In what could only be described as a Hail Mary pass, Google has agreed to cough up $250 million over five years to fund journalism and AI research in California. This deal was announced with much fanfare, and some might say a dash of self-congratulation. But before we start throwing confetti, let’s take a closer look at what’s really going on here.

The Big (and Not So Big) Picture

On the surface, this deal looks like a lifeline for local journalism. California’s newsrooms have been on life support for years, hemorrhaging jobs and revenue as the digital era reshaped the media landscape. The fund, administered by UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism, promises to inject much-needed cash into these struggling institutions. 

It helps Google paint itself as the savior of the free press while avoiding a dreaded “link tax” that could have forced the tech giant to pay publishers for linking to their content. This brings to mind California’s Journalism Preservation Act, which proposed to make Big Tech pay for news.

But here’s the kicker: $250 million over five years sounds like a lot until you consider that Google’s ad empire rakes in over $200 billion annually. To put it bluntly, this deal is a drop in the ocean for Google — a PR move dressed up as corporate responsibility.

Why It Matters: The Real Cost of Free News

For years, publishers have watched in horror as their ad revenues dried up while Google and Meta (Facebook’s parent company) turned into digital juggernauts. The relationship between tech platforms and news publishers has always been lopsided. Publishers create the content that drives traffic, but the platforms get the lion’s share of the ad dollars. This new deal doesn’t change that dynamic; it merely delays the inevitable. 

The idea of a “link tax” has been gaining traction globally, with Australia and Canada leading the charge. In those countries, Google and Meta were initially resistant, but eventually, they caved — well, sort of. In Australia, Google opted to pay selected publishers, while Meta briefly blocked news altogether before returning to the table. In Canada, Google agreed to pay $74 million annually to keep news content in its search results, while Meta decided to go the nuclear route and block news links entirely. The global push for Big Tech to pay for news mirrors what’s happening in California.

Google’s deal with the state allows the tech behemoth to avoid the more stringent regulations that would have come with the now-shelved CJPA. The CJPA would have forced Google and other tech giants to hand percentages of their ad revenue over to news publishers. Instead, we get a voluntary fund that’s easier for Google to swallow and far less beneficial for the publishers who need it most. The CJPA could have significantly shifted the balance of power, much like similar legislation in other regions.

The AI Angle: A Trojan Horse?

Then there’s the $62.5 million earmarked for AI research. Let’s not kid ourselves — this deal might seem like a bonus, but it’s worth asking whether it is really about saving journalism. Could it be more about Google bolstering its AI capabilities under the guise of public good?  While the idea of using AI to solve “real world problems” sounds noble, including AI funding in this deal is more about securing Google’s future dominance than helping the news industry.

As Google continues refining its AI-driven search features — like its Search Generative Experience — publishers are experiencing a decrease in traffic from organic search results, directly impacting their revenue. The rise of AI in search is reshaping the landscape, with AI-powered engines like Perplexity.ai offering revenue-sharing models that starkly contrast Google’s approach. 

Google’s move to include AI in this deal is less about journalism and more about maintaining its dominance in the search market. As Scott Messer recently pointed out in his analysis of Google’s latest SEO shake-ups, Google is playing a different game altogether. The company is not optimizing for sending traffic to publishers; instead, it’s focusing on maximizing its ad revenues, often at the expense of the very content creators it claims to support.

Critics, including journalists and labor unions, have called out the deal for what it really is: a backroom agreement that benefits Google far more than it does the struggling newsrooms of California. The Media Guild of the West, representing journalists in Southern California, Arizona, and Texas, was notably excluded from the negotiations, leading them to denounce the agreement as a “shakedown.” This isn’t the first time Google has been suspected of using its financial might to navigate legislative pressures.

Connecting the Dots: What Publishers Need to Know

For publishers, this deal is a double-edged sword. On one hand, any funding is better than none, especially in an industry that’s been in a death spiral for years. On the other hand, this deal sets a dangerous precedent. By allowing Google to dictate the terms of its support for journalism, California has effectively ceded control to a tech giant with little incentive to change the status quo.

Publishers should be wary of becoming too dependent on these kinds of deals. The digital landscape is shifting rapidly, and while Google’s money might keep some newsrooms afloat for now, it won’t fix the underlying issues that have led to the decline of local journalism. With AI companies like Perplexity.ai and OpenAI entering the scene with revenue-sharing models, publishers might need to start exploring these alternative sources of revenue to stay afloat — or, maybe not. The real solutions could lean more towards finding sustainable business models that don’t rely on the whims of Silicon Valley.

The Bottom Line: Google Wins Again

So, what’s the takeaway? Google has once again managed to sidestep regulation while presenting itself as a benefactor of the public good. The $250 million might help some newsrooms in the short term, but it does little to address long-term challenges. This deal is more of a Band-Aid than a cure.

As the dust settles, it’s clear that Google got the better end of this bargain. By agreeing to a voluntary fund, the tech giant has avoided the much larger financial obligations that would have come with the CJPA. Meanwhile, California’s newsrooms are left to grapple with an uncertain future, their fate still largely in the hands of the very platforms profiting from their decline. 

In the end, this deal is a stark reminder of the power imbalance between tech platforms and the news industry. Until that changes, we’re likely to see more deals like this — ones that look good on paper but ultimately fail to address the real issues at play.

The post Google’s $250 Million ‘Gift’ to California News – Is It Really a Gift or Just a Clever Tax Dodge? appeared first on AdMonsters.

Google has had a tough few months.

First, they announced an abrupt about-face in their years-long initiative to remove third-party cookies from Chrome. Barely two weeks later, they were officially declared a Search monopoly by a federal court in one of the most consequential antitrust losses in decades (with another concurrent antitrust case about Google’s AdTech business still pending.) 

As the CTO of Upwave (a Brand Outcomes measurement startup) I’ve spent the last decade doing what everyone in AdTech has to do – navigate cautiously and quietly around Google, for fear of drawing their ire (or simply being toppled by their massive wake.) I have spent years participating in World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) discussions about Google’s Privacy Sandbox, and I’ve watched the cookie saga unfold with morbid fascination. 

One thing became clear very early in the W3C process – a small number of companies (particularly, but not exclusively Google) believed very deeply that they had both the power and the right to exercise pervasive control over the entire digital media and advertising industries. Now, it appears that Google may have finally found the limits of its influence: at the courthouse steps. 

But with or without third-party cookies, the web must go on. So where do we all go next?

The Privacy Paradox

The Privacy Sandbox initiative was Google’s attempt to reconcile irreconcilable objectives: overcoming Apple’s privacy counter-positioning, maintaining ad revenue primarily generated by capturing and applying comprehensive behavioral data about its billion+, and preserving a sufficiently healthy web ecosystem (since what’s the point of maintaining a search monopoly if searchers have nothing to find?) 

However, Google’s approach was fundamentally flawed in its overly simplistic view of privacy, focusing solely on eliminating cross-site tracking. This narrow definition sidestepped uncomfortable conversations about Google’s data collection and use, but also set an unrealistic bar for the Privacy Sandbox APIs by demanding they facilitate effective advertising while rendering cross-site data sharing technologically unfeasible.

Google put a smart, capable team in the Privacy Sandbox, but their mission was impossible from the start.

The Monopoly Question

The recent court ruling confirming Google’s monopoly in search underscores the company’s immense influence in shaping the digital landscape. Google’s control of the most widely used web browser means that its decisions about cookies and privacy reverberate throughout the advertising ecosystem. And Google’s “walled garden” approach to its many interlocking properties has allowed it to build an unassailable flywheel by tightly bundling its proprietary data, unique scaled inventory, and ad tech stack. 

The Privacy Sandbox initiative, despite its stated goals, has always seemed more about protecting Google’s flywheel than about safeguarding user privacy. And whether the ongoing antitrust trial focused on Google’s ad tech business finds that Google’s dominance of the plumbing of ad buying and serving rises to the level of a monopoly, there can be no doubt that the entire ad tech industry still operates in Google’s long shadow.

Forging a New Privacy Path

Google’s announcement that they won’t entirely remove 3rd party cookies doesn’t mean cookies are safe. Industry analysts anticipate Google will likely implement a consent mechanism similar to Apple’s “App Tracking Transparency,” effectively decimating cookie availability without outright eliminating them.

