Advertisers looking to change the way they buy media are being put in the spotlight in the US with claims it is defunding conservative media. In this op-ed James Rose, managing director ANZ at Channel Factory explains, these claims ignore the inconvenient reality of where this disparity hits hardest.
During a US Congressional hearing last week some of the biggest businesses in the advertising industry, including GroupM and Unilever, were labelled “cartel” members for adopting standards designed to make the internet, and world, a better place.
This particular US congressional hearing was looking into the GARM (Global Alliance for Responsible Media) initiative, which has been set up by no less than the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA) to help advertisers make more conscious choices around what their money supports online.
Anyone who uses the internet can see there’s been a huge polarisation, particularly when it comes to US media. This can create many problems in society and potential issues for advertisers who don’t want their ads appearing next to something that isn’t aligned with their values.
This hearing did bring to light the complexities of the advertising industry’s efforts to ensure brand safety and suitability. While scrutinising the frameworks guiding our industry is essential, it is equally crucial to approach these efforts with a balanced perspective.
Labelling any attempt to improve this landscape as left-wing, woke, or cartel-like is not only reductive but undermines the collaborative efforts of industry stakeholders. These frameworks are not about imposing arbitrary restrictions but fostering a safer, more respectful online environment.
The Evolution of Digital Advertising: From Chaos to Conscious Curation
The evolution of digital advertising has been a journey from chaos to cautious, and now, a more conscious approach.
Whenever we get a new medium, there’s a ‘Wild West’ period, where ads are placed everywhere with little understanding or regard for brand safety. The internet was a perfect example of this, where too many advertisers found their ads appearing next to content and views in direct opposition to their brand values.
As the web matured and went more mainstream, this chaotic period shifted towards stringent measures like keyword blocking and allow/block lists, which, while effective in certain aspects, inadvertently removed vast swathes of content from monetisation, causing inadvertent collateral damage.
One good argument against the ‘woke’ accusations is that this kind of prevention, which is still common today, almost always punishes more niche and ‘progressive’ content creators by blocking content around topics that may be perceived as divisive like trans rights, sexuality and even feminism.
Today, we are witnessing a more nuanced approach with the adoption of frameworks like GARM, which guide us in making more inclusive and contextually aware decisions. At no point does GARM prescribe advertisers should ascribe to any particular views, left or right leaning. Instead, it sets out some principles to help brands make better buying decisions.
With news businesses of all types battling for advertising budgets, it is understandable they may shy away from content, which is harder to monetise at the current time. Is that a status quo we want to maintain?
This conscious approach aims to balance safety with content monetisation, ensuring that ads appear in environments that align with brand values without stifling the diversity of available content.
Brand Suitability at the Individual Brand Level
Brand suitability is something we spend a lot of time thinking about at Channel Factory, and too often the traditional one-size-fits-all approaches of block lists et al are having a significant drag effect on their advertising performance by keeping them away from content which would expose them to much broader audiences.
Put simply, a brand-suitable approach is fundamentally tailored to the individual brand level. Frameworks such as GARM serve as vital tools to guide us in creating safer digital advertising environments. They provide a structured approach to mitigate risks associated with inappropriate content while promoting responsible media practices.
Diversity of views and open conversations around societal issues are incredibly important for all of us, and something every advertiser should be thinking about supporting more consciously. This isn’t about being overtly political (most consumers don’t want businesses forcing their views on them) but rather exposing your business to a wider subset of people.
The irony of this recent set of criticisms isn’t lost on me because, without change, it is the people and publications in less mainstream communities, rather than right or left-wing commentators and news sites, who struggle the most to monetise their content and find support to continue these conversations.
Advertising has a big role to play in this, because it is what funds the internet. So being more conscious and considered in where your advertising shows up will help in no small way to making the internet a better and more balanced place for everyone.
