Who's Responsible for the Proliferation of MFAs in Digital Advertising?Table of ContentsIntroductionThe Role of Supply- and Demand-Side PlatformsAdvertisers' ResponsibilityPublishers: Innocent or Guilty?The Role of Ad Verification VendorsBroader Implications of MFAs on Digital AdvertisingFAQIntroductionImagine you're navigating the dense forest of digital advertising, only to find yourself surrounded by an endless number of low-quality websites designed strictly for hosting ads. These platforms, known as Made-for-Advertising (MFA) sites, have proliferated, significantly affecting the advertising landscape. But who is to blame for this rise? Is it the marketers, the advertisers, or the publishers themselves? Digiday+ Research investigated this pressing issue by surveying brand, retailer, agency, and publisher professionals in the second quarter. The findings were revelatory, shedding light on where different stakeholders believe the responsibility lies. This blog post examines the viewpoints, provides an in-depth analysis of the factors contributing to the proliferation of MFAs, and highlights the broader implications for the digital advertising ecosystem.By the end of this post, you'll have a clear understanding of the forces driving the growth of MFAs and what it means for the future of digital marketing.The Role of Supply- and Demand-Side PlatformsSupply-Side Platforms (SSPs)Supply-Side Platforms (SSPs) have been pinpointed as a major culprit in the rise of MFAs. According to Digiday's survey, 60% of publisher professionals believe SSPs bear significant responsibility. The rationale is straightforward: SSPs are designed to maximize the number of ad impressions by connecting a multitude of ad inventories to advertisers. This model inadvertently encourages the creation of MFA sites aimed solely at generating ad views, irrespective of content quality.Demand-Side Platforms (DSPs)Close behind SSPs, Demand-Side Platforms (DSPs) are also seen as facilitators of MFAs. A surprising 58% of publishers surveyed agree that DSPs play a considerable role. DSPs empower advertisers by providing them with a plethora of inventory options for ad placements. However, in the pursuit of lower costs and higher reach, these platforms often include MFA sites in their offerings.Advertisers' ResponsibilityShifting BlameMore than half of publisher professionals (57%) believe advertisers are responsible for the proliferation of MFAs, with nearly a quarter (21%) strongly agreeing. Advertisers often prioritize high click-through rates and vast exposure, even if it means sacrificing the quality of the sites where their ads appear. This tendency to prioritize quantity over quality nurtures the growth of MFA sites designed to generate ad impressions.The Marketer PerspectiveMarketers, however, present a more nuanced view. While 58% agree that publishers are to blame, the sentiment isn't strongly felt—only 15% of marketers strongly agree. This indicates that while there's an acknowledgment of the role publishers play in creating ad-friendly environments, there's also a recognition that advertisers themselves contribute to the issue by prioritizing metrics over meaningful engagement.Publishers: Innocent or Guilty?Denial of ResponsibilityWhen it comes to taking the blame, publishers are decisive in distancing themselves from the MFA problem. Only 29% of publisher professionals admit any culpability, with a striking 53% disagreeing altogether. Even more revealing, nearly a third (31%) of these publishers strongly disagree with the notion that they are to blame.Marketers' Viewpoint on PublishersContrarily, 58% of marketers believe publishers are responsible for the rise in MFAs. This disparity highlights the finger-pointing typical in complex ecosystems where multiple stakeholders have interconnected responsibilities. The blame game underscores deeper systemic issues that prevent effective collaboration to combat the rise of low-quality ad platforms.The Role of Ad Verification VendorsOverlooked CulpritsInterestingly, ad verification vendors are also in the spotlight. About 47% of publishers agree these vendors bear some responsibility for the proliferation of MFAs. Ad verification vendors assure advertisers of the legitimacy and quality of ad placements, but their methods and benchmarks may inadvertently allow MFA sites to thrive by not being stringent enough.Broader Implications of MFAs on Digital AdvertisingLowered Trust and Increased SkepticismThe proliferation of MFA sites impacts the entire advertising ecosystem. For advertisers, it means less effective ad spend and potentially lower ROI. The presence of low-quality ad environments erodes trust, making advertisers skeptical about where their dollars are going.Loss of Audience TrustFor publishers, MFAs represent a broader reputation risk. When high-quality content struggles to stand out amid a sea of spammy, ad-centric sites, overall audience trust declines. This loss of trust can lead to reduced engagement and lower long-term revenue, ultimately affecting the entire digital media landscape.The Future of Digital AdvertisingAddressing the rise of MFAs requires a collaborative approach. Advertisers, publishers, SSPs, DSPs, and ad verification vendors must work together to establish higher standards and more stringent checks. Transparency and accountability at every stage of the advertising supply chain can help mitigate the issues leading to the proliferation of MFAs.FAQWhat are Made-for-Advertising (MFA) sites?These are low-quality websites created primarily to host a large number of advertisements. They focus on generating ad impressions rather than providing valuable content.Why are SSPs and DSPs blamed for MFAs?SSPs and DSPs focus on maximizing ad placements and impressions. This model favors the inclusion of MFA sites, promoting their growth in the digital ad ecosystem.Do advertisers play a role in the proliferation of MFAs?Yes, advertisers often prioritize metrics like click-through rates and exposure, inadvertently supporting the creation of ad-centric, low-quality sites.How can the proliferation of MFAs be mitigated?A collaborative effort involving higher standards, transparency, and accountability from all stakeholders—advertisers, publishers, SSPs, DSPs, and ad verification vendors—is essential.Are publishers entirely innocent in the rise of MFAs?While many publishers deny responsibility, the broader ecosystem's interconnected nature means that publishers are part of the equation, even if indirectly.In conclusion, the proliferation of MFA sites is a complex issue with multiple stakeholders bearing responsibility. By fostering collaboration and emphasizing quality over quantity, the digital advertising industry can work towards a more trustworthy and effective future.