This scenario presents significant challenges:

1. The industry loses momentum in its efforts to move beyond outdated tracking methods.
2. The Privacy Sandbox initiative risks fading into irrelevance without the urgency of imminent cookie deprecation.
3. Uncertainty surrounding the open web’s future continues to accelerate ad spending shifts toward walled gardens, paradoxically giving a few tech giants even more panoptical views of user behavior.
4. Google may decide it has bigger problems than the long-term viability of the open web and simply retreat into its castle, leaving everyone outside its walls to pick up the pieces.

The digital advertising industry stands at a critical juncture. It’s evident that where privacy is concerned, both industry self-regulation and unilateral decisions by tech giants have fallen short. 

So what’s next? In a world where big tech can no longer set the rules, what’s needed instead is a collaborative, multi-stakeholder effort to develop pragmatic privacy standards, practices, and enforceable guidelines.

It’s time for an international coalition to unite regulators, industry representatives, academic experts, and consumer advocates. Their collective task should be to craft a flexible, adaptable privacy framework that embraces a comprehensive view of privacy, acknowledging its contextual nature and the intricate realities of data usage in today’s digital ecosystem.

In the interim, we must prepare for a transitional period where cookie effectiveness wanes, but no clear alternative emerges. Advertisers must explore and evaluate various strategies, including refining contextual targeting, exploring emerging privacy-preserving technologies, and learning to think like marketing economists.

Google’s privacy misstep, combined with its antitrust challenges, presents an opportunity for industry-wide recalibration. By fostering collaboration, diversifying our approaches, and constructively engaging with regulators, we can work towards building a truly user-centric, economically sustainable, privacy-respecting digital ecosystem.

Ultimately, we have no choice. Google and the Privacy Sandbox are not coming to save us.

The post What Happens When Google Can No Longer Set the Rules for the Web? appeared first on AdMonsters.

Twenty-five years ago, search transformed the digital world. 

At its inception, Google was a fledgling company that revolutionized the Internet with its search engine. It built and expanded its empire thanks, in part, to the ruling in the antitrust case against Microsoft. The tables have turned today, and Google is on the other side of the bench.  

In early August, Google’s loss in the search antitrust case decision marks a landmark moment for the search industry. As it stands, Google forces user searches to be funneled to its search results page, squashing innovation and extracting tens of billions from search advertisers and publishers in the process. 

The industry now awaits proposed remedies to bring competition to the search market. The door is finally open for browsers and other search properties to innovate and improve the consumer search experience in search advertising by shaping consumer intent.

The Rise of a Tech Giant

In 1998, Larry Page and his Stanford friends invented a brilliant search engine that allowed anyone with a web browser to access relevant results to any query instantly and for free. Google now dominates search and most of Big Tech. 

At the time, the company’s algorithms were so much better than competing search engines that the word “Google” became a verb that was, and still is, synonymous with “search.” 

As Google grew, went public, and eventually added free software like Gmail, Maps, and Chrome, it extended its digital advertising empire. At the time, the only losers seemed to be the news and editorial publications who traded analog ad dollars for digital pennies when they raced to give away content for traffic. 

However, to grow search ad revenue, Google began locking out competitors, raising ad rates, and extracting value from the user experience. As it extended its monopoly into new markets over the last ten years, Google’s search revenue has grown fivefold. 

Unlocking Innovation on the Open Web

Google’s stronghold on the search advertising market is largely due to its exclusive search distribution contracts, which force partnerships like Apple to outsource search experiences to Google, making it the default search engine.

Conversely, “Search on the Open Web” is when a person searches for relevant results outside the search engine, such as on the homepage of a privacy browser like Firefox or through a shopping app like Klarna. In 2023, the size of the Open Web search advertising market was $90-100 billion. Over 90% of that revenue went to Google, according to evidence revealed in the U.S. v. Google antitrust trial.

Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for Washington D.C. determined that Google’s exclusivity prevents the largest Open Web search properties from controlling ad selection or experimenting with their results. The tech conglomerate is also guilty of removing search results and ads provided by Google. 

Now that Google has been found liable, the door to competition, innovation, and experimentation has opened. Most importantly, the consumer will benefit because the industry is entering a new era of curated search results. 

How Can the Consumer Benefit?

Search on the Open Web opens the door to innovative, generative AI solutions. When Open Web search properties compete to experiment with search, consumers benefit from a more modern, personalized, relevant, and dynamic experience. With a curated search experience, users can find the best result or offer from the browser or property they are searching on and skip the SERP altogether.

Google’s exclusivity contracts currently prohibit this innovation. As a result, Open Web search properties generate less than 10% of total Open Web search revenue. Today, few Open Web search properties can refuse to forgo Google ad revenue altogether — but that is poised to change. 

What’s at Stake for Advertisers and Publishers?

The Court is poised to require Google to compete in search to create incentives for open Web search properties to innovate the search experience. Breaking Google’s exclusivity would bring transparency and efficiency to advertisers, as publishers could show their search results or ads or curate those from direct sources.

Whether it’s privacy search or Generative AI, everyone from DuckDuckGo to Apple Safari to your favorite shopping app could show Google and their own search results and make revenue from their search media.

For advertisers, tens of billions of dollars in wasted ad spend is at stake – as well as the return of transparency and control over their budgets. With Google’s exclusivity deals prohibited, these advertisers can “go direct,” reducing costs and gaining transparency.

The Future of Search Will Be Curated and Driven by Consumer Intent

Search on the Open Web will more effectively serve the needs of consumers in today’s increasingly fragmented and modernized search journey.

The Court’s decision suggests that it will fashion the remedy most likely to create competition in the search results and ad markets, similar to the Microsoft remedy in the early 2000s.

A potential structural remedy, such as the divestiture of Chrome and Android, would incentivize Google to participate in search markets where competitors produce innovative user search experiences and deliver transparency and efficiency to advertisers.

However, the remedy phase plays out, and one thing remains certain: the future of search will be built around valuable moments of consumer intent that can open up the market for $500 billion in consumer spending.

The post Back to the Future of Search: Google’s Loss In The Search Antitrust Trial Unlocks Innovation appeared first on AdMonsters.

Navigating these complex challenges is essential for maintaining trust with consumers and brands.

Unique publishers (diverse, small, and niche) must navigate these complex waters to maintain their competitive edge in an industry where data privacy and transparency are under intense scrutiny. According to Jamie Barnard, CEO of Compliant, “The ad tech ecosystem was never built for privacy,” making it especially challenging to retrofit existing systems.

These smaller players are vulnerable, with privacy concerns mounting and regulations becoming stricter. They may not attract the same advertising spend as larger entities. Still, compliance with privacy laws is critical—not only for legal reasons but also for preserving their relationships with advertisers.

During our conversation with Jamie Barnard aboard a yacht in Cannes—over cheese and pepperoni—we discussed how brands and agencies can support unique publishers in navigating compliance challenges. He stressed the importance of adapting to the rapidly changing landscape. “Those who fail to adapt will find themselves in precarious positions,” Bernard warned. By approaching compliance as a collaborative effort between publishers, brands, and consumers, these publishers can create bespoke advertising experiences while upholding essential privacy principles.

Why Building Strong Compliance Models Matters More Than Ever 

Developing robust compliance models is no longer optional for unique publishers, it’s essential.  These models should go beyond merely responding to current regulations. They should be proactive frameworks anticipating future changes. Flexibility and adaptability are key to ensuring these publishers can withstand the inevitable shifts in the regulatory environment.

Creating a culture of compliance involves more than simply adhering to rules. It requires a deep understanding of privacy and data protection. This is particularly crucial given the widespread use of third-party tracking and data leakage — practices increasingly under scrutiny. As awareness of these issues grows, larger brands and consumers demand higher transparency and accountability from their partners.

“In our industry, where trust is everything, compliance is the foundation,” Bernard said. “When we approach compliance as not just a checklist, but a genuine commitment to our audience’s well-being, we unlock the potential for deeper connections and long-lasting loyalty.”

Publishers must go beyond compliance to educate their teams and stakeholders on this importance. By cultivating a culture of awareness and diligence, they can embed compliance into every facet of their operations. This shift will mitigate risks and bolster the publisher’s reputation in an industry where consumer trust is increasingly paramount.

