Advertising Technology

Fighting over banner ads, plus a serious downer

Banner ads, for better or worse, got their fair share of the headlines this week. Some hate them, some still love them, but the expertier of experts agree that they're still quite effective. So effective, that fraudsters are still trying to cash in, these days via “domain laundering.” Lastly, despite what else you made have read, the only thing this week that actually came close to #BreakTheInternet was the DFP outage.

  • Ad Blocking: Can Publishers Catch A Break? (MediaPost) – New data show that nearly 30% of U.S. web users are using ad blockers, and that number goes up to 41% for the much-coveted Millennial generation. When ads are blocked, ad buyers are left with the chance to spend their money on some other impression somewhere else. Publishers, however, see that impression gone forever and with it the chance to earn revenue from it. So it makes sense that 76% of publishers are worried about ad-blockers. But what can be done about it?
  • In Defense of Banner Ads: Everybody Hates Them, but They Work (AdAge) – New York Times tech columnist Farhad Manjoo blatantly declared the fall of the banner ad last week, protesting that not only are they ineffective but that “they have ruined the appearance and usability of the web, covering every available pixel of every page with clunky bits of sponsorship.” Despite the claims by Manjoo — just the most recent of many — the banner ad business remains alive and well today. The best defense of the banner ad's effectiveness came from a person whose job it is to make sure client money is spent in the method that will yield the highest return. Tim Goosmann, chief creative at agency True North, writes in AdAge that his agency continues “to design and serve online display advertising … as an integral part of any multichannel campaign.”
  • Domain ‘Laundering' Is the Latest Fraud Threat (Wall Street Journal) – There wages a not-so-secret war on ad fraud, featuring players from all sides of the equation. Take a look at one of the latest favored fraud technique from the pilferers of the programmatic landscape. It's called “domain laundering,” and it can make marketers thing they're buying legit ads on proper sites, but what they're actually buying is still (somewhat) legit traffic but on site's they're rather have no part of in purchasing.

Also, Google's DFP went down, here's the fallout …

By |November 14th, 2014|Advertising Technology|0 Comments

20 years later, banner ads tougher to kill than cockroaches

There's been a lot of chatter over the past week about banner ads. Perhaps it was spurred by the 20th anniversary of the first banner ad that took place last month. Perhaps the online ad pundits decided to take a week off from writing about fraud, transparency and measurement.

Either way, it just seems like it was time for someone to call for the death of the banner ad. You know, kind of like how 2015 will be the year of mobile. Again.

New York Times tech columnist Farhad Manjoo blatantly declared the fall of the banner ad last week, protesting that not only are they ineffective but that they have “they have ruined the appearance and usability of the web, covering every available pixel of every page with clunky bits of sponsorship.”

Every pixel, that is, besides those taken up by his 1,200-word opus. That's pretty hefty coverage, by the way.

Despite the claims by Manjoo — just the most recent of many — the banner ad business remains alive and well today.

Take the opinions of Manjoo's podcasting co-host, Business Insider writer Jay Yarow. To say that Yarow disagreed with Majooo's claims would be a bit of an understatement, and you can listen to his retort here at about the 11-minute mark.

Manjoo's podcasting co-host wasn't the only one to pick apart the claims of the columnist who works for a publication heavily funded by ad revenue (there were four banner ad placements on the page that displayed his column). The Wall Street Journal's Jack Marshall followed up with his response, adding that the “banner ad might be widely disliked by journalists, consumers, publishers and even marketers, but there's little evidence to suggest spending on banners is reducing significantly.”

But probably the best defense of the banner ad's effectiveness came from a person whose job it is to make sure client money is spent in the method that will yield the highest return. Tim Goosmann, chief creative at agency True North, writes in AdAge that his agency continues “to design and serve online display advertising … as an integral part of any multichannel campaign.”

He continues:

Through complex analytics, we know when a person first sees an ad, if and when they later used search to follow up on the message, and when they landed on the website. Deciding to visit a website didn't just come to them in a vision. When someone purchases at retail, you don't credit the cashier with getting him or her into the store.

Many have declared that banners are ignored and ineffective. Behavior tells a different story. We see the banner's influence again and again. When we have stopped using banner display ads for clients, we've seen traffic, search and conversions plummet.

…

I'm tired of pundits declaring the patient dead without first bothering to check the pulse. If the data tell us otherwise, we'll be the first to put our client's money elsewhere.

Compiling these responses isn't meant to pile it on against Manjoo. In fact, it's healthy for the industry to have these conversations. They act as a forced pause, getting decision makers in the space to “check their work,” so to speak — to make sure the current tools in the box are the right ones to get the job done.

Everything must be tracked and measured to ensure continued effectiveness. Those on both the sell-side and buy-side are doing that, and the data backs up that which we already know — the banner ad is still an effective marketing tool.

Therefore, as Goosmann closes his column, “the banner lives.”

By |November 11th, 2014|Advertising Technology|0 Comments

Programmatic progress on several fronts

The industry has been talking about fraud, viewability and measurement for a while now, and these days one thing is becoming crystal clear — it's going to take cooperation on all sides to get any of this solved. This week, we've seen promises of fraud-free ad traffic and a call to action for publishers to help advertisers move past the CTR as the top measure for success in digital advertising.

