What do you think is the biggest problem in ad tech? 

Some might say the loss of revenue, others might say privacy concerns that create increased signal loss and more difficult audience targeting, and I’m sure there are a host more issues to list off. However, many problems in the industry are linked to a lack of transparency in the supply chain, says Claire Atkin, Co-founder and CEO of Check My Ads. 

Digital advertising, long been plagued by a lack of transparency, allows bad actors to profit from spreading disinformation and extremism online. In a recent keynote session, Atkin warned that publishers and advertisers should address these issues and restore trust in digital advertising.

“If advertisers are given the opportunity to have control over their ads, we will actually have a media system that works for you,” shared Atkin. 

Without more transparency, advertisers don’t know where their ads are showing up, often supporting the very things they want to avoid.

Beyond supply chain issues, Atkin highlighted how digital advertising hurts quality journalism by diverting funds to low-quality, disinformation-filled sites. To address this, she encourages publishers to build direct relationships with advertisers and boost their brand strength, aiming to restore trust and realign incentives in the industry.

Check My Transparent Supply Chain

The opaque nature of digital advertising has devastatingly impacted publisher revenue. As Atkin pointed out, many advertisers are blissfully unaware of their ad placements. “Our ads are off the asshole of the internet,” one executive confessed after Check My Ads audited their campaigns. 

This lack of visibility and control has allowed unscrupulous actors to profit at the expense of legitimate publishers. “Hundreds of thousands of dollars could be in your bank account daily, but it’s not — it’s going to fund chaos, not just disinformation, but useless stuff,” Atkin said. The systematic defunding of quality journalism results from advertisers’ inability to monitor and govern their ad placements effectively. 

Atkin urges publishers to build direct brand relationships to combat this trend rather than relying on intermediaries. If advertisers control their ad placements, Atkin believes publishers will have a media system that works for them. By strengthening their brand equity, publishers can attract advertisers willing to pay a premium to be associated with trusted, high-quality content — a strategy that could help realign incentives and restore financial viability to the news industry. 

Check My Disinformation

Unfortunately, digital advertising has inadvertently become a breeding ground for disinformation and extremism. The very structure of the ad tech industry has created perverse incentives that allow bad actors to profit from the spread of harmful narratives, explained Atkin.

“Around every politician that is politically advancing due to disinformation and hate, there is now a donut of Grifters making money off those same narratives,” Atkin said.

Since brands lack visibility into some of their ad placements, they have unwittingly funded websites and individuals peddling conspiracy theories, hate speech, and outright lies. Atkin’s organization, Check My Ads, works to identify and defund these malicious actors, successfully targeting prominent figures like Dan Bongino and Steve Bannon.

Addressing the root of the problem, Atkin argued that the ad tech industry must embrace a new era of accountability and transparency. She advocates for hourly log-level data and “know your customer” requirements to empower advertisers and help them monitor their placements, ensuring purveyors of disinformation are not co-opting their brand messaging. 

By realigning the incentives within the supply chain, publishers and advertisers can start reconfiguring digital advertising from a conduit for misinformation to a force for supporting quality journalism and democratic discourse. 

All in all, this will create a healthier supply chain that allows publishers and advertisers to get the most bang for their buck.

The post Check My Ads, Check My Transparency, and Check My Disinformation: Notes From AdMonsters Publisher Forum Boston appeared first on AdMonsters.

Prominent disinformation scholar Dr. Joan Donovan has filed a legal complaint against Harvard, saying she was fired for criticizing Meta.

She joined Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University in 2018 as the Technology and Social Change (TASC) project was just getting underway. As a researcher who has studied the ways that nefarious manipulate the media, she was uniquely suited for the project, which describes its mission as “dedicated to understanding how media manipulation impacts public conversation, democracy, and society.”

The following year, she was promoted, and under Dr. Donovan’s leadership, TASC investigated and published research on a wide range of topics, including misinformation related to the January 6, 2021, insurrection. 