Ad Tech’s Role in Adapting to Regulatory Changes

The ad tech industry’s transformation is largely driven by the need to comply with evolving privacy laws. While these changes may seem reactive, they present new opportunities for innovation in both technology and operational practices. With Google’s new 3PC consent framework, smaller publishers have a huge role in reshaping the industry standards moving forward. 

Smaller publishers should leverage technology as a compliance tool to take advantage of this shift. For example, artificial intelligence and machine learning can monitor data practices, identify potential compliance issues, and automate consent management processes. These technological advancements not only streamline operations but also enhance the precision and effectiveness of compliance efforts.

 As regulatory demands evolve, ongoing education and experimentation are crucial. Publishers should stay informed about the latest trends and changes, adapting their strategies as necessary. Abrupt changes brought about by decisions like Google’s back-and-forth dance with turning off third-party cookies, serve as a stark reminder of how quickly things can shift. 

Continuous learning should be embedded in the organizational culture, positioning compliance as not just a set of rules but as a dynamic practice driving industry evolution. With the U.S. regulatory environment beginning to catch up with the EU’s more stringent standards, the pressure to adapt has never been greater. As Bernard pointed out, education, transparency, and consumer empowerment must be top priorities for publishers moving forward.

The post The Ad Tech Ecosystem was Never Built for Privacy appeared first on AdMonsters.

Things just ain’t the same for mobile. Times are changing, and signals are disappearing.

We recently outlined what mobile marketers need to know about the Android Privacy Sandbox. Now, we turn our lens toward publishers.

Google’s Android Privacy Sandbox isn’t just another update — it’s a fundamental overhaul of mobile ad infrastructure enhancing user privacy, and impacting how ads are served and measured. But as with any ad tech update, every overhaul comes with both opportunity and complexity. This guide aims to break down these changes, offering a balanced view of what publishers can expect — and what they should watch out for along the way.

What’s Really Going On Inside the Android Privacy Sandbox?

Android Privacy Sandbox is Google’s response to the increasing demand for user privacy. It’s designed to create a delicate balancing act of protecting personal data while still enabling effective advertising.

For publishers, the transition requires rethinking how ads are targeted and measured. While Google presents the Sandbox as a solution to the privacy dilemma, it’s critical to assess whether it meets publishers’ needs without introducing new challenges.

Can it live up to the mobile IDs of the past? Is this really the silver bullet it claims to be?

Core Objectives:

Protecting User Privacy: While this is crucial, what happens to data granularity and advertiser effectiveness when third-party access is restricted?

Balancing Personalization with Privacy: Can the Sandbox deliver personalized ad experiences without compromising user privacy? This is the tightrope that the Sandbox attempts to walk — relevance without invasiveness.

Redefining Measurement Tools: The new APIs promise precise metrics, but the transition might come with trade-offs in data richness and complex implementation.

Showdown: Android Privacy Sandbox vs. SKAdNetwork vs. Ad Attribution Kit

Why pit the Android Privacy Sandbox against Apple’s SKAdNetwork and Ad Attribution Kit? Because they all address balancing privacy with effective advertising — but in distinct ways. By understanding these differences, publishers can make smarter choices about which strategies to adopt as they navigate mobile privacy.

The Publisher’s Playbook: Opportunities and Potential Pitfalls

1. Cross-App Tracking: The End of an Era?

The decline of cross-app tracking is more than a simple shift. It forces data collection strategies that could either unlock new opportunities or leave gaps in your data.

2. Ad Targeting and Measurement: New Tools, New Complexities

The new Sandbox APIs promise a lot but also require a leap of faith. Will these tools deliver the precision they claim, or will they leave publishers with a diluted version of what was once possible?

3. Revenue Implications: Walking a Tightrope

The impact on revenue streams is real. While contextual ads and first-party data are touted as solutions, the practical implications could be more nuanced.

Real-World Experiences: Insights from Early Adopters

1. Gameloft’s Strategic Leap: Testing the Limits of Privacy-First Ad Measurement

Gameloft, a mobile gaming titan, has been at the forefront of adopting the Android Privacy Sandbox. Partnering with Singular, they tested the Attribution Reporting API, balancing effective ad measurement with the demands of user privacy. Their journey highlights both the promise and the challenges of adapting to these evolving standards, particularly in maintaining data accuracy and targeting precision.

2. Verve Group’s Bold Move: Redefining On-Device Bidding with Privacy Sandbox

Ad tech innovator, Verve Group, is pioneering on-device bidding through the Android Privacy Sandbox, focusing on the Protected Audiences API. By moving auctions to the user’s device, Verve reduced data transfers, aligning with privacy goals. But not without running into significant hurdles. Their collaborative work with partners like Remerge has been essential in overcoming these technical challenges, from latency issues to complex implementation requirements.

The Realities of Implementation: What Publishers Need to Know

1. Implementation Complexities: The Devil’s in the Details

Implementing these new APIs requires more than a simple update — it’s an extensive reworking of infrastructure. Publishers should invest significant resources into testing and development to ensure these systems work effectively. Expect compatibility issues.

2. Latency: The Hidden Cost of Privacy

On-device processing is a cornerstone of the Android Privacy Sandbox, but latency can become a significant issue, impacting ad delivery, viewability, speed, and efficiency.

3. Data Accuracy: A Double-Edged Sword

Privacy-preserving methods often result in less data granularity. While this protects users, it can also undermine ad targeting precision and measurement, leaving publishers questioning whether the benefits outweigh the drawbacks. Will we still be able to hit KPIs?

Game Plan For Sailing Mobile’s Privacy-Preserving Seas

1. Hoist Your Sails, But Chart Your Course Wisely

Early adoption is key to catching wind and gaining momentum but plot your journey carefully. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid just yet. Thorough testing and validation are necessary before full-scale implementation, ensuring you’re prepared for the uncharted waters.

2. Steer Your Ship with Trusted Crew

Partnering with reliable DSPs, SSPs, and MMPs is crucial for steering the complex waters. Ensure these alliances are aligned, guiding you towards your specific goals — not just drifting the tide of broad industry trends.

3. Keep a Steady Hand on the Helm: Embrace New Standards, But Stay Informed

As you sail through the shifting currents of the Android Privacy Sandbox, keep a watchful eye on the horizon. While the new Attribution Reporting API offers potential, it’s vital to understand what’s being gained — and what might be lost. Stay informed and ready to adjust strategies as the seascape evolves.

Looking Forward: A Cautious Path to the Future

1. Stay Critical, Stay Agile

As the Android Privacy Sandbox develops, keep a close eye on updates. While it promises much, the reality may require agile adjustments to strategies and expectations.

2. Evolve with the Technology, But Manage Expectations

This shift isn’t a survival strategy — it’s about evolving. But evolution is complex and often slower than anticipated. Prepare for a marathon rather than a sprint.

The Android Privacy Sandbox is not a cure-all, publishers need to navigate these changes carefully, balancing new opportunities with potential pitfalls. By staying informed, skeptical, and proactive, you can make the most of this transition — without falling victim to the hype.

Additional Resources:

– Google Privacy Sandbox Documentation

– AppsFlyer’s Guide to Privacy Sandbox 

The post Dissecting the Android Privacy Sandbox: A Critical Guide for Publishers appeared first on AdMonsters.

Who said cookieless targeting doesn’t scale?

Dotdash Meredith’s cookieless targeting tool, D/Cipher, has propelled the publisher to a 12% increase in digital ad revenue year-over-year, marking the second consecutive quarter of double-digit growth.  

D/Cipher is proving its worth in driving campaigns like the one the media company conducted with Pandora. The campaign resulted in 76% higher foot traffic when compared to other targeting methods. 

But this isn’t just about impressive numbers. It’s about Dotdash Meredith setting a new standard in the industry. With third-party cookies becoming obsolete, their ability to pivot and innovate with tools like D/Cipher is a masterclass in adaptation. 

“The performance is amazing because the industry is always trying to find ways to tie media buys to real results. This proves that Dotdash Meredith can drive national brick-and-mortar sales for a brand without any cookie or identifier,” Lindsay Van Kirk, Senior Vice President and General Manager of D/Cipher told ADWEEK. 

The publisher’s success is part of a broader narrative vividly discussed at the recent AdMonsters Publisher Forum in Boston. Let’s connect the dots between Dotdash Meredith’s achievements and the strategies shared by top publishers.

