In June, we had an exclusive sit-down with Vegard Johnsen, Chief Product Officer at eyeo, who predicted Apple was brewing something big with its Web Eraser feature.

Fast forward to August, and Apple officially introduced Distraction Control — an evolution of the Web Eraser concept that’s already sending ripples through the industry.

What Is Distraction Control?

Distraction Control is not just a fancy pop-up blocker. It’s a user-empowerment tool enabling Safari users the power to hide distracting elements on websites. While Apple carefully distinguishes this feature from traditional ad blockers, the implications are clear: publishers and advertisers must rethink their strategies to survive.

The feature has sparked controversy, especially among publishers who rely on ad revenue and subscription prompts to stay afloat. Apple’s quiet roll-out of Distraction Control in the latest iOS 18 beta is a stark reminder that the tech giant isn’t afraid to shake things up in the name of user experience.

In this follow-up Q&A, Vegard Johnsen returns to share his insights on how Distraction Control could affect publishers, advertisers, and the broader ecosystem. Spoiler alert: this is just the beginning of a new era where user experience reigns supreme, and publishers must evolve — or risk becoming obsolete.

The Revenue Impact: Are Subscription Models at Risk?

Lynne d Johnson: How do you foresee Apple’s Distraction Control feature affecting publishers’ ability to generate revenue, especially those relying on subscription sign-ups and mailing lists?

Vegard Johnsen: Subscription sign-ups, mailing lists, and similar mechanisms to generate revenue are a numbers game. Most users ignore or dismiss these messages most of the time. There have always been incentives to reach the right user at the right time, with the right message. But for the most part, the cost of being lazy was low, so many were lazy, deploying spray-and-pray tactics. Now, with Distraction Control, being lazy is going to get more expensive because users will have more agency in removing these elements.

However, I do imagine that some kind of crowdsourcing of user action is on the roadmap in the future. The obvious way to go with this feature is to offer users to opt-in to crowdsourced feature removal. In that case, the impact could be quite significant since it wouldn’t be limited to just the individual user.

But perhaps this is good news for high-quality content creators who engage with the user respectfully, at the right time, and with the right message. It may lead to these “good” publishers standing out with more signal amongst the noise. Ultimately, there would be fewer bad apples (no pun intended) to spoil the bunch.

Ad Blocker or Not? Understanding the Fine Line

LdJ: Distraction Control has been described as not being an ad blocker. How does this distinction affect the broader ecosystem of online advertising and content monetization?

VJ: One could easily imagine this feature evolving to better cover dynamic content. The biggest reason for that development is simple game theory — there will now be an incentive to make ‘everything’ dynamic (i.e., adding dynamic elements to subscription sign-ups and mailing list prompts).

Striking the Right Balance: User Experience vs. Publisher Needs

LdJ: What balance should be struck between enhancing user experience by removing distracting content and maintaining publishers’ needs to engage users with necessary overlays like cookie consent and subscription prompts?

VJ: That balance has always been necessary, of course, but Distraction Control takes it to a new level. Now users have more choices if they are not happy — not just by bouncing off the site but by also taking control and removing elements. For elements where data is available and timing is discretionary (such as subscription prompts), it becomes extremely important to show the right message at a time that works for the user. Failure to do so may mean the dialog is gone forever.

For other messages where timing and/or data is not available to customize (such as cookie consent notices), one could expect to see pre-messages (such as the ones that often precede the IDFA dialog box) warming up the user. But, perhaps this is also going to spur the industry to move away from dark patterns — from asking for consent for 900 vendors and instead towards asking for a more reasonable number, thereby making the UX more balanced.

For sites to get signals on what direction to take, it would be great to see some kind of feedback feature for the content owner. This feature could share details on what elements are being removed, so publishers can learn what users have issues with and what they don’t.

Industry Response: Adaptation or Resistance?

LdJ: Given the concerns raised by industry associations about similar features in the past, how do you think publishers and advertisers might adapt to or resist this new feature?

