In 2007, I posed the question “Is buying video advertising in social media a good idea?” as a way to highlight publisher behavior that was hurting the video advertising industry.
Today, I pose the question “Is buying video advertising from a video syndicator a good idea?” The answer is, it depends. But, again, bad actors are hurting the video ad business. Broadcast videos sites such as Hulu and CBS have done a phenomenol job of maintaining high quality users expereinces when their videos are in syndication. Hulu distributes their player to MSN, Fancast and other sites, and maintains a universal user experience. CBS, through the audience network, controls video content, placement and advertising, to insure consistency.
The problems for brands become more evident when we are talking about the content licensors such as Roo, NewsMarket, JamboTV, a slew of others or any of the video ad networks that offer video syndication. In an attempt to compete with the broadcasters (or each other), these publishers syndicate their players far and wide, with little attention paid to user experience, site or site placement. As a result, video advertising campaigns can end up on low quality sites or, worse, not even be seen by the consumer.
This problem is most evident when brands unknowingly buy fake pre-roll, either from a video syndicator or a video ad network. Fake pre-roll occurs when an advertiser buys pre-roll video inventory, but gets a placement where the video player autostarts a video ad in display inventory, usually with the sound off and often below the fold.
Examples of fake pre-roll are abundant (see screenshots below). In 15 minutes one day I found examples of Mars, State Farm, Nicorette, Van de Kamps, Starburst and Starkist running in low quality, fake preroll placements. On day two Hellmans, Jello, Tide, Oil of Olay and Bounty. Sites such as Luvcube.com, Sweetiessweeps.com, Hairpedia.com and Pajiba.com provide clear examples of fake pre-roll with video syndication from Jambo and video ads from many “leading” video ad networks. This gaming of video advertiser’s budgets is hurting all of us for the following reasons:
- These advertisements won’t perform for the advertiser, which hurts budgets moving online and the perceived efficacy of online video advertising
- These placements are priced at banner rates (or lower), which drives down rates for the entire category and falsely gives agencies the belief of a market rate
- Advertisers run the risk of being placed next to inappropriate content, which could result in an advertiser or agency pulling out of video altogether
The problem of fake preroll can either be solved by agencies (by paying more attention to the placements they are buying, comparing ad performance among players and demanding URL by URL reporting) or by the players in the industry (by not taking advantage of unknowing buyers, “gaming” the medium and returning to focus on selling a high quality product).Personally, I am much more a fan of self-regulation.
2 Responses to “Is this good for your brand? (Part Two)”