The Importance of SSP Inventory Quality Assessment

This past year, the ANA released its Media Supply Chain Transparency Report, which took an in-depth look at the efficacy of the programmatic landscape. In many ways the findings were brutal. 

Overall, the ANA found that just $.36 out of every dollar that enters a DSP effectively reaches the consumer.  Part of that waste is the result of made-for-advertising (MFA) websites, which, according to the ANA, account for 21% of all impressions (or 15% of all ad spend) traded in programmatic advertising.  The report describes MFA sites as those that contain low-quality content, such as, “fake news, conspiracy theories, or spammy links, and may use tactics such as pop-up ads, auto-play videos, or intrusive ads to maximize ad revenue for the site owner.”

In the months that followed the release of the report, the industry has struggled to find ways to address the concerns outlined by the ANA. The challenges the industry faces is understandable. First, not everyone agrees on the criteria that constitute an MFA site … is it ad density? Traffic sources? Content syndication? For some advertisers, sites with heavy ad volume and receiving most of their traffic from social media are perfectly fine as long as users actively engage with the content. For others, any site that fits the ANA definition of an MFA site must be banned from their media plan. 

This is a similar situation to brand safety and suitability, which can also vary from brand to brand. For instance, a brand that targets teens will consider content about cocktails as unsafe. But those same placements will be the perfect place to advertise for a spirits brand. And a beauty brand advertising in French fashion magazines will have very different brand safety criteria than a general news publication meant for conservative culture.

These examples are on the dramatic side; for most brands what constitutes a suitable placement is much more nuanced. Not surprisingly, It’s very difficult for machines to understand these kinds of subtleties and nuances, but such distinctions come quite naturally to humans. What’s more, humans have a higher degree of accuracy (which is why all AI applications require human spot-checking!). 

For this reason, deploying a team of humans to check the sites within your network is the best way to protect your reputation as an SSP, as well as meet the demands of your buyers and sellers.

An Investment in Your Reputation

Should you invest in a team of humans to assess the quality of the inventory that’s sold through you? We believe the answer is yes.

As an SSP, you’re more than just a platform. You serve as a trusted intermediary for both the advertisers and publishers that rely on your platform to transact inventory purchases and sales. Advertisers want to know that their brand is reaching real audiences on legitimate websites, avoiding the types of waste ($0.64 out of every dollar) described by the ANA. And, of course, they want to eliminate all reputational damage that stems from a poor-quality placement. 

Publishers, in turn, are assured that when they sell through your platform, you will bring them premium advertisers willing to pay more for valuable inventory. This positive cycle reinforces your SSP’s position as a reliable and valuable partner in the advertising ecosystem.

Campaign Performance

Quality inventory translates to better campaign performance as ads placed on relevant websites with engaged audiences are more likely to be seen, and clicked on, and lead to conversions.

In this respect, high-quality inventory translates directly into better campaign performance and higher ROI. As an SSP, it also translates to repeat business as advertisers and media agencies will continue to choose you over your competition.

Conversely, if advertisers don’t see tangible results from their ad spend with your SSP, they may pull the plug and spend their ad budgets elsewhere. This, in turn, will mean fewer demand partners for the publishers your company has spent time and resources courting and nurturing. 

Brand Safety and Ad Fraud

Low-quality inventory will inevitably lead to poor brand safety experiences for brands, as well as a variety of ad fraud, from IVT to malicious redirects. Advertisers have zero appetite for egregious brand safety placements, as it can lead to unwanted publicity.

By setting clear quality standards, SSPs act as a gatekeepers, filtering out malicious websites, fake traffic, and other fraudulent activities. Such safeguards protect advertisers from being associated with inappropriate content and ensure their ads are delivered to legitimate users. 

This proactive approach protects both advertisers and publishers, fostering a trustworthy and secure environment for everyone involved.

How Paragon Digital Services Performs Human Assessment of Inventory

At Paragon, we understand the importance of assessing SSP inventory, and we’ve developed a methodology and a dedicated team to do just that. What’s more, we perform this quality assessment on a monthly basis for our SSP clients.

We have a tried and true methodology, each site which begins with a visual assessment. A team member will visit each publisher site in order to evaluate the site for structure, ease of navigation, and the presence of abusive ad experiences. We also ensure that all ads meet industry standards for ad sizes.

Next, we look at the content to ensure it meets the SSP’s brand-safety standards. This is an important consideration and it’s one that’s hard to automate. Publishers rightly complain when their sites are discriminated against simply for carrying important news stories that may contain difficult content. There is a difference between sites that cover news stories and one that sells firearms. These are nuances easily detected by humans.

If a site carries restricted content (e.g. cocktail recipes or alcohol sales) are standard criteria such as age gates in place? 

We also look at the recency of content, which indicates whether a site is active (and provides readers a reason to return frequently) vs. one with stale content and more likely to be an MFA site.

Our teams will also accommodate any special requirements of the SSP, including more nuanced brand-suitability requirements.

Finally, our teams check to ensure the publisher has an ads.txt file so that we can verify authorized sellers.

While these monthly human-performed assessments are time-consuming, their peace of mind is priceless. As an SSP, you invest vastly in your tech stack, employees, publisher recruitment, and onboarding. It’s a shame to have those investments undermined by a few bad sites.

Want to learn more? Get in touch.