I don't think i've evern seen an article so badly written. It has the right research, but it is pointless. The whole thing is sumarized in the last two paragrap

I don't think i've evern seen an article so badly written. It has the right research, but it is pointless. The whole thing is sumarized in the last two paragraphs. With zero information lost: """ Says Woodman: “When we try to tighten things up, our measured performance goes down. There is an incentive among buyers to let the floodgates open. And publishers need more money, so they ignore.” So the bad traffic persists. “We need to fix this as an industry,” he adds. “Somebody needs to give a shit.” The IAB seems to. Per Sullivan, the organization is working on devising a standard for publishers akin to the Good Housekeeping Seal. He’d like to see the biggest stakeholders get more aggressive about the problem, including brands and agencies. “If buyers came out and said, ‘I will only buy from certified vendors,’ that would change things,” he says. """ so basically, the industry measures clicks. and bots delivers clicks. fraudulents, but clicks. and everyone is trying to fix it with black/white-lists so they get a promotion for getting the clicks, but not looking bad with their boss when some known scam site shows up in the report. The whole industry is based on allowing only the 'clean' bots of the week inflate your numbers.