Google debunks claims it misled advertisers: Is that enough to keep brands confident?

share on

twitter /
facebook /
linkedin /
- email
- telegram
- whatsapp
- wechat
- pinterest
- line
- snapchat
- reddit

Google has denied accusations that it may have violated its own guidelines and misled advertisers about viewing ads on third-party websites.According to a report by advertising research organisation Adalytics released last week, the tech giant may have misled advertisers including Fortune 500 brands, the US federal government, and many small businesses with regards to its ad viewership.

The misalignment likely came from Google’s proprietary TrueView skippable in-stream video ads which Adalytics estimates cost media buyers up to "billions of digital ad dollars", which were ultimately spent on "small, muted, out-stream, auto-playing or interstitial video ad units running on independent websites and mobile apps".

Don’t miss: Google accused of misleading advertisers and violating its own guidelines in new report

In a blog post, Google’s global video solutions director Marvin Renaud claimed the report "used unreliable sampling and proxy methodologies and made extremely inaccurate claims about the Google Video Partner (GVP) network."

“The report wrongly implies that most campaign spend runs on GVP rather than YouTube. That’s just not right. The overwhelming majority of video ad campaigns serve on YouTube," he added.

When advertisers create video ad campaigns, they can clearly see that their ads may run on third-party sites via GVP during the campaign setup.

When advertisers create video ad campaigns, they can clearly see that their ads may run on third-party sites via GVP during the campaign setup, Renaud said. “We offer the option to opt out at any time. They can also decide where their content may appear. Advertisers can exclude specific websites and URLs along with entire topics or apps they wish to avoid when running ads,” he explained.

The tech giant also debunked the claims in the report by reiterating that ad inventory across the Google Video Partner network is more than 90% viewable. Renaud added:

Advertisers are only paying for ads when they are viewed. We use real-time ad quality signals to determine if people are present and paying attention that help us decide whether to serve a video ad in a Google Video Partner site or app.

Has Google actually broken its promise to advertisers?

While both companies have listed out statistics to support their arguments, whether Google has betrayed advertisers, is currently still a matter of debate.

Pramodh Rai, co-founder of a cyber security company Cyber Sierra, said while Adalytics has published its report, there needs to be more validation of its findings in an objective, fact-based approach, preferably by a neutral party before strong conclusions can be drawn.

True enough, any executive who is well trained can ensure the campaign is running on whitelisted or curated inventory. Ranga Somanathan, co-founder at RSquared Global Ventures and former CEO of Omnicom Media Group, said: “However, vast majority of practitioners have an explicit faith in Google and as such abdicate their work to the systems/teams provided by Google,” he added.

Google in its role, has to reflect on how much it educates and highlights the value exchange of GVP is to them and the advertisers, he said.

He explained:

With this level of trust placed upon Google, it’s Google’s responsibility to aggressively communicate the differences, advise the risks involved and the trade-offs, for advertisers.

Agreeing with Somanathan was Ashvin Anamalai, CEO, DNA Creative Communications, who said advertisers expect platforms such as Google to deliver accurate ad viewership and ensure that their ads reach the intended audience. "If Google's TrueView skippable in-stream video ads were misaligned and resulted in advertisers unknowingly spending their ad dollars on less desirable placements, I'd most definitely consider it a breach of trust," he said.

How will this affect Google?

In fact, when advertisers and their agencies are planning for original content and they end up placing ads in user generated content or irrelevant content, they are at risk of undermining the brand equity. Hence, if the allegations are found to be true, brands will perhaps seek alternate solutions to secure their video inventory supplies, said RSquared's Somanathan.

He added:

It is imperative for brands to secure their video inventory by applying the principles of supply path optimisation, original content and fueling local publisher ecosystem.

Agreeing with him was Cyber Sierra’s Rai, who said there will likely be revenue impact to Google as advertisers take a pause in their engagements to understand if their efforts are worthwhile here.

However, brand safety and confidence in placing ads with GVP is a matter of trust that has been built over time between Google and its partners, he added.

He said:

There is already positive momentum in place for Google which the firm can use to its advantage while it clarifies the findings of the Adalytics report.

On the other hand, it could have a detrimental effect on brand safety, and instability in the industry. DNA Creative's Anamalai said brand safety is a critical concern for advertisers, as they want to ensure that their ads appear in suitable and reputable environments. "Advertisers may worry about their brand reputation being tarnished or their ads being associated with content that doesn't align with their values - however we are far away from an alternative with the current uncompetitive and exclusionary digital ad landscape," he added.

After all, further investigations and independent verification of the allegations will be crucial in determining the accuracy of the claims. Anamalai said the response from advertisers, industry experts, and regulatory bodies will also play a significant role in shaping the narrative and understanding the potential impact on the advertising industry.