Connecting the Dots from Publisher Forum

Several sessions highlighted how publishers leverage data to secure ad spend and ensure brand safety, aligning perfectly with Dotdash Meredith’s success story. Conversations weren’t merely about surviving the post-cookie apocalypse — they were about thriving.

Data-Driven Strategies:

Patrick McCarthy, SVP, Programmatic Monetization, Dotdash Meredith, emphasized the importance of big data in ad operations. “We are a very data-driven company. When you go into meetings with our C-suite team, hunches really aren’t acceptable. Our whole programmatic and advertising part of our business is really driven by our CFO and Chief Innovation Officer, who is a former data scientist. Data is absolutely paramount to making your case for new investment, for new products to be rolled out,”  he said.

This reflects D/Cipher’s ability to utilize first-party data and contextual signals to outperform traditional cookie-based methods. He also highlighted the role of predictive analytics and real-time data applications. The publisher is proving that first-party data and advanced analytics are the future.

Echoing the power of data, Jesse Waldele, SVP, Digital Operations and Client Success at Dow Jones, shared how they’ve ditched third-party data in favor of first-party insights, fueling more effective ad solutions. Their “Thematic AI” tool, which predicts the best content placement using AI, has driven noticeable performance lifts for advertisers. Dow Jones’ focus on real-time measurement ensures that advertisers keep rebooking.

While the benefits of big data are clear, reliance on it also comes with obstacles. The high cost of data management and the risk of data privacy issues can be a significant barrier for smaller publishers.

Brand Suitability and First-Party Data:

In her keynote, Jana Meron, Vice President of Revenue Operations & Data, The Washington Post, discussed the power of first-party data in achieving brand suitability and effective ad placements. She noted, “The intersection of deterministic and probabilistic first-party data is where we get our power.”

The Washington Post observed a 3x performance lift when using first-party data compared to third-party data with standard display, and a 5x lift when integrating custom ad units designed for their audience.

While first-party data offers significant benefits in targeting and personalization, the session also highlighted potential downsides, such as difficulties in scaling deterministic data due to the reliance on user logins, which can limit reach. Additionally, there are concerns about balancing privacy with data collection, as overly aggressive data strategies might lead to consumer pushback or regulatory scrutiny.

Still, The Washington Post’s direction is a fundamental shift in how publishers view and leverage their audience data. By focusing on the nuances of their data, publishers can create a more personalized and effective advertising ecosystem, which is essential as consumers become increasingly wary of invasive data practices.

Harnessing Audience Power: Future’s Strategy

Jeff Goldstein, Head of Programmatic at Future, offered a compelling keynote on the importance of understanding and harnessing audience passions. He explained how Future’s approach to audience segmentation — dividing users into “practical intenders” and “passionate intenders” — has allowed the publisher to optimize its content and ad strategies.

Goldstein shared that through their first-party data platform, Aperture, Future has identified high-intent users, leading to a 30% higher purchase likelihood among these users. He emphasized the value of deep audience insights and the role of AI-driven data in refining targeting strategies.

Future’s approach underscores the value of deep audience insights, enabling them to create more personalized and effective media products. By leveraging AI and contextual data, Future exceeds advertiser expectations, driving better outcomes across its 200+ owned and operated properties.

ID Bridging: Navigating the Benefits and Risks

In another session, the topic of ID bridging was explored in depth, highlighting how this technology enables publishers to maintain addressable audiences in a cookieless environment. Ianna Feliciano, Senior Director, Programmatic Advertising, Raptive, and Jasper Liu, Senior Programmatic Yield Analyst, Daily Mail, explained how ID bridging allows for deterministic and probabilistic matching across devices and browsers. While deterministic matching offers precision, it often lacks scale. On the other hand, probabilistic matching provides greater reach but with potential trade-offs in accuracy.

The speakers also explained the risks associated with ID bridging, such as increased complexity in managing multiple ID partners and the potential for data leakage, which can have severe privacy implications. Additionally, the costs associated with ID bridging can be significant, especially when considering the need for continuous vendor management and compliance with evolving privacy regulations.

But when connected with the right partners, ID bridging is becoming essential for maintaining campaign effectiveness in the face of increasing privacy regulations and the decline of third-party cookies. The session emphasized the importance of choosing the right ID-bridging partners and continually testing and adapting strategies to balance accuracy, scale, and compliance with privacy laws.

Innovative Revenue Strategies:

The “One Big Problem” session, a town hall publisher-only conversation, underscored the challenges and strategies in ramping up revenue. One standout solution was monetizing social media audiences. Publishers are turning their social followers into a goldmine, leveraging these platforms to drive engagement and revenue. This strategy, highlighted by some ad ops leaders shows the innovative ways publishers are navigating the post-cookie landscape.

This strategy doesn’t come without its downsides though. Relying heavily on social platforms means publishers are subject to the algorithms and policies of those platforms, which can change suddenly and impact reach and monetization.

Another exciting approach discussed during the Forum was Deal Curation as a Service (DCaaS). This strategy empowers publishers to showcase and monetize high-quality inventory effectively, leveraging first-party data for improved targeting and higher CPMs. Yet, implementing DCaaS can be resource-intensive, requiring significant investments in technology and data management. It can also lead to increased operational complexity, as publishers must manage and coordinate with multiple partners and ensure the integrity of their curated deals. 

In the long haul, DCaaS enables publishers to regain control over their inventory, creating a more curated and valuable marketplace that benefits publishers and advertisers alike. As Scott Messer of Messer Media explained, DCaaS alleviates costs, aggregates sales efforts, and delivers a good product.

The Existential Crisis and Future-Proofing Revenue

Despite Google’s flip-flop on third-party cookies, savvy publishers are already adapting. Our recent Publisher Pulse report, Ramping Up Your Revenue: Digital Publishers Reveal Key Growth Strategies, shows that 71% of publishers are investing in new tools and technologies to drive revenue growth, with the most invested tools including audience segmentation (65%), identity resolution (50%), and AI-driven/advanced analytics platforms (40%).

But this isn’t just about technology for technology’s sake, it’s about addressing the existential crisis of trust and relevance. Publishers like Dotdash Meredith, The Washington Post, and Future are leading the way, demonstrating that investing in first-party data and contextual targeting is key to thriving in a cookieless world.

As Dotdash Meredith’s McCarthy explained, predictive analytics and real-time data are revolutionizing how we approach ad operations, ensuring we stay ahead of the curve. This aligns seamlessly with the broader industry trends discussed at the Forum, showing a unified move towards data-driven, privacy-safe ad tech solutions.

The landscape is shifting, and those who don’t adapt will be left behind. Since many of these approaches may require significant investment in technology and talent, it’s a survival of the fittest scenario, where only the most innovative and forward-thinking publishers will thrive. Regardless of the size of your operation, your best bet is to start small and keep testing iteratively.

Innovation must be balanced with caution — embrace your data, invest in the right tools, and keep innovating.

Editor’s Update 08/14/2024 An earlier version of this article omitted insights from Jesse Waldele, SVP of Digital Operations and Client Services at Dow Jones, and Jeff Goldstein, Head of Programmatic at Future’s keynote.

The post Dotdash Meredith’s Cookieless Conquest and the Publisher Pulse: Notes from AdMonsters Publisher Forum Boston appeared first on AdMonsters.

In a plot twist straight out of a digital marketing thriller, last week, Google announced it will not deprecate third-party cookies unilaterally after all and instead opt for enhanced user choice. This revelation is leaving buyers and sellers scrambling to reassess their strategies.

We attended a U of Digital Live Learning Event, where industry experts shared insights about what the news means for the advertising ecosystem.

Following are key points from the U of Digital event and what this means for digital media and ad tech, with insights from industry-heavy hitters. U of Digital’s Myles Younger and Shiv Gupta were joined by Alex Cone Product Manager, Privacy Sandbox at Google; Joe Root Co-Founder & CEO at Permutive; Shailley Singh, EVP Product & COO at IAB Tech Lab; and Therran Oliphant former SVP Data & Technology at Essence Mediacom discussed what steps advertisers and publishers should take to navigate this new reality.

The Big Reveal: Google’s Change of Heart

Last Monday, Google unveiled its new approach to privacy, giving users elevated and informed choices for managing third-party cookies in the Chrome browser. Instead of outright deprecation, users will receive a universal prompt allowing them to decide whether to accept cookies, with the option to adjust this choice at any time. This move aims to balance user privacy with the industry’s need for effective advertising tools.