VJ: One obvious way the industry might resist is to start adding dynamic elements to messages to avoid ‘detection’ by this feature. But, that kind of cat-and-mouse game would incentivize Apple to make the feature more blunt and powerful, so this is not a good path. Given that, at least for now, the feature requires users to actively remove the content.

So, the reasonable path will be to ensure that the elements on the page stay below the activation threshold. By having a good ratio of content to other elements, and by reducing and avoiding distractions and interruptions, users will have no reason to take action.

The Future of Content Monetization: Evolution or Revolution?

LdJ: What long-term implications do you see for content creators if features like Distraction Control become standard across browsers? Could this lead to new forms of content monetization?

VJ: To me, this is simply an evolution of users taking control of their online experience. They have plenty of options today, from choosing a browser to suit their needs to installing extensions and apps to improve their visual, privacy, and data experience. Browsers are a competitive space, particularly post-DMA, so I would be surprised if other browsers did not follow suit, particularly if this feature proves to be popular with users.

Fundamentally, users are happy to support content creators, but they want the balance to be right. Given that I don’t see the need for new forms of content monetization or any special action by content creators, when it comes to those publishers with a good user experience already, this is something to celebrate.

Rethinking Ad Strategy: Opportunities Amid Challenges

As publishers and advertisers grapple with the implications of Apple’s Distraction Control, the focus must shift toward more user-friendly ad strategies. One effective approach could be reducing intrusive pop-ups in favor of smaller, more subtle placements that integrate seamlessly with the user experience. There’s also potential value in publishers seeking direct buys with advertisers, which can ensure higher quality placements than those typically filled by programmatic platforms.

Interestingly, the need for users to actively hide ads creates a unique opportunity, as those ads might attract more attention offering useful insights into user behavior. Still, the key to thriving this new thorn in your side is to prioritize user experience.

The post What Apple’s Distraction Control Means for Publishers appeared first on AdMonsters.

WWDC 2024 was a mixed bag for digital media and advertising, delivering promising advancements and unexpected omissions. Apple introduced “Apple Intelligence,” a suite of AI-powered features designed to enhance user experience by leveraging personal context. Highlights included a more intuitive Siri, text-to-emoji generation, and a collaboration with OpenAI to integrate ChatGPT into Apple devices. These updates promise to transform app interfaces and streamline interactions, offering brands new ways to engage with users.

However, the absence of the rumored Web Eraser feature — an AI-driven tool, leveraging Apple’s language model Ajax, would allow users to erase unwanted web content, from ads and text sections — left many in the industry with bated breath. This feature, expected to debut with iOS 18 for Safari, could significantly impact digital advertising, raising concerns among publishers and advertisers about revenue and content accessibility. Despite its omission, the ad tech world is buzzing with questions and predictions.

Experts like Vegard Johnsen Chief Product Officer at eyeo suggest that similar ad blocking solutions are on the horizon. As Apple continues to prioritize user control and privacy, the industry must prepare for the potential impacts on their digital strategies. In this exclusive Q&A, Johnsen shares his insights on why he believes Apple’s Web Eraser is still on the horizon and what it means for the future of web browsing and digital advertising.

Lynne d Johnson: So, Apple didn’t end up announcing Web Eraser at WWDC and it doesn’t appear to be releasing in iOS18. Can you explain why the industry was so concerned about Web Eraser and what a service like this could mean for publishers?

VJ: Clearly, total ad blocking has been and continues to be a problem for the industry. Most publishers, in particular, small and medium-sized ones, are not in a position to demand a subscription, so total ad blocking leaves them without any good options for revenue.

There are also negative consequences for consumers, since it forces publishers into an adversarial position, putting up barriers (required registrations, etc.) to pay for operations, as well as the content creation that sits at the heart of their businesses. If Web Eraser were to remove those as well (presumably something it might be capable of) then even the conversation about the value exchange is shut down, and we’d be at an impasse.

LdJ: How much do you think the pushback from French publishers and advertisers, as well as UK news outlets, had to do with Apple’s decision to delay this feature?

