Brand safety still struggles in advertising | Ad Tech | News | Rapid TV News
By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our cookie policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them. [Close]
With all the brand safety hype in the advertising industry, there’s still a bit to go to ensure it, according to Integral Ad Science’s H1 2017 Media Quality Report.

brandsafety 14sep2017The report found that violent content accounted for the majority of brand risk on desktop display and desktop video, mirroring H2 2016 results, to the tune of nearly 30% or more of all risky impressions flagged.

Brand safety concerns remain consistent with H2 2016, with 9.4% of desktop display impressions and 11.2% of desktop video impressions flagged for objectionable content.

With brand safety concerns staying top of mind, IAS also uncovered a strong correlation between impressions flagged and current events, with advertisers updating their parameters according to the current news cycle. For example, the Manchester Arena bombing that occurred in May led to the top keywords blocked that month; these included “explosion,” “bombing,” “Manchester Arena” and “Ariana Grande”.

“The data suggests that brand trust and positive sentiment around traditional institutions (ie such as traditional media publishers) will continue to decline,” said Maria Pousa, CMO of IAS. “96% of advertisers are concerned about fake news in programmatic advertising and this will likely be damaging to the position of these news outlets in the ecosystem.”

She added: “The definition of brand safety is set to evolve. As violence accounts for nearly 30% of all risky impressions, we will see this increase in the volatile political environment that we live in. Brands’ definition of what is considered ‘safe’ vs. ‘unsafe’ is sure to change. We’ve seen companies like Kellogg’s become more conscious of how their public reputation, and tech companies like Google and GoDaddy being held increasingly responsible for the content their systems support. This raises the question: who is responsible for policing extremist and politically-charged content? Overall, we anticipate more brands becoming more conscious of how their brand is portrayed across all mediums.”