Made for Advertising sites are a nefarious player has emerged in a ever-evolving landscape of online advertising. Originally published on June 26, 2023, this article sheds light on the deceptive practices employed by MFAs and the dire situation they pose to the digital advertising ecosystem. As of this update, we delve deeper into the issue, exploring the latest developments, including a video explainer skit. Read on to understand the gravity of the situation, the tactics used, and potential solutions.
Understanding the Made for Advertising Phenomenon
MFA sites are digital chameleons, cunningly masquerading as prime advertising real estate while ensnaring unsuspecting advertisers in their web of trickery. Towering banner ads and strategically positioned video players create a cacophony of commercial chaos, giving the appearance of a digital nightmare. However, behind the scenes, programmatic advertising systems perceive these sites as golden opportunities – more likely to be seen and cheaper than other alternatives.
The Programmatic Advertising Game
At the heart of the MFA issue lies a flaw in programmatic advertising. The unattainable desire for cheap yet high-quality media has given rise to MFAs. Marketers, driven by superficial success metrics like cost per viewable impressions, unknowingly contribute to the perpetuation of this deceptive ecosystem. Damon Reeve, CEO of the U.K-based publisher alliance Ozone, aptly describes MFAs as a programmatic system being gamed, emphasizing the misalignment between ad-tech metrics and genuine business outcomes.
Fraud or Gray Area?
The question of whether MFAs constitute fraud depends on industry standards. While they may not meet the criteria for invalid traffic (IVT), their practices raise concerns. MFAs enable marketers to reach real users, but their engagement is often short-lived, acquired through content recommendation companies rather than organically earned. This blurs the line between legitimate traffic and potential IVT, resulting in ads that yield little impact on consumer behavior.
The Scale of the Problem
The true extent of the MFA problem remains elusive, given the clandestine nature of programmatic advertising. The ANA’s examination of programmatic ad dollars revealed that MFAs accounted for 21% of audited impressions, translating to 15% of the total spending by 21 advertisers. However, it is highly likely that the issue extends beyond these figures, infiltrating private marketplaces designed to be free from dodgy inventory.
Private Marketplaces: Not Immune to Deception
Contrary to their intended purpose, private marketplaces are not always free from deceptive inventory. Programmatic consultancy Jounce Media’s findings indicate that a significant number of private marketplaces include MFA inventory. These marketplaces, instead of being premium, often resemble a programmatic bait-and-switch tactic, deceiving advertisers with subpar offerings.
Concerns and Conversations
The recent investigation by the ANA has ignited fervent conversations among industry stakeholders. Ad executives stress the importance of prioritizing high-quality media over low-cost, low-value inventory, while marketers express frustration toward ad tech vendors for enabling the proliferation of MFAs. Consultants advocate for buying ads exclusively from trusted sellers, emphasizing the need for action beyond mere discourse.
Challenges to Tackling MFAs Head-On
Despite the rising concerns, the likelihood of marketers tackling MFAs head-on remains slim. Historical patterns indicate a consistent failure to curb the growth of such issues. Ad tech vendors, initially dismissive of MFA inventory, are now embracing it, creating more opportunities for deceptive impressions. Publishers are also jumping on the trend, employing MFA specialists to maximize ad revenue. The challenge is compounded as MFAs become adept at acquiring traffic at remarkably low costs.
The Way Forward: Meaningful KPIs and Industry Consensus
Addressing the MFA issue requires a paradigm shift in how success is measured. Marketers must consider adopting more meaningful Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) aligned with tangible business metrics. This shift would challenge the very foundation that allows MFAs to persist. Lou Paskalis, Chief Strategy Officer at Ad Fontes Media, suggests that industry consensus on what constitutes an MFA website could alleviate the issue by distinguishing between brand safety and brand suitability.
The dark world of Made-for-Advertising sites poses a significant threat to the integrity of online advertising. As the industry grapples with the challenges posed by MFAs, a collective effort is needed to redefine success metrics, hold ad tech vendors accountable, and establish industry standards that prioritize quality over quantity. Only through such concerted actions can advertisers hope to break free from the web of deception spun by MFAs and restore trust in the digital advertising ecosystem.
In the realm of digital advertising, protecting your brand and ad spend is paramount. As the industry grapples with the challenge of Made-for-Advertising (MFA) sites, Twinleon stands as your ally in the fight against deceptive practices.
By using our service you’ll save on wasted invalid ad clicks and avoid the need to regularly submit to Google Ads for a refund since we block many of the malicious sources before they can be clicked on by them. Let’s get it started!