VJ: It’s common for Apple to have features in beta that they don’t announce for a variety of reasons. Maybe they needed more time in the presentation for other things like Apple Intelligence or the feature just wasn’t quite ready.

Historically Apple tends to stake out a path and stick to it fairly consistently, despite industry concern. We saw this with ITP – they definitely took on feedback and made improvements, but they remained committed to its launch.

LdJ: Given Apple’s Privacy Push in recent years with products like ATT and Hide My Email, amongst other privacy-first features, do you think we can still expect to see a similar service in the near future?

VJ: While Web Eraser isn’t technically a privacy feature, we increasingly see users turning to ad blocking as a key way to help control their privacy online. In general, though, the trend is very much in the direction of features that give users more control over both their privacy and online experience. I would expect to see more of this, not just from Apple, but others as well, like Google, lest it be seen as too far behind (e.g. ITP vs Sandbox).

LdJ: What other ad blocking issues do you think publishers should be concerned about in 2024 and what strategies should they be implementing to mitigate these issues?

VJ: If the user experience continues to deteriorate, ad blocking usage will continue to grow. (Ad blocking has seen an average YoY growth of 30% worldwide since 2011 and there are already almost a billion ad blocking users today.) A significant portion of this usage is actually ad filtering rather than total ad blocking, but it could be seen as indicative of the potential for complete ad blocking to take further hold.

If publishers want to mitigate total ad blocking, they should be looking into user-centric solutions, ones that respect the user experience but can still be monetized. Research has shown that users don’t outright hate ads. They just don’t want to be bombarded with them. In fact, a recent IAB study showed that the overwhelming majority of consumers would react negatively, including being frustrated, disappointed, angry, confused, or sad if they had to start paying for the websites/apps they currently use for free. There is a middle ground for an ad-supported internet, as long as we put the user first.

The post Expert Predicts Apple’s Web Eraser Ad Blocking Tool Is Imminent appeared first on AdMonsters.

Ad blocking may not be seen as big a threat as it was, say, eight years ago when the rise of ad block users was as steep as Canada’s Mount Thor. The topic certainly isn’t living rent-free in publishers’ minds the way the ever-present threat of signal loss is — despite the recent frenzy over YouTube’s ad-blocking crackdown.

Still, it could thwart a publisher’s revenue growth just like the handful of times The Clown Prince of Crime was able to one-up The Dark Knight in DC Comics. (The Joker vs. Batman, get it?) It’s one of those things we can’t imagine ever happening, but still, somehow it does.

The truth is, publishers around the world will lose $54 billion in ad revenue due to ad blocking in 2024, representing around 8% of total global ad spend. If not for ad-filtering tools that enable users to elect being shown only non-intrusive ads, those losses would be notably higher – about $116 billion. These are just some of the key takeaways from the latest Ad Filtering Report from eyeo, formerly known as the PageFair Adblock Report. Read on to learn more…

Ad Blocking on a Steady Incline

Between Q4 2021 and Q2 2023, ad blocking adoption grew 11%, reaching a total of 912M users. While only a slight uptick from Q4 2022, it’s on a steady incline following a significant dip in Q1 2022. During the COVID pandemic, which ushered in the Work From Home era, there was a definite shift in user behavior.

The impact? Desktop ad blocking surged, vying for the top spot over mobile throughout 2022, with mobile taking lead at the end of Q2 2023 claiming over 495M estimated monthly active ad blocking users. That’s just about 25M shy of mobile’s ad blocker heyday between 2020 and 2021.

These increases in ad blocking are interesting given the 2017 plateau when the Better Ads Standards first rolled out. Chrome subsequently started filtering out ads that don’t comply with the Better Ads Standards in 2019, also making tools available to publishers to mitigate negative ad experiences on their properties. Could it be that it’s time to reassess what audiences consider intrusive or annoying ad experiences?

Ad Blocking Users Annoyed With Clutter and Intrusive Ads

There’s no question that understanding your ad-blocking audience is once again paramount, especially as the third-party cookie fades to black. While I know this isn’t the first time you’ll hear this, I’ll say it again for the people in the back: The more you know about your audience, the more relevant you can make their experiences while visiting your properties. You’ll also have a better chance of meeting your advertisers’ KPIs.