Panel Insights: What the Experts Are Saying

During the U of Digital event, the panel of industry experts dissected the implications of Google’s announcement, and here’s what they had to say:

User Choice and Its Ripple Effects: Google’s decision to elevate user choice, potentially mirroring Apple’s ATT framework, means cookies aren’t entirely gone but are expected to decline as more users opt-out. The design and deployment of the consent prompt will be pivotal. Will it be opt-in or opt-out? How will it be presented to users? These factors will determine the extent of cookie usage going forward.

Privacy Sandbox Continues to Evolve: Despite the shift, Google will continue developing privacy-preserving alternatives like the Topics API, Protected Audiences API, and Measurement API, ensuring the industry has robust tools for the future.

Broadening Privacy Horizons: With plans to introduce IP protection in incognito mode and other privacy measures, Google is pushing the envelope on broader privacy initiatives beyond cookies.

Voices from the Field: Real-Time Reactions

The panel experts shared their perspectives on the announcement’s broader implications:

Publishers and Ad Tech Innovators: Joe Root emphasized the significant shift for publishers who must now consider a future where cookies play a smaller role, focusing on alternative IDs, contextual advertising, and first-party data.

Advertisers and Agencies: Therran Oliphant pointed out the increased complexity for marketers, stressing the importance of investing in first-party data and streamlining tech stacks to future-proof their strategies. This is a wake-up call for marketers to clean their houses. Those clunky, inefficient tech stacks? They’re yesterday’s news.

Portfolio Solutions Approach: Cookies may still have a seat at the table, but they’re no longer the head. Shailley Singh from IAB Tech Lab highlighted the need for a portfolio approach, blending cookies with other addressability solutions to maintain effective advertising strategies in a rapidly evolving landscape.

Alex Cone’s Crucial Insights: Timelines and Testing

While the timeline has shifted, the privacy-first future is still coming. It’s less of a demolition and more of a renovation. Alex Cone from Google provided valuable insights regarding the timelines for cookie deprecation and the privacy sandbox APIs:

Decoupling Timelines: Cone clarified that the timeline for third-party cookie deprecation has always been separate from the availability of the privacy sandbox APIs. The APIs have been generally available since last September, allowing publishers to start testing and integrating these tools well before cookies are phased out.

Testing and Adoption: While a 1% deprecation rate for cookies was meant to facilitate initial testing, the APIs are available for broader industry adoption. Publishers can and should start integrating these technologies to prepare for the eventual decline of third-party cookies.

Informed User Choice: Cone emphasized the importance of ensuring users can make informed choices about their privacy settings. This involves a more detailed and transparent consent mechanism, likely resembling Apple’s ATT prompts but applied universally across browsing experiences.

What Publishers Need to Know: Practical Steps Forward

It’s time for advertisers to find new ways to reach audiences without relying on third-party data. The race to find the perfect balance between personalization and privacy has just begun.

For publishers, the cookie jar might not be empty, it’s certainly not as full as it used to be. Root of Permutive pointed out that many users are already browsing without third-party cookies. The time to develop robust first-party data strategies and explore contextual targeting solutions was yesterday.

While Google’s announcement offers some breathing room for the industry, it raises crucial questions about implementation and future strategies. Here are the key considerations for publishers:

1. Prepare for User Choice: Publishers should anticipate a decline in third-party cookies as more users opt-out. Investing in first-party data collection and management will be critical.
2. Embrace Privacy Sandbox APIs: Start testing and integrating Google’s privacy-preserving alternatives like the Topics API and Protected Audiences API. These tools will be essential in maintaining addressability and ad effectiveness.
3. Develop and adopt privacy-preserving technologies: As cookies continue to decline, the industry must keep developing and adopting privacy-preserving technologies. This includes enhancing first-party data strategies, utilizing privacy sandbox APIs, and exploring new addressability solutions.
4. Engage with Consent Mechanisms: Stay informed about the development of Google’s consent prompts. Understand how these will be implemented and what messaging options will be available to maintain user trust and transparency.
5. Monitor Regulatory Developments: Google’s approach is designed to appease regulators, but ongoing dialogue with bodies like the UK’s CMA will shape the final implementation. Publishers should stay engaged with these discussions to anticipate and adapt to regulatory requirements.

Adapting to a New Era of Digital Advertising

Google’s third-party cookies reversal marks a significant shift for the industry. While it offers a reprieve, the long-term trajectory remains clear: a move towards greater user privacy and the need for innovative solutions. Publishers must stay agile, continuously adapt their strategies, and prepare for a future where privacy and addressability coexist in a delicate balance.

Take a deeper dive into this topic, check out the presentation, view the deck, and download the recap at U of Digital. 

The post Google’s Cookie Curveball: What’s Next for Buyers and Sellers? appeared first on AdMonsters.

This week, Google threw the ad tech industry for a loop by announcing a significant shift in its privacy strategy. Contrary to its long-standing plan to eliminate third-party cookies from its Chrome browser, Google has revealed it will offer users the option to opt out of third-party cookies through a new choice mechanism. This unexpected pivot has sparked a flurry of reactions from publishers, advertisers, and industry stakeholders, many of whom have spent the past few years preparing for a cookieless future.

In a blog post by Anthony Chavez, VP of Privacy Sandbox, Google outlined its revised approach, emphasizing user choice and engagement with industry feedback. This move comes after four years of extensive testing and regulatory discussions, during which Google faced substantial pushback from industry players and regulators like the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). 

The original plan to phase out cookies had been postponed multiple times, with the latest delay pushing the deadline to 2025. Now, Google’s new path aims to balance privacy with the practical needs of the advertising ecosystem.

There are mixed reactions to this news. While some industry leaders express relief at the additional time to adapt, others remain wary of the potential implications for privacy and competition. The ad tech community is now grappling with questions about how Google will implement this mechanism and its impact on the broader industry. Below, we’ve gathered insights and opinions from key figures in the industry, offering a glimpse into the varied responses to Google’s surprising announcement.

Publishers React to Google’s Privacy Pivot: Balancing User Choice and Industry Innovation

In light of Google’s recent decision to let users choose between Sandbox and legacy cookie behaviors, publisher’s reactions vary. Some expect a shift towards user opt-outs rather than forced changes, while others are hopeful for a balanced approach that maintains innovation and effective monetization. There are calls for transparent messaging without fear-mongering and a recognition that Google is grappling with the complexities of balancing user privacy with meaningful ad experiences.

“The news is confirmed. I think we’ll see aggressive messaging pushing users to opt-out, instead of a forced deprecation effort.” – Justin Wohl, Chief Revenue Officer, Snopes.com

“This transition was never going to be easy. Google’s announcement that users will be able to choose between Sandbox and legacy behavior seems to offer the best of both worlds. It places the decision where it belongs, in the hands of the consumer, instead of any large technical organization. 

We’re looking forward to continuing our innovations in both environments, and we’re hopeful this doesn’t imply the CMA will release Google from their commitments in exchange for a small minority of users being able to opt into cookies. We won’t back off our ongoing investment in audience addressability using Sandbox technology so advertisers can reach all consumers, and our publishers will enjoy our industry’s best monetization however the consumer or their browser chooses to consume advertising.” – Patrick McCann, SVP of Research, Raptive

“I think Google’s decision is about removing deadlines and finding solutions that can work (and hopefully be more broadly supported) for the industry. Google already offers users the ability to remove third-party cookies in Chrome, so publishers will need to understand better how implementing this “new experience” plays out to understand the impact of this change.” – Emry Downinghall, SVP, Programmatic Revenue & Strategy Unwind Media

“I’m very interested to see more details come out following Google’s initial announcement.  I’m relieved at the step back, mainly because the proposed alternatives to date weren’t sufficient, and the industry wasn’t ready. The concept of actual damage due to third-party cookies and tracking has gotten overblown – offering a choice makes sense. I’m hopeful that the messaging around that choice won’t be skewed to elicit fear and will present a clear option to toggle them off if the site visitor is bothered by the idea of third-party cookies. Let’s not participate in fear-mongering this time around, a la ATT.” – Catherine Beattie, Director of Programmatic, Weatherbug

