“The Cell CiderA column written by the sales party of the digital media community.
Today’s column is written by Stephanie Ledger, VP of Data, Identity and Ad Tech. News Corporation.
Google has recently launched Subject API, An offer for interest-based advertising. Although the issues are still with Google’s initial concept, a significant improvement over the FLOC The question is whether things cut the stain From the point of view of the consumer or the publisher.
Topics improve some aspects of user privacy such as predefining topics, limiting the number of topics that a site will find, and inserting random effects.
But the problem is, with adequate data points, Google and intermediaries can easily overlay issues across contexts to re-identify users. This denies many of the privacy features Google is trying to accomplish
Additionally, topics continue to enable cross-domain data collection and targeting, often to the detriment of publishers with unique content. For example, you might assume that visitors to Realtor.com are interested in real estate and may end up talking about “real estate.” That data is then shared across the Internet. But instead of buying ads where advertisers have that data, they are able to target that particular user elsewhere on the Internet.
The Topic API continues to play into the misconception that advertisers can buy the “same” audience they find. The Wall Street Journal Elsewhere, cheap. This premise has not served advertisers well, and it has unequivocally rewarded clever ad fraudsters rather than truly good publishers. This method ignores the quality of context and content. There is definitely a good road here.
As a publisher, I prefer what IAB Tech Lab Topic offers to API. It’s called Vendor-defined audience (SDA) – And it’s good for everyone.
SDA benefits the entire industry
First and foremost, Vendor-defined audience Good for consumer privacy. It relies on existing Open Standards such as IAB Tech Lab Content and Audience Classification, OpenRTB Specification and Data Transparency Standards that promote privacy-centric addressability and first-party data monetization.
SDA leaves data where it is created. This is treated as full first party data and is not shared across the domain. This is a solution that even privacy advocates will support, since the ads will only relate to the domain the user is using.
Consumers want privacy, addressability and relevant advertising even though they don’t know how to ask for it properly. The feeling of being tracked around the Internet will not happen to vendor-defined visitors. The ads will be relevant in a way that seems normal to the user.
SDA is also good for advertisers.
Open standards encourage access to transparent and accountable data and use it consistently in line with regional privacy expectations. This makes it easier to manage compliance with regulations. This means that advertisers also have a choice outside of platform solutions, which offers a way to scale without sacrificing their quality. They may be reassured that their money is being spent by quality publishers, rather than being snatched by intermediaries who are not adding value.
And finally, publishers can also benefit from vendor-defined audiences.
With the death of the cookie comes an opportunity for the media to truly connect with the data, rewarding quality publishers for their engagement and engagement with readers.
If you want better quality data, you must buy it from the site where it originated. This method is much more aligned with what advertisers actually need, because if a publisher’s data is actually better, it will perform better. The RTB algorithm will optimize towards quality, not price. Those who publish good content will be rewarded for their efforts.
And the SDA is more conscious of what is needed for the best privacy regulations because it prioritizes first-party relationships between publishers and consumers – and not just a random collection of tags and pixels that someone has jammed into HTML.
The seller-defined audience is good for the whole advertising ecosystem.
More privacy could be safer and better for future quality publishers of the Internet if we build it on solutions that reward content creators like vendor-defined viewers.