“This report shows that users are annoyed with clutter and intrusive online ads and are reclaiming control of their online experience,” said Jan Wittek, CRO, eyeo. “The growth of Acceptable Ads users is a testament to the fact that users are open to nonintrusive ads, thereby supporting publishers and creators for their efforts.  It’s a mistake to assume that they do not respect the value exchange with publishers – if their legitimate need for a better experience is considered. It’s time the entire industry recognizes that user-centricity doesn’t just benefit users, but publishers and advertisers as well.”

Acceptable Ad Users on the Rise

First things first, let’s stop calling them ad blockers and appropriately categorize them as ad filterers. Today’s ad block users don’t hate or block all ads. They understand the value exchange, when it’s clear. They are willing to share their information in exchange for premium content — as long as they can be in control of how their data is used.

The number of users opting into Acceptable Ads, a leading standard for nonintrusive digital ad experiences, has grown by leaps and bounds by 42% between Q1 2022 and Q1 2023, crossing the 300M mark — up from 216M. Overall, Acceptable Ads has an average opt-in of 94% based on the data in the 2023 eyeo Ad Filtering Report. This growth is attributed to the steady incline of ad block users, as well as browser and mobile OEMs adopting the Acceptable Ads Standard.

Of the 58% of users open or neutral to seeing some nonintrusive ads, a majority were open to seeing ads if…

• The ads are relevant — 78%
• The ads are interest-based — 64%
• The ads are nonintrusive — 79%
• They can control what information is shared — 70%
• They can control ad relevance — 65%

Ad Filtering of Tomorrow

The report concludes with predictions for the future of ad filtering, including issues such as the potential impact of AI and machine learning, as well as the consumer perspective and impending regulations on sustainability.

Like many other facets of ad tech, AI and machine learning will have a pronounced impact on ad filtering, making it more robust, sustainable, and scalable.

“ChatGPT and LLMs may seriously disrupt ad tech (as well as other industries). I think in the coming years we’ll see more applications of different AI models to ad filtering. Before that, it was more about experiments that were rarely used by ad blockers, but now the situation will improve,” said Andrey Meshkov, CTO & Co-Founder, AdGuard.

Given that programmatic advertising generates a staggering 215,000 metric tons of carbon emissions monthly across five major economies, media sustainability is another hot topic in ad tech. And, the topic holds meaning for ad block users as well.

Publishers should take note, ad filterers support products that align their businesses with sustainability goals. Seventy-seven percent of surveyed mobile ad-filtering users view companies that take action on sustainability in a positive light, while 42% view filtering ads as an action that reduces their online carbon footprint

You guessed it, ad blocking isn’t going anywhere, anytime soon. Publishers were ignoring this elusive audience for quite some time, chalking it up as a lost cause. But now, as publishers are revolutionizing their audience engagement strategies in preparation for the cookieless future, it’s time to rekindle those relationships.

To read the full report and read expert insights, visit eyeo.

The post Ad Blocking Will Be a $54b Publisher Problem in 2024 appeared first on AdMonsters.

During our Nov. 5, 2020 webinar, “The Login Play,” AdMonsters explored logins through several vantage points, including the potential for single sign-on alliances, thanks to remarkable panelists Claire Groves, Head of Ad Operations at Haymarket Automotive; Achim Schlosser, CTO of the netid Foundation; and Lisa Bouam, Director of Business Development at eyeo.

Does garnering an email address through a newsletter signup count as a login? When asking for logins, how do you lay out the value you’re offering in exchange for consumer data? And how is it different from before, when you didn’t ask for a login? Is this the moment consumers understand there’s a cost to web content? Watch the whole video for answers (as well as additional questions!), but below are some surface takeaways.