“As Google wrestled with balancing privacy and delivering a relevant ad experience to every user, I believe they were forced to identify exactly how much data is too much data. If we are honest with ourselves there are probably about five or so personally identifiable elements that are needed to provide a meaningful experience and meet the request of advertisers. Broad concern that it has passed the point of need to greed drove the push for Google to go cookieless.  Unraveling this invasive practice has become nearly impossible for Google without being completely blind to any user behavior. I’m glad that this forced Google to be honest about the state of advertising and its needs and wants in this ecosystem.” – Terry Guyton-Bradley, Senior Director of Advertising Technology, Fortune

“The news isn’t a shock, but I hope the fact that we still will have 3P cookies doesn’t stall the progress made around targeting without cookies. Preparing for life without cookies forced publishers to think about ways to get closer to their audiences, and I think that is ultimately a good thing. So, I hope they still push for that moving forward.“ – Kevin Antione, Head of Digital Inventory Optimization, Graham Media Group

“I was not surprised to see Google’s announcement that it would pause the deprecation of third-party cookies. Looking ahead, there is no changing the fact that cookies will still be deprecated within Google Chrome, even if a small percentage remains. With at least 60% of the web being unaddressable by cookies at the moment, the focus should be on solutions that work for cookieless environments. I advise my clients to stay the course and continue weaning into a cookieless future. While the sandbox will be an important part of the ecosystem in the future, the short-term focus should be on more immediate and tangible solutions beyond just the sandbox.” – Scott Messer, Principal and Founder, Messer Media

Ad Tech Leaders React: The Impact of Simplified Opt-Outs on Consumer Choice and Ad Revenue

The conversation around third-party cookies and privacy continues to evolve. Efforts to simplify opt-out processes for third-party cookies are a step towards greater consumer control, although the broader impact on advertising and data collection practices remains significant. Industry leaders stress the need for privacy-focused solutions that balance user protection with the realities of digital advertising.

“The CMA needs to be wary of letting Google off the hook by accepting Apple’s dark choice patterns. AdMonsters’ readers need to write to the CMA before 12 August to resist remedies involving user prompts controlled by monopolists. Remedies that enable transparency across data controllers and processors, including within Google’s own data engine, are preferable.

If notices are to be used then they must be applied equally to each of Google’s own services and products to avoid creating disparity. For example; when using sign-in-with-Google to collect so-called first-party data any user prompt needs to be identical to the one used with Chrome for so-called third-party data. CMA has the power to require this in the remedy and policy implementation. It is not a matter for data protection authorities like the ICO.

The industry narrative now needs to move towards quarantining web browsers by restricting them to access and navigation only. Web browsers must be separated from the monopolists’ other interests. W3C has a role in enforcing its antitrust guidelines to ensure fair play and prevent further privacy abuses in standards setting.” – James Rosewell, Co-Founder, Movement For an Open Web 

“Deprecating cookies in the world’s most used web browser was never going to be easy. This effort has been fraught with challenges, from antitrust and privacy concerns to the impact on ad revenue. While this announcement may feel like a reversal, I don’t think we should view it as a return to the status quo. 

Introducing a feature that will allow users to declare their preferences across all browsing activities is significant. This sounds like a global privacy control that consumers may actually use.  If that’s the case, the efforts invested in testing privacy-preserving APIs and introducing alternative identifiers will pay off. The use of third-party cookies will continue to get scrutiny from regulators, and when given an easy-to-use choice, consumers may choose to opt out.  

The data faucet has been slowly turning down, and with or without an official deprecation of third-party cookies, the industry needed a push to consider alternative solutions. Moving towards solutions that can balance the need to protect consumer privacy with the understanding that advertising powers the open web is a worthwhile endeavor, and I hope to see those efforts continue (albeit without the pressure of an impending deadline).” – Jessica B. Lee, Partner, Co-Chair, Privacy, Security & Data Innovations at Loeb & Loeb LLP

“When third-party cookie opt-out is made simple, people overwhelmingly say no, evidenced by the impact of GDPR in Europe, where over 90% of people have opted out. Forty percent of people who use Chrome have already said no, and that is when disabling cookies is hard, let alone easy. Google is using consumer choice as the cloak, killing the third-party cookie without necessarily providing an alternative solution, similar to Apple and ATT.

The vast majority of users online are already unreachable due to signal loss in the open web today, causing publishers’ OMP yields to collapse. For advertisers, this signal loss means bidding on an ever-smaller group of users, pushing up CPMs, and reducing the perceived efficiency of open web buying.

There is another way for advertisers to build brand equity, grow market share, and drive performance in programmatic. It lies in publisher first-party signals and data collaboration between data owners—advertisers, and media owners. When these data owners collaborate, it is not only enormously scalable but also performant, delivering increased yield for publishers, incremental sales, and reduced cost per acquisition for advertisers.” –  Joe Root, CEO & Co-founder, Permutive

“While some might see this as a relief, it’s a clear signal that the industry must diversify its strategies and focus on privacy-first technologies. We shouldn’t view this as a chance to return to old ways but as an opportunity to continue innovating and building a more resilient digital advertising future.” – Yang Han, CTO of StackAdapt

“Consumers are the beating heart of our industry, and I support Google’s decision to elevate consumer choice when it comes to cookies. Google is toeing the line between clients and customers, and they have already made improvements to Privacy Sandbox after many months of work. However, it benefits everyone if they have more time to perfect better identity-protecting strategies without harming Q4 revenues.

Regardless of Google’s decision, privacy regulations are ever-evolving and our industry should remain committed to enabling advertisers and publishers to succeed with privacy-first strategies. Apple has blocked cookies by default from Apple for years, and now that Google is following suit, advertisers should be prepared to meet their audiences where they are. Many consumers will likely choose to opt out of third-party cookies, and protecting the user journey will be key.

Google’s news today sets the tone for a privacy-centric future driven by the consumer, and the industry should continue to work together to leverage alternative IDs and other more privacy-focused solutions like contextual alongside existing signals (e.g., audience, performance). Publishers and advertisers must continue to navigate these transitions and build a strong, privacy-friendly data culture built on collaboration, trust, and a test-and-learn mentality, that keeps the consumer top of mind.” – Jenn Chen, President and CRO of Connatix

“This recent – and hopefully – final decision boils down to placing users in the driver’s seat regarding privacy. But this is a nothing-burger in many ways, as advertisers have already been on a cookie-less road. The digital advertising ecosystem will experience less disruption in the short term. Still, it could face long-term challenges related to privacy concerns, regulatory pressures, and the eventual need to adapt to a more privacy-focused environment. As XR has recently implemented IAB’s ACIF, we’re revolutionizing creative tagging throughout its lifecycle, driving the future of measurement and identity. This leadership positions us decisively ahead as others scramble to understand and adapt to the changing landscape.” –  Jo Kinsella, President of XR Extreme Reach

“Viant has estimated that less than 10% of total ad spend across our platform utilizes cookies today, which is indicative of an industry that has already moved on. The increasing importance of new channels such as CTV, which never relied on third-party cookies, has only expedited their diminishing utility. Ultimately, advertisers want contribution, not attribution, toward their real goals like return on ad spend.” – Jon Schulz, Chief Marketing Officer, Viant

“Google’s decision to create consumer choice with the advertiser use of their own data, signals two things. First, Google needs additional time to get the Privacy Sandbox to perform at a level that reduces disruption to their core business model. Thus far, sparse and unconvincing tests have proven that the Privacy Sandbox is not ready for the big show and they need more time. Second, is that complexity is not a concern. Depending on the functionality, there will be parallel data supply paths. In short, buckle up for more disruption in the coming months and years.”(Read more insights) – Therran Oliphant, Chief Strategy Officer, Hand Raiser Marketing

The post Industry Leaders Respond to Google’s Cookie Deprecation Pause and New Opt-Out Mechanism appeared first on AdMonsters.

In a detailed discussion with AdMonsters’ Yakira Young, James Rosewell, co-founder of Movement for an Open Web, discussed the nuances of the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) recent report and concerns regarding Google’s Privacy Sandbox. 

Exploring the pivotal changes and challenges in digital privacy and competition, this analysis highlights the tension between innovation and regulation, examining how new policies may reshape the digital advertising landscape. 

Here are Rosewell’s insights into the evolving dynamics of digital privacy and its potential ramifications for the industry. This recap highlights the significant aspects of his analysis, touching on the tensions between privacy, competition, and interoperability, as well as the future steps for addressing these emerging challenges.

