A veil of transparency or a shroud of deceit? Advertisers and the war on ad fraud
I recently attended ‘A War on Fraud’ panel during Advertising Week Europe – with participants including an agency trading desk, fraud vendor, ad exchange, two publishers, and a trade association. However, there was something missing. The advertisers themselves were conspicuous in their absence during the discussions surrounding the topic of ad fraud.
During the panel, one clear question came to mind – are the advertisers being protected by the industry, or are they being kept in the dark about the fraud epidemic that has a stranglehold on the digital ad industry? Or, are we purposely keeping advertisers away from these conversations to prevent them becoming too aware of the true scale of the issue?
‘A War on Fraud’ explored the key role of an ad exchange in preventing ad fraud, while outlining how publishers and advertisers should also be taking responsibility; it was certainly an insightful session with some interesting points raised.
The industry continues to maintain that advertisers need to take responsibility, but who is telling them this if they aren’t present to hear it?
An increasing number of US companies, such as American International Group, are actively standing up to online ad fraud, and demanding evidence that ads served have been seen by real humans rather than bots. Perhaps buoyed by recent figures – the Association of National Advertisers revealed that advertisers are losing $6.3 billion a year to so-called 'click fraud' – we are starting to see advertisers prioritise online ad placements where fraud protection technology is in place to prove that ads have been viewed.
At Forensiq, we will be engaging with 300 advertisers this summer at an event with ISBA, the advertising regulatory body, as we believe that advertisers have the right to transparency. This is not about spreading widespread fear and panic, which would result in budgets being pulled from the digital ad industry. Instead, it is about providing advertisers with the truth of the situation – not the extrapolated numbers being bandied around.
So what is the truth about digital ad fraud? One member on the panel summed it up perfectly, commenting: “If it’s too cheap to be believable, it probably is.” If advertisers buy cheap, blind inventory they will be left exposed unless fraud protection software has been implemented to monitor performance. If inventory is purchased from well-known, premium publishers, advertisers will be able to protect themselves more effectively.
It’s not rocket science, simply common sense measures that the whole industry – including advertisers – needs to embrace.
Julia Smith is a consultant at Forensiq and Erol Soyer is managing director, international at Forensiq