  • Taking programmatic advertising from black box to glass house (VentureBeat) – It's a pretty widely accepted belief that no matter what the transaction, people want to know what they're spending their money on. They want to know how much they're spending and what they're getting in return. The programmatic ad scene can be no different, and advertisers are tired of “taxation without representation.”
  • A Better Programmatic Supply Chain Will Root Out Fraud (Adage) – Fraudsters are thriving on the supply side because that's where its easy to get away with it. That being said, it's the supply side that needs to be cleaned up. The industry is starting to take steps to get this cleaning done, but that forward momentum must continue.
  • Publishers Need To Help Brands Move Beyond The CTR (AdExchanger) – Another of the growing pains our industry is working through is that of measurement. Of course advertisers want the best return for their investment, and for years that's been measured in how many people click through to their websites, landing pages, social pages, etc. Many on the sell side argue that CTRs aren't the best measurement of digital campaigns. Check out these clear examples of how CTR simply isn't the best measure of success, and what can be done about it.
  • Fixing Programmatic Trading Models (Exchange Wire) – Big-time programmatic representatives were on had at ATS New York to discuss several fork-in-the-road situations currently facing the entire industry.

By |November 7th, 2014|Advertising Technology|0 Comments

Mobile growth, ad attention and a birthday

Usage of mobile advertising is growing faster than any other digital ad format, but what is this doing to publishers' overall CPMs and revenue? Big brands are no longer putting up with worthless impressions, so check out how many a company like Kraft is ignoring. Publishers are new measurement standards beyond viewability, and are looking for additional ways to gain attention to the ads they're websites are serving.

Also, the banner ad turned 20 years old this week.

Here are a few of the headlines we found interesting this week …

  • The Mobile CPM Train Wreck (MediaPost) – Taking the information from the previous article and turning it toward the publishing sector, what does this mobile growth mean for ad revenue. The growth in mobile is replacing desktop usage, as opposed to adding to a publisher's overall audience. Since the CPMs of mobile banners are far less than the CPMs of desktop display banners, this is creating lower overall revenue for some publishers. So with that in mind, what can be done about it? “Fight back and raise CPMs,” this article says.
  • How Publishers Are Seeing The Light On Ad Blindness (AdExchanger) – Purch CEO Greg Mason writes that the industry's problem isn't about ads being viewable to real people (as opposed to bot), but in getting those ads actually viewed by the audience. Ad blindness, a person's tendency to simple ignore ads, is the real issue. The solution, Mason writes, is relevancy, simplicity and placement.
  • Defining Bricks to Build the House of Time and Attention (Digital Content Next) – Meanwhile, Digital Content Next CEO Jason Kint writes this week about the publishing world transitioning to what he calls the AV World — as in, the world “after viewability.” Kint takes a look at time-based measurement, but stresses that publishers can't carry the entire burden of the much-needed transition.

THE BANNER AD'S MILESTONE: Also this week, the banner ad turned 20! Ad Week offers an infographic timeline of the banner ad's existence, and Fast Company breaks down the history of the banner ad.


By |October 31st, 2014|Advertising Technology|0 Comments

The futures of programmatic retargeting, measurement and video

Thanks to some new uses for big data, there are going to be some different ways advertisers can retarget consumers. Mobile video is about to see some exponential growth in terms on inventory bought, but advertisers are still having trouble finding quality video in general available through real-time buying. Publishers are looking to move beyond impression-based pricing, and just what are some of the other challenges the programmatic industry faces going forward?

Here are some of the headlines we found interesting this week:

  • Retargeting By Any Other Name Is Still Retargeting (AdExchanger) – Retargeting has long been a strategy of the programmatic advertising space, and ecommerce sites have been huge beneficiaries of the tactic. As big data becomes available to more types of advertisers, the possibilities increase for other industries, such as consumer packaged goods. They're even able to use offline-to-online retargeting to convert consumers.
  • Quality Online Video is Scarce, Rubicon Project Says (Wall Street Journal) – Taking a shift back to video in general — mobile and desktop — there is no shortage of advertisers wanting to buy mobile inventory. There's just one problem, and it's that many are saying quality mobile inventory is pretty scarce. Much of the best inventory is still being sold directly, and there's little left for the programmatic space.
  • Survey: 80% of Premium Publishers Want to Sell Ads Based on Time (AdAge) – It looks like more publishers are looking for alternatives to impression-based metrics when it comes to ad pricing, and instead opting for a future that measures the amount of time ads are viewable to readers. AdAge reports, “60% are considering transacting based on time, 4% are already testing it, 8% will begin testing it in 2014 and another 8% plan to test it in 2015.”
  • The biggest challenges programmatic advertising faces (Digiday) – Several industry executives weigh in on the subject, and bring up things like “moving beyond cookies to publisher cooperation to the hype surrounding it as the be-all and end-all when it's just a part of the media equation.”

By |October 24th, 2014|Advertising Technology|0 Comments