Tensions at the Triangular Table

• Digital Industry’s Inflection Point: Rosewell describes the CMA’s April report as a pivotal moment that could dictate future directions for digital advertising and privacy. It’s a tipping point for the digital industry, marking significant changes in the regulatory landscape.
• Interplay of Competition and Privacy: The report underscores the ongoing tension between competition and privacy, pointing to the need for balance between these elements.
• Interagency Dynamics: Rosewell clarifies the distinct roles of the ICO and CMA in the UK’s regulatory framework, emphasizing their collaborative yet focused mandates on privacy and competition, respectively.
• Google’s Compliance Challenges: The ongoing scrutiny over whether Google’s Privacy Sandbox meets the dual mandates of the ICO and CMA.
• Future Projections for Google: Insights into potential changes Google might need to implement to align with regulatory expectations.

Unpacking Compliance and Concerns

• Non-Compliance with ICO Guidelines: Rosewell points out significant gaps in Google’s adherence to privacy standards, particularly in how the Privacy Sandbox handles data. While Google’s Privacy Sandbox has not fully complied with the ICO’s privacy guidelines, this could signal significant shifts in how data privacy is managed. Rosewell suggests that the ongoing non-compliance could lead to more stringent oversight and possibly a rethinking of current data privacy frameworks.
• Technical Shortcomings in APIs: There are concerns about the technical limitations and the potential misuse of de-identified data. The report details criticism of how privacy APIs might still be processing personal data, indicating a lack of true anonymization.
• Call for Clarity and Compliance: Upcoming, more detailed ICO reports, are expected to address these compliance issues. 
• Stakeholder Feedback: Reflections on the broader industry concerns regarding the overreach of the Privacy Sandbox beyond basic legal frameworks.

Governance and Technical Hurdles

• Need for Robust Governance: The discussion emphasizes the essential role of governance in managing digital practices fairly and transparently.
• Governance in Digital Operations: There is a necessity for proper governance frameworks that ensure fairness and compliance in digital operations, as opposed to automated, unchecked processes.
• Challenges of Ensuring Reliability: There are limitations in current technological solutions like the Attribution Reporting API’s Coordinator Service.
• Industry’s Call for Protection: There is a potential need for warranty language to safeguard the interests of advertisers and ad tech partners.
• Technical Challenges of Latency: The discussion of latency issues within digital platforms, emphasizes the limitations of browser-based solutions and the potential need for server-side solutions.

The Smaller Players’ Predicament

• Disproportionate Impact on Smaller Entities: Changes driven by the Privacy Sandbox could particularly challenge smaller publishers and advertisers.
• Potential for Increased Market Consolidation: Stringent privacy regulations may inadvertently push smaller players towards more restrictive platforms and into less competitive environments.

Looking Ahead: Remedies and Regulations

• Advocacy for Meaningful Dialogue: Rosewell calls for a balanced discussion that does not sacrifice interoperability, privacy, or competition.
• Engagement with Regulation: The importance of engaging with regulatory processes to influence and adapt to new market conditions.
• Envisioning Future Remedies: Data labeling and enhanced privacy guidelines could serve as potential solutions for the industry.

In this crucial moment for digital advertising, Rosewell’s insights underscore the importance of a collaborative regulatory approach that balances innovation with privacy and competition. As the industry anticipates the next phases of the CMA’s evaluations and Google’s responses, the continued dialogue at AdMonsters Ops — during Rosewell’s closing keynote June 4, 2024 — promises to provide a vital forum for shaping the future of digital advertising. 

The challenges and opportunities discussed highlight the critical need for an industry-wide dialogue and cooperation to ensure that future developments benefit all stakeholders.

The post LinkedIn Live Rewind: Unpacking the Implications of CMA’s Surveillance on Google’s Privacy Sandbox appeared first on AdMonsters.

After Google started the initial third-party cookie deprecation process earlier this year, implementing tracking protection for 30 million Chrome users (about 1% of its user base), and the ad tech industry began testing targeting cookieless audiences, there was a large industry sentiment that we were not quite ready for Chrome’s cookie deprecation. Well, it’s looking like maybe we weren’t. 

Even before Google and the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) release their quarterly report in April, updating the ecosystem about the latest status of Privacy Sandbox, the tech giant announced that Chrome’s apocalyptic cookie rapture would not complete by the second half of Q4, as earlier proposed.

Providing context for the delay Google wrote an official statement on the Privacy Sandbox site:

“We recognize that there are ongoing challenges related to reconciling divergent feedback from the industry, regulators and developers, and will continue to engage closely with the entire ecosystem.” It’s also critical that the CMA has sufficient time to review all evidence, including results from industry tests, which the CMA has asked market participants to provide by the end of June. Given both of these significant considerations, we will not complete third-party cookie deprecation during the second half of Q4.” 

Many in the industry called it, some even believing that a complete cookie cutoff will never come.  We reached out to some ad tech thought leaders for their points of view about what this means for the future of the third-party cookie and the ad tech ecosystem overall. Here’s what they had to say…

The Ad Tech Industry’s Initial Reactions

I’m sure some were banking on Google’s cookie deprecation plans coming through by the end of this year, but many saw the writing on Chrome’s walls long before this announcement. Still, giving publishers and advertisers more time to test post-cookie and privacy-centric solutions is a good thing. 

“Google’s new timeline helps the industry continue to test and adapt. Beyond even cookies, non-addressable inventory will only increase and the industry should act now to prepare for these changes. Either way, Yahoo is ready to support advertisers today, with solutions for addressable and non-addressable environments, as well as testing in the Privacy Sandbox.” – Adam Roodman, SVP of Product Strategy & Management, Yahoo

“Google will never be able to deprecate third-party cookies and still gather the enormous amounts of data that it has. Google’s core business is built on knowing and targeting known users across its systems and properties.  

I’ve said at every turn that third-party cookies would not be deprecated anytime soon with the CMA involved.” – Terry Guyton-Bradley, Senior Director of Advertising Technology, Fortune

“Kudos to the CMA for holding Google accountable and ensuring that Google’s approach is very thoughtful to publishers, especially when compared to Apple. Google has delayed the rollout of its cookie deprecation plan because it is thoughtful and has made good faith efforts to balance its corporate public-facing positioning with serving the Publishers and Brands who rely on Google’s ecosystem to survive. 

This stands in stark contrast to Apple, who are cynically painting Publishers who rely on advertising dollars as villains so they can drive audiences to Apple owned platforms. When Apple shut off third-party cookies on Safari, Publisher web CPMs dropped by 77%. When Apple shut off IDFA, Publishers’ mobile inventory suffered with a 50% drop in Facebook Audience Network CPM revenue.” – Matt Keiser, Founder, and CEO, LiveIntent

“Google’s delay, once again, is not surprising, given the technical and regulatory complexities involved. Marketers should take this extra time as a cue to adapt proactively. Focusing now on technologies that analyze the digital environment rather than the consumer—like contextual and intent-based advertising—will prepare them for a future where consumer privacy is paramount. As the industry evolves, adopting these privacy-compliant and contextually relevant approaches will meet regulatory standards and enhance digital engagement’s effectiveness.” – Uri Lichter, CEO Intango

“When Google announced the one percent depreciation earlier this year, they were testing the waters to see how much disruption would occur. Advertisers are still not prepared for a cookieless world, and it is the right move by the CMA to further interrogate a disruptive advertising move where currently only one entity, Google, stands to gain.” – Obele Brown-West, President, Tracer

“Google’s announcement on cookies wasn’t entirely unexpected, but the timing did raise some eyebrows. While cookie deprecation is inevitable for privacy reasons, finding a suitable alternative is crucial to maintaining effective targeting. Marketers are hopeful for a solution that respects user privacy without sacrificing precision in messaging. It’s a reminder of the ongoing evolution in digital marketing strategies.” – Chris Coomer, VP of Data, Analytics & Insights, NP Digital

“My initial reaction, and continued sentiment, is that this is a great setback for publisher innovation. Too many organizations require C-suite buy-in to invest in authentication and alt-IDs, and if those players are sated by the delay of cookie deprecation and are comforted by the knowledge that third-party cookies will still help their Chrome revenues through Q4, I think that all forward progress gets paused once again. 

