Ads.txt stands for “Authorized Digital Sellers,” and the aim of the initiative is to increase transparency in the way that programmatic advertising is sold to protect buyers from spoofers. Find out all you need to know about the IAB's initiative to fight fraud and how to implement it.
Programmatic marketplace optimisation continues to force change across the buy and sell side of the ad tech ecosystem, as deal flow stayed active over the summer months. Signs of consolidation and/or specialisation (buy or sell side) are abundant; in other words it’s ‘go time’ for many companies in ad tech. We have officially reached the awkward stage of adolescence as an industry and the next growth spurt will reveal what a more mature marketplace may look like as the world comes into focus
Much has been written and debated on the pages of the ad tech industry’s trade publications, websites, and blogs. There is no shortage of opinions, rationalisations, and debates for why things happen, with many points of view, forecasts, and predictions. We have seen many wins and many disappointments. But, there is no denying that in the real world (the one that happens when you shut down your computer or turn off your phone) history has a tendency of repeating itself. Guess what? It does in ad tech too!
The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) Tech Lab have recently introduced ads.txt as a means that can help advertisers improve their brand safety and publishers reach their legitimate ad dollars. But, how will that work and are there any concerns? The answers are below.
Many have sought to prevent potential video latency by creating systems solely designed to facilitate video ads. The most forward-looking have also built comprehensive user interfaces that offer more control over header bidding bidders and placement — so publishers have full visibility of buyers and the ability to grant or deny access, and brands know exactly where their ads will end up.
Brand safety has rocketed to the top of the marketing agenda for almost every brand on the planet, following scandalous revelations by British newspaper The Times that companies, charities and even governments were unwittingly funding extremist groups through programmatic advertising on Google’s YouTube.
Real-time bidding (RTB) is great for scale and efficiency, but it can come with risks for brand image, as recent developments have highlighted. Columnist Alex Bornyakov discusses these risks and explores whether it is possible to increase transparency in this programmatic channel. Alex Bornyakov discusses these risks and explores whether it is possible to increase transparency in this programmatic channel.
As criminal activities go, digital ad fraud has a certain appeal. The potential gains are high, the costs and resources required are minimal, and there have been very few successful convictions thus far. With Hewlett-Packard classifying ad fraud as the most attractive type of hacking in terms of financial gain and effort, it’s no wonder this type of criminal enterprise is thriving.
Despite accounting for an impressive two-thirds of US digital ad spend in 2016, the path of programmatic has by no means run smooth. While it is true that programmatic has proven its worth as a cost-effective, far-reaching method of advertising, recent industry developments – such as the revelation that major brands have unknowingly funded terrorism by allowing ads to appear alongside extremist content – have brought long-harbored concerns around brand safety swiftly to the fore.
October 30, 2017
September 07, 2017
July 26, 2017
June 15, 2017
May 31, 2017
May 16, 2017
May 03, 2017
April 27, 2017