects: Publishers need to protect customers now more than ever

As the programmatic revolution reaches its potential, bad actors continue to find innovative ways to exploit the system. The technological advances to increase advertising efficiency are the same ones targeted by bad actors who are incentivized to move at a faster pace in order to keep their revenue streams flowing. The result is an endless scourge of malware and auto redirects that threaten the viability of the overall digital advertising supply chain and the relationship the industry has with the end consumer.

Programmatic provides a green field to bad actors, who consistently evolve their attacks, bypassing defenses and attacking publishers and their digital customers. Once thought the answer to publisher woes, malware blockers have proven to be a short-term fix. Unfortunately, malware incidents have almost doubled since the solution’s relatively recent introduction. Clearly, something has to change. That’s why smart publishers are calling in the experts and forming a joint task force between their Ad Ops and the IT/security teams to combat the problem together.

Bad ads aren’t your only problem

Digital ads are not the only security issue that publishers need to watch. Digital publisher businesses have diversified their revenue streams, evolving from advertising-only models to introduce subscription services and merchandise stores such as the ones hosted by most major news outlets, like The New York Times, NBC, and the The Washington Post. These new revenue channels introduce a new significant security risk for publishers due to the storing of personal data and credit card information.

Publishers are an even more tantalizing target for cybercrime groups, especially those behind large-scale malicious campaigns like Magecart, ShapeShifter-3PC, and ICEPick-3PC. Cybercriminals increasingly use the digital ad supply chain targeting payment pages to steal personal data and payment card information. Publishers trust that the payment processing vendor provides perfect security. However, time and again, these vendors are compromised, either through a direct hack, employee error, outdated code or misapplied patches. Even worse, when a breach happens, the customer will hold the publisher accountable. Headline grabbing news regarding major breaches in the past year focus on the brand, not the vendor. That makes sense since the brand has the relationship with the consumer.

Cybercrime groups zero in on vulnerabilities in third-party code in the digital environment to execute their attacks. Digital ads serve as delivery vehicles for third-party code. Publishers also rely on third-party code to optimize and monetize the user experience. Beyond ad-related platforms, the use of analytics, content delivery systems, video platforms, and widgets carry the risk of being compromised, exposing the website and its users to harm. One recent example is the havoc wreaked by the JuiceChecker malware, which utilized vulnerabilities in third-party code to enable smart malware delivery, which evaded multiple detection efforts including malware blockers.

Interdepartmental partnership

These complicated scenarios leave publishers with difficult choices. While using ads and other types of third-party code help to generate more revenue, they also expose them customer base to more vulnerable code, ready to be exploited by cybercriminals who know how to find and exploit weaknesses. Exposing customers to these threats have long-term consequences. Failure to strike an appropriate balance between revenue and security kills the user experience and creates situations where customers don’t return.

Clearly, a modified approach is necessary if the balance is to be struck correctly. This approach involves bringing product and IT/security teams into the ad/revenue operations fold. An interdepartmental culture is already being fostered by many publishers in order to stay on the right side of legislation such as the EU’s GDPR and California’s upcoming Consumer Privacy Protection Act.

The need for digital security expertise

Moving forward, advertising and revenue operations must work with both product and IT/security teams to review publishers’ existing vendor relationships and strategize how to drive revenue without sacrificing security. Internal security teams are experts in the latest threats and can help develop a comprehensive plan to protect the digital environment and deliver a better user experience.

The ability to successfully generate revenue through multiple revenue streams is important. It is up to the revenue teams to engage with the security experts within your organization to make sure the Internet remains a safe place for advertisers, businesses, and users alike.

About the Author

Steve Stup is responsible for developing and overseeing the revenue and product strategy at The Media Trust. Previously, he ran digital strategy as the General Manager at The Washington Post. In this capacity, he was pivotal in the publication’s digital transformation effort and served on the leadership team that helped position it as one of the most innovative digital publishers in the industry. He led teams responsible for driving product strategy, ad innovation, and revenue operations. Prior to that, he was in technology sales at Lexis Nexis, and other recognized brands. He received his MBA from The George Washington University and is an alum of Virginia Tech.

Innovation

What is OTT?

Are you down with OTT?  Yeah, you know me.

O is for ‘Over’.  T is for ‘the’.  The last T? Well, it’s not that simple.

What exactly is the ‘Top’?  You probably haven’t heard two people define OTT alike. In fact, lately it has come to mean everything Other Than Traditional.

So, let’s start from the top, with a multiple-choice question:

What is OTT?

(a) STB: the set top box with your cable subscription and remote control using a private cable network also known as an MVPD (multichannel video programming distributor). These days, consumers can also stream their favorite content like Netflix via apps integrated with their STB. A lot of streaming content can also be accessed via Xbox and PlayStation gaming consoles that increasingly take centerstage in living rooms.

(b) STV: the smart TV.  No longer just a screen, these televisions are equipped with an operating system (e.g. Android TV) so that they can connect to the public Internet network and directly stream content.  Moreover, CTV (connected TV) streaming devices like Fire TV, Apple TV, Chromecast, and Roku, connect TVs to the Internet to stream consumers’ favorite content onto any TV no matter its IQ.

(c) iOS, Apple mobile Apps, and Android Apps on Google Play. These apps allow consumers to stream content on mobile phones anytime, anywhere. Users can also directly “cast” or project from a smartphone to televisions, which allows the mobile to serve as the new universal remote.  And let’s not forget how many people stream video over the Internet onto laptop, desktops, and tablet.

(d) All of the above.  Or, DTC- Direct to Consumer.  This is the right choice and what it’s all about.  Essentially, it’s all about the direct distribution of video content to consumers over the Internet, no matter how its accessed whether by streaming device, gaming console, Smart TV, mobile device, computer or STB. No cable company/private network required.

