admin
The long-held adage that "all media isn’t created equal" is being resurrected as a critical counterpoint to the prevailing theories in programmatic advertising. For years, the industry has largely operated under the assumption that the nuances of media quality and even the content itself can be standardized and commoditized. This perspective, driven by the focus on targeting specific audiences, is now being challenged by a new paper from the Coalition for Innovative Media Measurement (CIMM). The report, previewed during CIMM’s East event in New York City, aims to dismantle the notion that audience is the sole determinant of ad value, particularly within the rapidly expanding Connected TV (CTV) landscape.
The forthcoming paper, a pre-release copy of which was reviewed by AdExchanger, goes beyond merely demonstrating that differences in media quality are measurable. It argues that the industry’s relentless pursuit of short-term outcomes has exacerbated persistent challenges. These include the proliferation of made-for-advertising (MFA) sites that exploit the programmatic ecosystem, brands inadvertently overspending on low-quality CTV ad placements that are lumped in with premium inventory, and ad tech vendors that prioritize audience data over the intrinsic value of the media itself.
Erez Levin, founder of ad tech consultancy Emet Advisory and a co-author of the paper, articulated the need for a more robust definition of quality. "Quality has been a buzzword for a while in this industry, and no one’s really defined it, except, for the most part, in self-serving ways," Levin stated. He explained that CIMM’s objective in publishing this guidance is to foster an "objective, industry-wide shared consensus and framework." This, he believes, will move the conversation beyond its current "limbo" and facilitate a more coherent approach to media quality measurement across agencies, tech platforms, and publishers. The paper is not intended to introduce novel measurement standards but rather to catalyze a comprehensive industry dialogue.
The Urgent Need for Consensus in a Fragmented Ecosystem
The rationale behind CIMM’s initiative is underscored by the explosive growth and fragmentation of the media quality, curation, and programmatic verification services sector. A burgeoning landscape of startups, including Jounce Media, DeepSee, Sincera, Adalytics, and Gamera, are each tackling similar challenges from diverse angles. This has been further amplified by the resurgence of established players like DoubleVerify and Integral Ad Science, both publicly traded companies, which have reignited interest in the dormant category of media quality verification. Recent trends in attention measurement and deal curation have also introduced new mechanisms for transacting on quality signals, adding further complexity to an already intricate ecosystem.
The genesis of the CIMM paper can be traced back to the organization’s collaborative work with the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) on the Attention Measurement Playbook for Marketers, released late last year. During the development of these attention standards, the working group repeatedly encountered a fundamental lack of industry-wide consensus on how to effectively measure the quality of ad impressions. This realization highlighted a critical gap that CIMM aims to address.
Despite these complexities, progress is being made, and the CIMM paper seeks to illuminate the array of new tools now available to advertisers. Levin has been a vocal advocate for enhanced quality and attention measurement since at least 2017, a period when he served as a product specialist for Google Marketing Platform, engaging with both buy-side and sell-side stakeholders. The paper’s other co-author, Gabriel Dorosz, brings a wealth of experience from the publisher side, currently serving as the global advertising initiative lead at the International News Media Association and formerly as head of audience strategy for The New York Times.
Dorosz shared his perspective on the project’s impetus: "In the premium news publisher space, there’s a belief that the market is not serving those kinds of publishers well. My passion is that quality publishers ought to be getting more of their fair share of ad spend, and this paper is a way to advance that."
Dispelling Myths and Redefining Value
Dorosz emphasized that the paper’s scope extends beyond empowering publishers to demonstrate their media’s quality. It also aims to equip buyers with the knowledge to prevent wasteful spending on less effective advertising. To achieve this, the authors endeavor to debunk persistent myths that have taken root, particularly as a result of buyers being "oversold on the value of certainty," according to Dorosz.
