https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-violated-its-standards-in-ad-deals-research-finds-3e24e041
About 80% of Google’s video-ad placements on third-party sites violated promised standards, new research shows; Google disputes claims.
Google violated its promised standards when placing video ads on other websites, according to new research that raises questions about the transparency of the tech giant’s online-ad business.
Google’s YouTube runs ads on its own site and app. But the company also brokers the placement of video ads on other sites across the web through a program called Google Video Partners. Google charges a premium, promising that the ads it places will run on high-quality sites, before the page’s main video content, with the audio on, and that brands will only pay for ads that aren’t skipped.
Google violates those standards about 80% of the time, according to research from Adalytics, a company that helps brands analyze where their ads appear online. The firm accused the company of placing ads in small, muted, automatically-played videos off to the side of a page’s main content, on sites that don’t meet Google’s standards for monetization, among other violations.
Adalytics compiled its data by observing campaigns from more than 1,100 brands that got billions of ad impressions between 2020 and 2023. The company shared its findings with The Wall Street Journal.
In a statement, Google said the report “makes many claims that are inaccurate and doesn’t reflect how we keep advertisers safe.” The company said it has strict policies for the program that serves video ads on third-party sites.
“As part of our brand safety efforts, we regularly remove ads from partner sites that violate our policies and we’ll take any appropriate actions once the full report is shared with us,” the company said.
Some ad buyers who have reviewed the research say they want their money back.
“This is an unacceptable breach of trust by YouTube,” said Joshua Lowcock, global chief media officer at ad agency UM Worldwide. “Google must fix this and fully refund clients for any fraud and impressions that failed to meet Google’s own policies.”
The Journal independently observed invalid ad placements such as those the research identified, but couldn’t confirm the extent of the phenomenon. Digital ad-buyers and engineers vouched for the research findings.
To complete its research, Adalytics worked with ad agencies to analyze their clients’ ad-buy placement reports. The company also analyzed data collected by companies that archive the web to find instances when ads ran on sites that didn’t meet the Google Video Partners requirements.
Campaign ads for Republican Sen. Mike Lee appeared in invalid placements, according to the research, and he was critical of Google.
Among the major brands whose Google video-ad placements weren’t in line with the promised standards were Johnson & Johnson, American Express, Samsung, Sephora, Macy’s, Disney+ and The Wall Street Journal, according to Adalytics. It also affected ads for government agencies, including Medicare, the U.S. Army, the Social Security Administration, and the New York City municipal government.
“CMS is concerned with reports of invalid ad placements by YouTube,” said a spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.
YouTube accounts for 8.3% of U.S. digital-video ad spending, according to research company Insider Intelligence. Marketers feel obligated to advertise on YouTube because of its size, several ad buyers said.
Google sells ad placements on third-party sites as part of bundles that include ads on YouTube itself.
didn’t disclose how much revenue came from Google Video Partners. Brands and ad agencies often aren’t aware that their ads have run on third-party sites, said several ad buyers.
For every brand in Adalytics’ sample, more than half the budget they spent on the bundles went to non-YouTube properties, the research found.
A Google spokesman said the overwhelming majority of the video ads it sells are served on YouTube—not third-party sites. Advertisers can clearly see that their ads might run on third-party sites, and how much is spent there, and can easily opt out, he said.
Brands typically pay about $100 for every 1,000 completed views of the ads on third-party sites, according to several ad-buyers. They pay the premium rate to avoid ad placements that are intrusive, such as those that load in the margins of the user’s desired content. Such lower-quality ads often sell for about $5 per 1,000 instances of ads, the buyers said.
“I feel cheated,” said Giovanni Sollazzo, founder, chairman and chief executive of digital-ad agency AIDEM. “What I requested to buy was not what I got. This should entitle me to a refund for invalid traffic.”
Ad placements appeared on low-quality sites that trafficked in misinformation or “clickbait” content, as well as those that appeared to publish pirated content, contrary to the promises of the Google Video Partners program, the researchers found.
The research raises questions about how Google vets the sites in its network, said Adalytics founder Krzysztof Franaszek, who authored the research.
The research underscores the opaqueness of the digital-ad market, where money flows are difficult to track and it is hard for brands to know that they are getting what they paid for.
At least 23% of the $88 billion spent annually by marketers on automated digital ad buying on the open web is wasted, according to the Association of National Advertisers.
The Adalytics report “proves the lie in Google’s assertion that it has made digital advertising better for all involved,” said Sen. Mike Lee (R., Utah), after reviewing the research. “Advertisers and consumers will continue to suffer from Google’s rampant conflicts of interest and fraudulent conduct,” said Lee. His campaign ads also appeared in invalid placements, according to the research.
Marc Friedman, founder of digital-marketing consulting firm Mfried Consulting, said he planned to ask for compensation for ads that ran in the wrong places and format. “It’s just not being honest,” he said.
Leave a Reply