According to Whistleblower Aid, representing Dr. Donovan, in 2021, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative pledged $500 million over 15 years to found Kempner Institute for the Study of Natural and Artificial Intelligence at Harvard. It was the largest single contribution in the school’s history. Both Chan and Zuckerberg attended Harvard.

Whistleblower Aid accuses Harvard’s Kennedy School leaders of targeting Dr. Donovan to destroy her work and her team’s work to “protect the interests of high-value donors with obvious and direct ties to Meta/Facebook.” Harvard strongly denies this claim.

The Washington Post reports that Dr. Donovan’s conflict with Harvard began when she acquired the Facebook Papers, a collection of internal documents whistleblower Frances Jaugen provided to Congress and multiple news outlets. At a gathering of important Harvard donors, Dr. Donovan spoke of the importance of these papers, as they demonstrated that Meta was well aware of the harm its platforms were causing but opted to prioritize engagement over user safety. 

Fired Just in Time for the Political Season

Ten days after the gathering, her troubles with Harvard began. Kennedy School Dean Doug Elmendorf emailed Donovan, asking her “pointed” questions and reminding her that the $500 million grant was in the works. It culminated in her being let go.

“The surprise dismissal alarmed fellow researchers elsewhere, who saw Donovan as a pioneer in an increasingly critical area of great sensitivity to the powerful and well-connected tech giants,” the Washington Post wrote.

Harvard claims that Dr. Donovan was informed at the end of 2022 that it would wind down the TASC project. Nancy Gibbs, the director of the Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, told the Washington Post in early February of this year that the decision was due to a school policy that requires a faculty member to lead research. Dr. Donovan is not a faculty member. That decision prompted more than 100 Harvard professors to call for the resignation of the Dean of the Kennedy School. 

Far be it from me to second guess decisions made by Harvard, but Dr. Donovan was hired in 2018. It took them until late 2022 to realize she was not a faculty member.

Harvard’s Surprising Ostracism

At a time when just 32% of Americans say they trust the media, the dismissal isn’t a good look. Dr. Donovan is hardly an obscure researcher tucked away in an ivory tower. She is co-author of Meme Wars: The Untold Story of the Online Battles Upending Democracy in America, a book that Harvard itself describes as “A political thriller with the substance of a rigorous history” and “a warning that if we fail to recognize these powerful undercurrents, the great meme war for the soul of America will soon be won.” 

Before joining Harvard, she was a research lead for media manipulation and platform accountability at the Data & Society Research Institute.

Dr. Donovan has also testified before Congress on online misinformation and the influence of social media algorithms on societal discourse. “Deception is now a multi-million industry. My research team tracks dangerous individuals and groups that pose as political campaigns, social movements, news organizations, charities, brands, and even ordinary people. This emerging economy of misinformation is a threat to national security,” she warned the House Subcommittee on Consumer Protection and Commerce. 

A Growing Scourge for Journalists

Misinformation is a severe threat to journalism, both to the journalists who investigate the news and the audiences who rely on news reports to make decisions. According to a PEN America survey, 81% of journalists say misinformation is a serious threat they confront daily. While there is broad recognition of the problem, 11% of respondents said they had inadvertently included misinformation in articles they’ve published.

This makes it baffling that Harvard would ostracize a prominent expert in disinformation and how to prevent it, especially as we move into the political season. Election experts have raised the alarm of misinformation, and some say that AI-generated misinformation will be the “super weapon” of nefarious players.

“While I was hired as the TASC project director in 2018 and was promoted to research director of Shorenstein in 2020, this rationale comes as a big surprise,” Donovan said in an email to colleagues. “If I had known that we would be dismantled before the 2024 election, I would have built our project elsewhere.”

It’s a pity she didn’t, as this decision leaves a gaping hole when expertise in misinformation will be needed most.  

The post The Cost of Criticizing Meta? Termination appeared first on AdMonsters.