• Bouam focused on being transparent about the value exchange between publisher and consumer, and the potential for using enhanced user engagement to push away from over-reliance on ad-driven revenue, especially with the third-party cookie sunsetting in 2022. She talked about tools like REMP, which enable publishers to get a better sense of what loyal readers might be more attune to subscription deals and other logged-in services.
• Schlosser dived into the creation and execution of the netid Foundation’s sign-on alliance across Germany. By having an independent governance operation overseeing the workings of the actual netid solution, major German publishers have signed on with confidence and used the tool to monetize and deliver data-driven advertising. netID’s convenience for users also seems to be a hit with consumers.
• Haymarket Automotive has long had several login programs where the value exchange was quite clear—data in exchange for actionable information from various car dealerships and other related advertisers. While the publisher has been highly focused on its first-party data offering (and will be for the foreseeable future), this loigin program and other efforts are gaining more traction internally over anxieties about the third-party cookie’s collapse and the potential for audience extension to drive additional revenue.

The post Webinar Replay: The Login Play appeared first on AdMonsters.

At the same time, many publishers used the ad spend slowdown to examine their processes and tech partners, implementing major changes like paywalls that will color user experience going forward.

This wide-ranging, intimate discussion on October 8, 2020—Is This the Rebound?—with the support of eyeo, brought together a panel of revenue specialists from the US and Europe to talk about what publishers expect during the fourth quarter, how they’re preparing for an uncertain future beyond that, and how their audience relationships are evolving.

Watch a video recap of the webinar: Is This the Rebound?

While it’s still way too early to tell what the long-term impact of the pandemic will be on ad revenue, things are coming around the bend and publishers are cautiously optimistic.

“We’re just shy of a rebound, said Lisa Bouam, Business Development Manager, eyeo. “There’s a shift in priorities with the deprecation of third-party cookie coming. It’s taking time for brands to catch up and adapt to consumer’s new reality.”

With direct sales taking a hit due to advertiser brand safety concerns, the publishers who are surviving the pandemic had a few key elements in place to weather the storm. Registration walls, new subscription models, launching new ad products, doing more customizations, and providing ecommerce offerings have all helped pubs mitigate revenue losses due to the direct sales slowdown.

But what works for one pub may not work for another. It really depends on the brand and the audience’s behaviors.

Here are the top three takeaways from the webinar:

Revenue diversification is key

• Pubs are focusing on their newsletter offerings and providing native content to buyers, as well as doubling down on contests and looking at ways to implement sponsored paywalls.
• Customizations for advertisers have become the lay of the land with new products like customized podcasts where pubs and brands work together on the content as well as more interactive elements allowing readers to speak directly to article subjects or journalists via video and/or chat.
• Ecommerce has also helped some pubs mitigate revenue losses. Dennis Publising Reviews section really took off during the pandemic. Having the right content in place gave them a headstart while some pubs who were just starting out during the pandemic didn’t see as much success.

Get your first-party data strategy together

• Here’s what the pandemic brought: First-party data strategies that focus on the user. Pubs are creating new products and more interaction with users.
• Personalization has been a big play for publishers dealing with the ups-and-downs of the pandemic. How are marketing, sales and operations working more closely with data modeling to better understand user behavior.
• “We’ve been focused on having a really robust first-party-data strategy to offer products that are scalable and compliant.” Alex Kirb, Dennis Publishing
• “There’s a struggle with first-party and obtaining consent. It’s best to focus on first-party-data and data alliances. Publisher data will be more valuable in the future and the open marketplace will be bottom of the stack. Data will be cleaner. It will encourage us all to work together more.” — Sophie Toth, Euronews

Come out, come out of your silos

• Is this the end of silos? Sales strategies changed at The Economist—the way we go to market. Got closer to product teams. 2021 should bring less division between church and state.
• Programmatic, direct and marketing tools are all coming together. “It’s not just working together but learning from each other. It’s how it should be as a whole business moving forward to create the best products.” — Sophie Toth, Programmatic and Ad Tech Lead, Euronews
• Some pubs have different funnels set up for subscribers, registered users, and non-registered users. Building these strategies takes teams working together.