What’s not OTT

Often, there is confusion about PTV (Programmatic TV) — which is the enablement of digital data capabilities for greater audience insights than GRP (Gross Rating Points) and reports in real-time instead of months. There’s also its subset ATV (Addressable TV), which accomplishes one-to-one digital targeting capability.  PTV and ATV improve the targeting and reporting capabilities of both OTT and traditional linear TV.

For broadcasters and video creators, OTT offers a direct relationship (and possibly content subscriptions) with consumers outside of the cable TV universe.  But like OTT itself, the Internet-delivered video market is acronym-riddled and complex. A good grasp of the basics will help you understand the many opportunities ahead when viewership of various OTT video services will overtake traditional broadcast TV. This is predicted to happen within the next 5 years, according to a recent OTT Video Services Study.

In addition, revenues in the Global OTT market will increase to $18 billion in 2019, more than doubling the market from just three years ago.  This has massive implications not only for those who produce content, but for agencies, advertisers, and technology providers as well.  As companies in this space begin to assess how they will address this massive paradigm shift, it’s a good time to get familiar with the OTT opportunity.

Advertising | Perspectives

What building a digital media agency has taught us about navigating programmatic

For the first time, spending on digital advertising is greater than television. To experienced advertising professionals, the news didn’t come as a surprise. But its impact is significant for myriad reasons: in 2017, While industry watchers saw this coming for years, it still signifies a monumental shift in the ad business. And all of the players in the ecosystem – brands, agencies and ad tech companies – are scrambling to evolve to accommodate new requirements.

It was with these challenges in mind, and recognizing that digital advertising is now more than 20 years old – IAB/PWC tracks spending to 1996 – that my agency, Anagram, launched in 2015. Our guiding principles from day one have been to focus strictly on programmatic buying. We balance both creative and data inputs in our approach, and embrace transparency. We define requirements based on a campaign’s goals; select the best channels / exchanges / systems for the job; and then execute / monitor / optimize the media buys.

The most significant differences between programmatic and traditional media buying are the reliance on systems and software, amount of performance data available, and an advertiser’s ability to make adjustments on-the-fly (i.e., “mid-flight”). While these options present advertisers with varied new opportunities for performance improvement, they also increase their potential risk exposure by way of wayward spending, fraud, and visibility.

In addition to our guiding principles, we have defined three complementary axioms that continue to govern our company’s direction and behaviors, which we hope will help others better navigate programmatic.

1. ‘Digital-First’ Is No Longer Optional

Based strictly on costs, implementation speed, and flexibility, a ‘digital-first’ approach is a no-brainer. When comparing TV, print and radio options to digital in each of these areas, digital comes out on top.

But that’s only part of the story. A genuine ‘digital-first’ strategic mindset requires significant cultural and business process implications as well. As corporate brands have worked furiously to embrace this approach, the legacy advertising agency business model has lagged to adjust.

What’s worked for us is that we’ve taken the valuable components of the old ad agency structure – talent and creative chops – and fuse them with new agency requirements (technology, data management, speed-to-market) to establish a stronger foundation. This includes a new way to manage staffing, methodology, and partnerships.

2. ‘Integrated Marketing’ is Easy to Say and Difficult to Realize

Big data, for all of its benefits, has also introduced a litany of challenges into the marketer’s day-to-day activities. While the media landscape has fragmented exponentially over the past decade, it has also created an overflow of data (which has resulted in introducing terms like ‘data lakes’ into the marketer’s lexicon) that requires management and analysis. Additionally, the “big three” issues that have been front-and-center in the digital ad business for several years now – viewability, fraud, and transparency – are now on the radars of non-marketing executives. So, marketers must be prepared to involve CEOs and even CEOs in big data discussions.

One way to tackle these “omni-channel” (another popular buzzword) challenges is through integrated analytics dashboards. But these require the incorporation of data from “walled gardens” like Facebook, Amazon, and Google. While difficult to acquire and organize, once wrangled, provide a vital component to solutions that help create an orderly view of the world, and simplify analysis and marketing mix allocations.

3. If You’re Not Confused, You’re Not Paying Attention

While market consolidation in the marketing technology is inevitable – according to one estimate there are more than 5,000 companies in the category – it’s not going to happen in a meaningful way for several years, or perhaps even a decade. For every mammoth, deep-pocketed concern like Adobe, Amazon, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, Salesforce, SAP, there are hundreds of pesky (and often well-funded) startups flooding the market. It is critical not only to rely on a trusted suite of proven technologies to deliver client solutions, but also to constantly evaluate new market entrants, because this market moves fast.

Long-Term Keys to Success: Focus & Adaptability

I’m proud of the progress that Anagram has made in the few short years since our inception. But I know there’s still a lot of work to be done. Staying committed to the core plan, while at the same time being flexible to accommodate evolving marketing conditions, will be an ongoing challenge. But we believe this is how all agencies will need to operate in order to thrive in the new marketing environment. Buckle up!

About the author

Adam Cahill is the President of Digilant US and CEO of Anagram, a Boston-based programmatic agency. A 20-year veteran of the digital industry, he went all­in on programmatic in 2009, launching one of the first agency trading desks. Before joining Digilant, Adam founded Anagram, a digital media consultancy built for the modern marketing era. Previously, he served as Chief Digital Officer at Hill Holliday and SVP/General Manager of Carat in Boston. Adam has been named a Media All-Star by Adweek, a Media Maven by the Ad Club, and has led teams that have twice been named Media Agency of the Year.

©2024 Digital Content Next. All Rights Reserved.