Home On TV & Video Transparency Is The Last Piece Of The Programmatic CTV Puzzle

Transparency Is The Last Piece Of The Programmatic CTV Puzzle

SHARE:
Nicole Scaglione, global VP of OTT & CTV business at PubMatic

On TV & Video” is a column exploring opportunities and challenges in advanced TV and video. 

Today’s column is by PubMatic Global VP of OTT and CTV Nicole Scaglione.

A major selling point of linear TV inventory is the information that comes with it. Linear media buyers are able to pick specific genres, shows and even episodes. 

But publishers have pushed back on providing the same level of transparency for programmatic CTV. The combination of audience targeting and content targeting is just too much for them to stomach. After all, it could give brands the ability to “cherry-pick” premium inventory.

But brands should be able to get more transparency on programmatic CTV. Just as importantly, publishers should get something in return for sharing this information.

In advertising, as in life, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

The programmatic turning point

Transparent content object signals are the keystone that will bring the best of linear advertising together with the best of programmatic advertising.

Publishers have built up this keystone to mean something specific and relatively negative. Their primary concern is that brands, armed with so much information, will target a much smaller, more specific number of impressions, leaving them with an undervalued, picked-over asset that ignores large amounts of less-desirable placements. 

For a long time, programmatic was the fast-food joint of the restaurant world. Brands wanted scale at low prices. This was the hallmark of display advertising for years. Sellers gave it to them, but the industry was opaque, overly complex and plagued by fraud. At the peak of this cycle, brands were buying “target audiences” that were dramatically larger than the actual number of people in that real-life audience. High frequency and bad data fueled the problem.

Today, there’s more transparency, more accuracy and much less fraud. Our industry is now a fine-dining establishment. We’ve done such a good job that brands are actually willing to pay extra to get the audiences that matter to them on good, quality content. Hear that, publishers? Brands are willing to pay more.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

In return, though, they are asking for content signals to inform their CTV media buys. This isn’t the equivalent of asking for extra pickles on a cheap burger. They’re in a nice restaurant. And they are essentially asking for extra caviar. If publishers have the caviar, they should sell it – at the right price.

Publishers might push back here and say this is their secret sauce. There is no way to manage this level of cherry-picking without literally going out of business. But there is a way forward that can give advertisers transparency and ensure publishers maintain the value of their entire content portfolio.

Brands crave content signals

One approach is using programmatic guaranteed (PG) deals to package specific inventory at a specific price. Rather than go directly to open auction, publishers can dip a toe and get comfortable with just how much information to share and at what price. The demand is there.

Many aggregator publishers run into complexity because of contracts with content creators who limit the amount of transparency that can be provided. Publishers can use this to their advantage. If they know that sharing content signals using the “content object” field can bring in new demand, that can be used as a bargaining chip in future agreements. Over time, more contracts will include specific stipulations that make it easier for publishers to be more transparent with buyers.

Content signals can also be used as a point of differentiation for smaller CTV publishers. Brands are likely to be more receptive to a new publisher if they know that they’ll be able to learn more about the content.

Publishers are also concerned that brands will somehow be able to use content signals to “game the system” and buy media on the open auction without paying extra in the future. This, like every technology challenge we’ve had in the past, is simply an issue that needs to be better understood and resolved. It’s not an excuse for inaction.

We’ve arrived at a major moment for programmatic. Linear TV dollars are shifting, leaving opportunities up for grabs for publishers that make the right moves. Brands want it. Publishers can benefit from it. It’s time to get serious about making it happen.

Follow PubMatic (@PubMatic) and AdExchanger (@AdExchanger) on Twitter.

For more articles featuring Nicole Scaglione, click here.

Must Read

After The Election, News Corp Has Harsh Words For Advertisers Who Avoided News

News Corp’s chief exec blasted “the blatant biases of ad agencies and ad associations,” which are “boycotting certain media properties” due to “personal political prejudices.”

LiveRamp Outperforms On Earnings And Lays Out Its Data Network Ambitions

LiveRamp reported an unexpected boost to Q3 revenue, from $160 million last year to $185 million in 2024, during its quarterly call with investors on Wednesday.

Google in the antitrust crosshairs (Law concept. Single line draw design. Full length animation illustration. High quality 4k footage)

Google And The DOJ Recap Their Cases In The Countdown To Closing Arguments

If you’re trying to read more than 1,000 pages of legal documents about the US v. Google ad tech antitrust case on Election Day, you’ve come to the right place.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

NYT’s Ad And Subscription Revenue Surge As WaPo Flails

While WaPo recently lost 250,000 subscribers due to concerns over its journalistic independence, NYT added 260,000 subscriptions in Q3 thanks largely to the popularity of its non-news offerings.

Mark Proulx, global director of media quality & responsibility, Kenvue

How Kenvue Avoided $3 Million In Wasted Media Spend

Stop thinking about brand safety verification as “insurance” – a way to avoid undesirable content – and start thinking about it as an opportunity to build positive brand associations, says Kenvue’s Mark Proulx.

Comic: Lunch Is Searched

Based On Its Q3 Earnings, Maybe AIphabet Should Just Change Its Name To AI-phabet

Google hit some impressive revenue benchmarks in Q3. But investors seemed to only have eyes for AI.