SPEAKERS:

Sergei Bachtin
Senior Director, Global Revenue Operations
The Economist Group

Sophie Toth
Programmatic and Ad Tech Lead
Euronews

Alex Kirby
Head of Programmatic & Audience Data
Dennis Publishing

Lisa Bouam
Business Development Manager
eyeo

SPONSORED BY:

The post Webinar Replay: Is This the Rebound? appeared first on AdMonsters.

The researchers argue that ad blockers can make the advertising marketplace “more efficient by filtering users who are sensitive to general ads, allowing websites to target more intense ads to the rest of the users.” Ah—non-blockers love a good intense ad experience that leaves you with a nosebleed!

But the real jaw-dropper in the paper is the notion that ad blockers “help regulate the ad industry by motivating the advertising platform to pay a fee to the ad-blocking company to include it in a list of ads that are allowed past the blocker.”

So the ad blocker fee model—which has been widely decried as blackmail within the publisher community—is… a beneficial watchdog for the overall industry?

Rethinking the Ad Blocker’s Role

All right, we know some publishers in the audience are about ready to divide teams with pitchforks and torches between Carnegie Mellon and City University of Hong Kong, but that last finding needs a little context, and a shift in how we think of ad blockers.

eyeO, parent company of AdBlock Plus and AAX, has been switching its language from ad blocking to ad filtering. (This is where we note that both eyeO and AAX are regular sponsors of AdMonsters events.) So think about using ABP as a negotiation platform between users and… Well, the digital media landscape at large. 

A user leveraging an ad filter is giving a signal to all in the supply chain that, “Hey, I’ll deal with ads, but they have to meet this non-irritating criteria, and targeting has to be limited.”

A third party is an apt partner for this because managing preferences on a publisher to publisher basis would be annoying for the consumer, while the use of programmatic fill in indirect sales would make it difficult for publishers to ensure preferences are met. An intermediary like an ad “filter” enables demand sources (like AAX, which has a revenue share model) that only comply with “acceptable” ad practices.

You could also argue that all advertising should be on that “acceptable” level, making an ad filter gratuitous, but come on—we know that’s not going to happen. This is also where that first point comes in—the majority of Internet users don’t seek out ad blockers or filters. “Intense” advertising doesn’t repulse them—they might even appreciate it. So advertisers should have the opportunity to hit them with potentially exciting (or potentially annoying) creative.

Long story short, the paper has a point that ad filters can serve a useful purpose in the ad industry, and can even deliver some efficiencies when it comes to user experience. Saying that’s “good” for publishers is a bit much considering the past (and the fact users can still use ad blockers to block any and every ad), so we’ll suggest, “Not all bad.”

The post Ad Blockers Are Good for Pubs… Wait, What? appeared first on AdMonsters.

You don’t have to be following the DMEXCO conference in Cologne, Germany, to have heard the biggest story/scandal. EyeO GmbH – the parent company of everyone’s favorite ad blocker, AdBlock Plus (ABP) – decided the event was a prime time to announce the launch of its new exchange for replacing blocked ads. Uproar was swift from both ad industry types and ABP users.

According to the press release, the “New ad platform turns tables, lets publishers programmatically offer nonintrusive ads.” In partnership with SSP ComboTag, EyeO would theoretically replace ads blocked by ABP with ones that fit its “Acceptable Ads criteria” – e.g., “non-intrusive,” not too heavy, no autoplay, proper labeling, etc. Through a simple tag integration, publishers could choose ads from a marketplace of white-listed creative. 

The Wall Street Journal reported that Google and AppNexus would offer ABP’s replacement inventory to buyers through their exchanges. This was news to the former – “We were just as surprised by the announcement as you were,” Google SVP of Ads and Commerce Sridhar Ramaswany told reporters at DMEXCO. “We certainly have no relationship with Eyeo when it comes to this effort.” 

An AppNexus spokesperson initially told WSJ that the company was working with EyeO and ComboTags on the Acceptable Ads Platform, but in a typically reflective blog post, CEO Brian O’Kelley clarified that while ComboTag “has been an active client with AppNexus, we have not — and will not — allow them to use our platform to monetize Eyeo and AdBlocker Plus.” Both Google and AppNexus appear to have stripped the SSP of exchange privileges.