Chrome will for sure deprecate the third-party cookie, just as they will further obfuscate IP addresses and device IDs in time.”  – Justin Wohl, Chief Revenue Officer, Snopes.com

Movement For an Open Web (MOW) Questions Google’s Motives 

James Rosewell, co-founder of the MOW, commented on Google’s decision to delay its Privacy Sandbox rollout further, noting that regulatory and industry pressures compelled this move. With inquiries from the CMA, the EU, and the US DOJ scrutinizing Google’s Privacy Sandbox and market position, it was inevitable for Google to postpone such a significant change. 

Furthermore, Rosewell states that Google’s Privacy Sandbox’s ineffectiveness offers a convenient shield. Both the CMA and the IAB Tech Lab have raised concerns about its suitability. Google can acknowledge these concerns and sidestep regulatory injunctions. 

“For anyone who thinks regulation doesn’t have an impact, they’re wrong. However, both the CMA and Google are complicit in continuing the uncertainty. The CMA needs to be clear that Google can’t interfere with interoperability and that Google’s Privacy Sandbox must compete on its merits. That would solve the problems. If the CMA is reluctant, then the DMU is weeks away from becoming law, which gives them more powers. 

“Now, the industry has more time to prepare if they think Google’s plans will come to fruition. However, be mindful. Without the guarantee of interoperability, so-called alternative solutions will likely not work either. Apple has a policy regarding interference. Under data protection law, there is no difference between first and third parties. It’s all about the risk of harm. Jumping on first-party data solutions is not without risk.

“I predict that cookies will eventually go the way of the telegram. When they’re no longer used, Chrome will remove them. In the meantime, they need to remain while better solutions are advanced and adopted. In the field of privacy, there are likely to be many better solutions than those advanced by GApple. A competitive market will enable innovation and diverse solutions suited to different needs.” – James Rosewell, Founder, MOW

The Future of the Industry and Chrome’s Cookie Delay

As the news of Chrome’s cookie delay settles in, the ad tech industry is moving ahead with cookie alternative privacy-centric techniques. Whether Chrome will be going cookieless anytime soon, ad tech is forging a path forward that helps engage consumers with considerations of privacy ethics. 

“This delay presents a valuable opportunity for the industry to capitalize on existing cookied datasets while leveraging contextual or alternative identifier data. Advertisers and publishers should seize this opportunity to test solutions now while seeing the impact through A/B testing is still easy. This will help guide the new proxies and performance replacements when (not if) the cookie is gone. The race to interoperability is on, and we encourage the industry to maintain its momentum in preparation—now is not the time to take our foot off the pedal.” – Jenn Chen President and CRO, Connatix

“This is only a pause. IAB Tech Lab maintains that the 3PC will eventually disappear. We continue to advocate for a portfolio approach to addressability. This delay should not be an excuse for the digital advertising industry to be complacent. We must continue to innovate privacy-preserving addressability & measurement solutions while working with Chrome to improve upon the critical shortcomings of the Privacy Sandbox.” – Anthony Katsur, CEO, IAB Tech Lab 

“It was very likely that a delay was going to happen, given that the larger ecosystem wasn’t ready. A lot of work is being done but it’s a long road to remake the whole digital ads ecosystem. I continue to think it’s very likely that Google will depreciate, but will be very curious to see the next UK CMA report as it will shed light on some of the biggest areas that led to the delay.” – Paul Bannister, CSO, Raptive. 

“I have been researching Privacy Sandbox for years now and am constantly learning more. I will use the extra time to better understand how the industry is using these new tools and how they perform. So many of us are grappling with Privacy Sandbox and I will continue to share my findings publicly—including an open webinar next week. 

I also know from speaking with leading companies in this space, that they face three key challenges: 1) implementing & optimizing the various Privacy Sandbox tools in practice; 2) orchestrating these tools and the feedback they provide; and 3) scaling from 1% deprecation to 100%. So, I expect these companies will make good use of this extra time.” – Garrett Johnson, Assistant Professor, Questrom School of Business, Boston University

“Most Marketers have already prepared themselves for a cookieless world, and the recent Google delay only postpones the inevitable. The vast majority of the bidstream today is already cookieless and the fastest growing channels like CTV have never supported cookies. We’re encouraging marketers to lean into their first-party data strategies, and to adopt identity solutions that break free from reliance on third-party cookies to ensure they remain competitive.” – Jon Schulz, CMO, Viant Technology

“We have always embraced contextual and content-based targeting, without the need of third-party data. Rather than having ‘will they, won’t they’ conversations, we’ve been able to take a future-proofed approach, ensuring that an ad is placed within relevant content. As a result, we’ve helped brands and agencies increase campaign impact, effectiveness and, as a result, reduce media wastage.” – Bill Schild, GM, Americas, Channel Factory

“While the industry has been buzzing about the pros and cons around Google Privacy Sandbox, I keep asking myself – ‘Isn’t the cookie just soggy at this point?’ Ad tech firms like Liveramp, TTD and Magnite have already started to plant their flag in the ground with identity-free solutions.

As the decision to delay becomes official, my only caution to our industry is that we don’t keep pushing identity down the road—much of the cookie depreciation has already occurred. Marketers who own their data and take a thoughtful approach to reaching and messaging with their customers and prospects are primed to win the biggest share of wallets.” – Lance Wolder, Head of Strategy and Marketing, PadSquad

“For marketers, the message is clear: get off cookies now. Most of the industry, including mobile and other browsers like Safari, have already moved away from cookies or never used them in the first place. Don’t wait for Google’s shifting timeline to take action; the transition should be happening now. Keep in mind that regardless of cookies, the web’s future—driven by consumer preferences and regulatory changes—is identity-less. Contextual targeting is the best way forward.” – Ken Weiner, Chief Technology Officer, GumGum.

“In the U.S., Chrome represents 50% of web traffic, and even here, we often see a 10% to 50% reduction in tracking accuracy due to cookie synchronization challenges. This means that globally, we can track less than half of web traffic using third-party cookies. 

Marketers must assess their dependency on third-party cookie technology in running ads, measure their performance, and explore alternative solutions to limit the risk of being impacted by a Google technology change likely to happen in the coming months.” – Rico Dittrich, Consulting Manager and Privacy Ambassador, fifty-five

“The roll-out of Chrome’s Privacy Sandbox is a complex endeavor with a lot of regulatory oversight, so it’s no surprise that there have been delays along the way. That said, Android’s Privacy Sandbox is progressing well, and this is a great time for marketers who advertise on mobile to get familiar with a world without device identifiers. They can begin early testing of the Privacy Sandbox by starting integration tests, testing the APIs, and providing feedback, which can greatly help influence Google’s designs and roadmaps.” – Katie Madding, Chief Product Officer, Adjust

“Google has historically solved issues within their own four walls attempting to deprecate third-party cookies with the promise to offer alternative solutions warrants collaboration. After initial reluctance, the AdTech industry has proposed multiple solutions to the issues that plague Privacy Sandbox, Google should consider altering their own opinions in order to meet the promise they made to the CMA.

Neither the sell-side and buy-side of the industry should deviate from testing and improving the solutions offered for a cookieless browser environment, no matter the change in timeline from the Privacy Sandbox team. The largest threat to the digital advertising ecosystem is the stagnation of innovation and having an entire industry consumed by the depreciation of the third-party cookie is threatening to do just that.” — Amanda Martin, SVP, Monetization & Business Strategy, Mediavine

“Anyone expecting Google—or any other big tech platform—to help end the era of measurement, privacy, and marketing malpractice that third-party cookies underpin must open their eyes to the broader trajectory of where this has been and where this is going. There was once a time when the third-party cookie added economic value that far outweighed the risks it created. In 2024, third-party cookies are only making a few companies a lot of money: the companies that set the cookies (Google, Facebook, etc.). 

Brands lose up to $29 per customer acquired online because their acquisition strategies rely on third-party cookie-based audiences. These audiences are now over-saturated, leaving a smaller and smaller pool of users under-exposed to any individual brand message, all while the cost of showing these ads is higher than ever. 

So, what will end the third-party cookie? Simple, when someone figures out how to make advertisers more money without them.” — Matt Butler, the CEO and co-founder of Bonsai Data Solutions

The post 20 Ad Tech Industry Experts Weigh In On Google’s Third Party Cookie Deprecation Delay appeared first on AdMonsters.