Striking the Right Balance on Safety & Suitability

In today’s digital advertising landscape, brand safety remains a top concern for marketers. However, Mia Libby, SVP of enterprise at The Wall Street Journal, draws attention to a significant issue in a recent episode of AdExchanger Talks. The fear of unsafe content and reputational risk has led to a “massive overcorrection” by advertisers in choosing suitable content. While it's understandable and prudent for advertisers to be cautious about where their money goes and what their ads show up next to, overly conservative keyword exclusion lists block all news and much other content from programmatic media plans. This approach not only hinders the reach and effectiveness of campaigns, but it also muffles brand’s looking for alignment with key consumers, while undermining the financial viability of quality journalism and social justice inventory.

Brand safety, at its core, is about ensuring that advertisements do not appear alongside content that could harm a brand's reputation. Brand suitability focuses more on the alignment of content with a brand’s ethos.  In an effort to conduct buys at scale and avoiding risky placements, advertisers may be inadvertently creating buys that are too restrictive. In fact, the methods employed to achieve this objective have sparked significant controversy. For instance, the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM) has come under scrutiny from lawmakers. Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has raised concerns about potential antitrust law violations, suggesting that some advertisers might be colluding to steer ad dollars away from conservative media. This allegation posits that the intent behind brand safety measures may extend beyond just protecting brands from harmful content, veering into the realm of political bias.

During a recent hearing, the ad community defended the use of brand safety tools. Herris Patel, President of Unilever USA, emphasized the necessity of these tools, recounting instances where ads for Dove soap appeared next to misogynistic content. Such placements can significantly damage a brand’s image and the trust it has built over the years. “From the Unilever perspective, you can create damage to what the brand stands for and the equity that we build for many decades,” Patel noted.

The debate over brand safety is multifaceted. On one hand, there is a clear need for brands to protect their image and ensure their ads do not appear next to harmful content. On the other hand, the tools and methods currently employed to achieve this protection can be overly broad and detrimental to the advertising ecosystem. The challenge lies in finding a balance—developing sophisticated, nuanced tools that can accurately distinguish between genuinely harmful content and quality journalism that simply reports on the world's events, including those that are unpleasant.