Who's to Blame for the Proliferation of Made-for-Advertising Sites?Table of ContentsIntroductionThe Rise of Made-for-Advertising SitesThe Blame Game: Publishers’ PerspectivesMarketers’ Views on MFAsSupply-Side Platforms: The Mechanism Behind MFAsDemand-Side Platforms: Facilitating MFAsAdvertisers’ ResponsibilityThe Role of Ad Verification VendorsBalancing The Blame: A Complex EcosystemThe Path Forward: Solutions and StrategiesConclusionFAQIntroductionIn the evolving landscape of digital advertising, made-for-advertising (MFA) sites have become an increasingly contentious topic. As the digital ad space grows, so too does the proliferation of these sites, prompting industry professionals to point fingers at various culprits. But who really bears responsibility for the rise of MFAs? This blog post delves into the findings from Digiday+ Research and contextualizes them with broader industry insights to uncover the underlying dynamics at play.We will dissect the perspectives of different stakeholders, including publishers, marketers, and tech platforms, to shed light on the varied opinions and roles each plays in this complex scenario. By the end of this article, you will gain a comprehensive understanding of the factors contributing to the growth of MFA sites and the implications for the digital advertising ecosystem.The Rise of Made-for-Advertising SitesMade-for-advertising sites are designed primarily to generate income through advertisements. Unlike content-driven websites, MFAs prioritize ad placements over user experience, creating an environment tailored for maximum ad revenue. While these sites can be lucrative for their owners, they often pose challenges for legitimate publishers and advertisers.The Blame Game: Publishers’ PerspectivesAccording to Digiday+ Research, a significant majority of publishers believe that supply-side platforms (SSPs) and demand-side platforms (DSPs) are the primary drivers behind the growth of MFAs. Specifically, 60% of publishers attribute the proliferation to SSPs, while 58% point to DSPs. Publishers argue that the mechanics of programmatic advertising, which these platforms facilitate, inherently encourage the creation of MFA sites by rewarding ad impressions over content quality.Interestingly, despite their role in the ecosystem, publishers themselves are reluctant to admit any responsibility. Only 29% of publisher professionals concede that publishers play a part in the spread of MFAs, making them the least likely group to accept blame. This sentiment underscores a defensive posture, as over half of publishers (53%) disagree with the notion that they are at fault.Marketers’ Views on MFAsMarketers offer a more balanced perspective, yet they too show a tendency to place blame on others. According to the survey, 58% of marketers, including brand, retailer, and agency professionals, believe publishers are responsible for the prevalence of MFAs. Meanwhile, 56% of respondents attribute the issue to SSPs.What sets marketers apart is their acknowledgment of shared responsibility, although it is not overwhelmingly strong. Approximately 54% of marketers agree that advertisers themselves contribute to the issue. However, the level of conviction varies, with only 15% of respondents expressing strong agreement on any single group's blameworthiness.Supply-Side Platforms: The Mechanism Behind MFAsSupply-side platforms (SSPs) are integral to the ad tech ecosystem, as they help publishers monetize their inventory by connecting them with advertisers. Yet, their practices are under scrutiny. The automated nature of programmatic advertising tends to favor quantity over quality, allowing MFA sites to thrive by generating high ad impressions despite low-quality content. This system inadvertently incentivizes the creation of MFA sites, leading to their widespread presence.Demand-Side Platforms: Facilitating MFAsDemand-side platforms (DSPs) empower advertisers to purchase ad space efficiently across multiple websites. However, DSPs often prioritize cost-effective impressions, sometimes overlooking the quality of the sites where ads appear. This approach can funnel revenue to MFA sites, further entrenching their position in the marketplace. Marketers' reliance on DSPs exacerbates the situation, as the focus remains on metrics like clicks and impressions, rather than content integrity.Advertisers’ ResponsibilityWhile advertisers aim for broad reach and efficient spending, their strategies can unintentionally support MFA sites. By focusing on maximizing impressions and clicks, advertisers may overlook the quality of the websites where their ads are displayed. This oversight can channel funds to MFA sites, encouraging their continued operation. The digital advertising model, thus, creates a feedback loop where MFA sites emerge and flourish due to the very metrics that advertisers prioritize.The Role of Ad Verification VendorsAd verification vendors are tasked with ensuring that ads are displayed in suitable environments, protecting brand safety and maintaining ad effectiveness. Despite their role, 47% of publishers attribute some blame to these vendors for the proliferation of MFAs. This perspective suggests that current verification measures may not be stringent enough to filter out low-quality sites, allowing MFAs to slip through the cracks.Balancing The Blame: A Complex EcosystemThe issue of MFA sites is a multifaceted problem with shared responsibility among various stakeholders. Publishers, platforms, advertisers, and verification vendors each play a role in the ecosystem that perpetuates MFAs. While pointing fingers is easy, addressing the root causes requires a collective effort to prioritize quality over quantity in digital advertising.The Path Forward: Solutions and StrategiesTo mitigate the prevalence of MFA sites, a shift in digital advertising practices is essential. Here are some strategies that stakeholders can consider:For PublishersInvest in high-quality content: By prioritizing content over ad placements, publishers can attract and retain audiences, making their sites more valuable to legitimate advertisers.Collaborate with ad tech partners: Working closely with SSPs and DSPs to implement stricter quality controls can help filter out MFA sites from the ecosystem.For AdvertisersAdopt quality-first metrics: Shifting the focus from impressions and clicks to engagement and content relevance can reduce the incentive for MFA sites to exploit advertising models.Enhance ad verification: Implementing robust verification processes ensures that ads appear only on high-quality sites, protecting brand integrity and reducing revenue streams to MFA sites.For Ad Tech PlatformsImplement stringent filters: SSPs and DSPs should enhance their filtering mechanisms to identify and block MFA sites from participating in programmatic ad transactions.Promote transparency: Providing advertisers with detailed insights into where their ads are displayed can help them make informed decisions and avoid low-quality sites.For Ad Verification VendorsStrengthen verification protocols: Enhancing the criteria for site quality and reliability can help weed out MFA sites from the ad ecosystem.Educate stakeholders: Offering training and resources to advertisers and publishers on best practices for ad verification can foster a more quality-focused advertising environment.ConclusionThe proliferation of made-for-advertising sites is a complex issue with shared responsibility across the digital advertising ecosystem. While publishers, marketers, SSPs, DSPs, and ad verification vendors each play a part, the path forward lies in collective action and a shared commitment to quality over quantity. By embracing these strategies, stakeholders can foster a more sustainable, effective, and ethical digital advertising landscape.FAQWhat are made-for-advertising sites?Made-for-advertising (MFA) sites are primarily designed to generate income through advertisements rather than providing meaningful content. They prioritize ad placements to maximize revenue.Who is most to blame for the proliferation of MFAs?According to Digiday+ Research, publishers largely blame supply-side platforms (SSPs) and demand-side platforms (DSPs), while marketers point fingers at publishers and to some extent, advertisers themselves.How can publishers combat the rise of MFAs?Publishers can invest in high-quality content and collaborate with ad tech partners to implement stricter quality controls, ensuring that their sites are preferred by legitimate advertisers.What role do ad verification vendors play?Ad verification vendors ensure that ads are displayed in suitable environments. Enhancing their verification protocols can help filter out MFA sites from the ad ecosystem.How can advertisers avoid supporting MFA sites?Advertisers can adopt quality-first metrics and enhance their ad verification processes to ensure their ads only appear on high-quality sites, reducing revenue streams to MFA sites.