Our sister company PR News will gladly point out that it’s a faux pas to announce such potentially explosive news before chatting with your launch partners, but the reactions from Google and AppNexus made clear that ComboTag was only using them as demand partners. Both companies were shocked (shocked!) to hear how ComboTag planned to leverage their services for ABP’s replacement ads.

Though AppNexus’ initial response sprinkles some skepticism on that claim, in a statement the company (correctly) re-classified the so-called Acceptable Ads Platform’s business model as a toolbar reinsertion scheme. That’s about as scummy as you can get in ad tech. 

That didn’t stop ComboTag CEO Guy Tytunovich from gloating that the company had a thousand publisher sign-ups at DMEXCO. While that number seems suspect, the interest in the Acceptable Ads Platform is not surprising as it’s basically an innovation on how ABP has been doing business.

Same Song, New Dance

ABP was adamant on Twitter that nothing had changed when it came to user experience on its product. And they’re sort of right – when signing up, users have the choice of a blanket block or allowing ad that meet its “acceptable” criteria slip through. 

Just wanted to clarify: Nothing has changed. You can block ALL ads or allow Acceptable Ads to support your fav sites pic.twitter.com/HZX23amRdz

— Adblock Plus (@AdblockPlus) September 14, 2016

The latter is how the company makes its revenue – by charging major demand partners like Google and Amazon to have their ads white-listed. If you think that sounds like high-tech blackmail, you’re not alone. While they may have cut ties with ComboTag, will Google keep paying the ABP ransom?

With the Acceptable Ads Platform, users would see more ads on publishers who had opted in and were loading up white-listed replacements from the marketplace for blocked ads. Theoretically, publishers could make up for some lost revenue while ComboTag and its demand partners take a cut. 

But in this case did ABP’s hubris do them in? It’s honestly too early to judge. AppNexus and Google may not be playing ball (for now – hardened stands are known to soften in ad tech), but other demand sources will certainly try to fill their shoes. Ad-blocking users are technically a valuable audience that is hard to reach.

Acceptable to Whom?

The thing is – how many users opt into being shown acceptable ads? I’ve mocked the Acceptable Ads Initiative before because I have trouble believing that ad-block seekers will reject a complete shutout for receiving some ads – particularly ones deemed OK by the blocker. (Understanding ABP’s monetization strategy makes it even harder to swallow the company’s supposed altruism.)

I thought people sought out ad blocking, not ad replacement: ABP opens exchange for acceptable ads https://t.co/MJTA1FimTz

— Gavin Dunaway (@AdMonsterGavin) September 13, 2016

At the same time, recent studies have shown that ad-block users have a conscience and are willing to whitelist certain sites that ask them to. Surely some that seek out ad blocking will realize they are starving beloved media sites of revenue, and let their pangs of guilt enable acceptable ads. It’s just not clear how many. And at what point does the ad load hit the point where our hypothetical user says, “Whoa, this isn’t what I signed up for,” and either turns on blanket mode or switches to a more hard-line ad-blocker?

So as a publisher, you could make a stand and refuse to work with ABP – do your part in starving them of revenue. Or you could join in and reclaim some of your revenue, but be aware that despite all that acceptable rhetoric, the replacement demand sources will likely not be major players (though you can never count out arbitrage…). 

In the end, ABP is a racket that shields itself in the notion that it’s making the Internet better by choosing which ads are soon. The better solution for publishers is removing one more intermediary and simply offering your own brand of acceptable ads. It’s not about protesting against ad blockers but reconnecting with your users, as the IAB’s DEAL initiative wisely points out. 

Make the case to your ad-blocking users to whitelist your site – Forbes has already had some success with this (more details about that next week) by offering assenting users an “ad light” package. The Acceptable Ads Platform is a quick fix with a heavy ethical cost for the industry; engaging your users is a long-term solution. That’s something we’ll dive into during the Tech Forum in LA on October 18.

The post #OPSPOV: So Ad Blockers Are Selling Ads Now? appeared first on AdMonsters.