4 ms·
What a load of BS. From all the demand side platforms I've dealt with, Google is by far the most serious about fraud prevention. They realized early on that whi
by endymi0n 11y ago
What a load of BS. From all the demand side platforms I've dealt with, Google is by far the most serious about fraud prevention. They realized early on that while fraud boosts their short term revenue, they'd have a massive PR problem afterwards if this stuff continues.
Nobody's vetting both publishers and advertisers as extensively as Google, their automatic ad verification and fraud prevention algorithms are top notch.
On top, even though "Online" is slowly declining for sure (though not as massively as stated), everyone seems to ignore that both Google and Facebook more than made up for the loss of online with mobile ads that are orders of magnitude harder to block on the closed smartphone ecosystems.
Whoever paid for this piece, it's someone who very obviously has no clue at all about Adtech.
- ssharp 11y agoThe DSPs I've used address a lot of the concerns here -- fraud, what sites show your ads, etc. on top of what they do for optimizing spend, targeting, remarketing, and making your life easier. However, the article is treating the DSPs are a leeching intermediary. As long as the intermediaries are adding value, their existence isn't a negative and many of the intermediaries the author mentions aren't necessary.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- sgoraya 11y ago> Google is by far the most serious about fraud prevention. I agree - they've had 'Verification' in DFA > DCM > DDM and the associated tools and reports keep getting better. And if you have ReportBuilder skills, you can really ID and find discrepant/fraudulent data.