A significant myth that the paper addresses is the industry’s heavy reliance on deterministic attribution as a proxy for audience value. The prevailing notion is that a bid request containing a deterministic identifier inherently signifies higher inventory value compared to one lacking such an ID. In this paradigm, factors like time of day, contextual data, and device type are often relegated to secondary importance. However, CIMM’s paper posits that probabilistic modeling, rather than solely deterministic data, offers marketers a more accurate understanding of the true value of a broader spectrum of ad impressions.
CIMM’s guidance advocates for incorporating probabilistic metrics, such as attention scoring and contextual relevance, to better gauge an impression’s potential to advance a brand’s stated campaign objectives. The paper details how these metrics can exhibit significant variability based on factors like time of day and other contextual elements. This nuanced approach challenges the simplistic binary evaluations often employed in programmatic transactions.
Levin pointed to the example of Connected TV (CTV) advertising, where high price points for premium inventory have become commonplace. He highlighted that major streaming platforms often command similar high CPMs regardless of the time of day, even during periods when audiences are typically less engaged. This suggests that advertisers may be overpaying for inventory that is unlikely to yield optimal results, simply because it’s categorized as premium CTV. Levin argues that advertisers should scrutinize campaigns that allocate substantial budget to overnight slots and question why such allocations are made if not supported by data-driven insights into audience receptivity.
A New Model for Media Quality: The Quality Trifecta
To advocate for a renewed emphasis on media quality, CIMM introduces a novel framework designed to reconnect with the foundational principles of marketing. This new model is primarily anchored in what Levin has termed "The Quality Trifecta," a concept he has been promoting since last year. The core tenet of this trifecta is the independent measurement of three critical components: media quality, creative quality, and audience quality.
Within this framework, media quality is further deconstructed into two key factors: "attention," which pertains to the prominence and visibility of the ad placement, and "situational context," which assesses the likelihood that the surrounding media environment fosters a receptive mood in the viewer.
The paper strongly advises marketers to move beyond simplistic, binary quality assessment methods. Instead of relying on binary indicators such as the presence of an ID in a bid request or meeting minimum viewability thresholds, CIMM advocates for "non-binary, relative, and probabilistic" measurements. Attention scoring, for instance, is presented as a method to evaluate media quality along a spectrum of effectiveness, acknowledging that quality is not an all-or-nothing proposition.
These non-binary approaches, Levin explained, are more conducive to making meaningful comparisons across different media types. They are also more adept at capturing the inherent variations that exist across different audience segments and other influential factors, such as time of day. Furthermore, the paper underscores the importance of considering both short-term performance and long-term brand-building opportunities, while acknowledging that brands heavily reliant on immediate returns should continue to prioritize short-term outcomes.
CTV as the Proving Ground and the Buy-Side Imperative
While CIMM’s paper is intended as a comprehensive guide for the entire open web, the authors identify streaming media and CTV inventory as the critical proving ground for these new principles. This is due to the high-stakes nature of the CTV market, characterized by the highest CPMs, most intense demand, and expansive creative canvases.
Dorosz added that CTV’s relative freedom from the entrenched dependency on third-party cookies, which has plagued other digital channels for over two decades, allows for a more innovative approach. The established status quo in other digital environments does not necessarily constrain CTV players. Moreover, many traditional pixel-based measurement methodologies, well-suited for other platforms, are not as effective for CTV.
For example, the paper advocates for a complete re-evaluation of viewability measurement in the context of CTV. Given that CTV ads typically auto-play with sound and occupy the full screen, the traditional definition of viewability becomes less relevant. The focus, therefore, should shift to metrics that more accurately reflect engagement and impact.
Despite the overarching goal of industry-wide adoption, the authors concur that the buy side must take the lead in driving this transformation. Dorosz concluded, "These theories only matter if the buy side demonstrates success and drives repeatability." This implies that advertisers and their agencies must actively embrace and implement these new measurement paradigms, proving their efficacy and encouraging wider adoption across the ecosystem. The implications are significant, potentially leading to a more efficient and effective allocation of advertising spend, a fairer playing field for quality publishers, and ultimately, a more robust and trustworthy digital advertising ecosystem.
