We are thrilled to announce we are expanding our partnership with HUMAN, the global leader in collective protection against sophisticated bot attacks and marketing fraud. This marks the fourth year the two companies have partnered in the battle against ad fraud.

“We are committed to the fight against bad actors in digital media. Providing publishers and advertisers with a safe and trustworthy environment continues to be our primary goal and there is no better partner to have in this battle than HUMAN.” – Maayan Segal, VP, Clients of Primis

“We are thrilled to expand on an already outstanding partnership with Primis as we continue enhancing our capabilities aimed to protect the growing video ecosystem from fraud and attacks by bad actors,” said HUMAN SVP of Customer Success Operations Megan Baker. “Primis continues to play a leading role in the fight against fraud as evidenced by the publication of their new Sellers.guide tool, which bolsters publishers’ good cyber hygiene with clear and actionable insights into how to clean and maintain the use of their ads.txt files—a vital part of ad tech.”

The partnership focused on the measuring of SIVT, will continue to enable our Primis publisher community to operate within the video supply chain with confidence the impressions that pass through are human-verified. We are part of a growing community of HUMAN partners that collectively protect the industry from sophisticated fraudulent methods.

HUMAN verifies more than ten trillion digital interactions per week, working directly with the largest internet platforms, DSPs, and exchanges. The technology uses a multilayered detection methodology to spot SIVT and stop sophisticated bot attacks, incorporating technical evidence, continuous adaptation, machine learning, and the Satori Threat Intelligence and Research Team. As a result, HUMAN Advertising Integrity blocks non-human traffic across all platforms, from desktop and mobile web to CTV and mobile app.

A cybersecurity company with the most advanced Human Verification Engine to protect applications, APIs, and digital media from bot attacks, preventing losses and improving the digital experience for real humans. Protect your digital business with HUMAN. To Know Who’s Real, visit www.humansecurity.com.

The post Primis Expands Partnership with HUMAN: Continuing the Fight Against Ad Fraud appeared first on Primis.

Brand Safety is Also a Publisher Issue 

The more technological digital advertising became, and more profitable, the more there became a need for safety precautions against the growing sophistication of ad-fraud. This brought rise to several brand-safety initiatives and vendors catering to the many ad tech companies in the industry. Their influence on online advertising, including on the way SSPs and DSPs decide whether or not to advertise on a given site, has grown dramatically. 

These days, all major SSPs and DSPs are using at least one, if not several brand safety vendors. Based on the vendor’s reporting, they decide whether or not to advertise on the ad inventory they receive. That has an immediate impact on ad revenue, which is why it is crucial that publishers take a bigger interest in their brand safety rankings.

As most publishers don’t work directly with brand safety vendors, they are usually not aware of any brand safety situation they might have. They might not even know that the concept of brand safety exists. For that reason, we gathered the 6 ideas and actions that every publisher needs in order to improve their brand safety performance:

1. Demand Partner Vendors – Find out which brand safety provider your demand partners are using. SSPs and DSPs are using several brand safety vendors and decide whether or not to publish on a specific site based on their results. 
2. Know Your Ranking – Get to know your brand safety rank on the various brand safety platforms. Demand performance can be impacted by brand safe rank, resulting in lower bids and fill rates.
3. Understand Your Metrics – Find out which metrics you are lacking. The vendors measure different metrics using different algorithms. While one partner may approve the traffic, another can block it altogether.
4. Constant Feedback – Make sure to ask your demand partners for any feedback regarding the quality of traffic they are seeing. The publisher may be exposed to potential complaints and chargebacks from his associates due to the results they are seeing with the vendors they are using.
5. Learn More –  Understand the different metrics meanings. Publishers should know the meaning of the IVT reasons of the different vendors to have an easy and fast fix in case of a problem.  
6. Get Your Own – Work directly with a brand safety vendor. It can be very helpful as the publisher has direct access to the information and can work together with his AM in case of an issue, without involving middle men.

<

Becoming knowledgeable about every aspect of your business is always a good idea. But for such an integral part of the advertising chain it becomes even more important. The fact that there are so many different vendors and metrics, and each one of them can have an impact on your revenue, does add to the complexity. However, ignoring the issue, and not taking control of your brand safety standing is simply not an option. Stay safe!

The post What Every Publisher Needs to Know About Brand Safety appeared first on Primis.

Brand safety has been discussed more than ever over the past few years. Advertisers and media buyers are calling for a greater degree of transparency when it comes to where their ads are being shown.

This year, $5.8bn is expected to be wasted due to ad fraud, and lack of transparency from brand safety vendors is somewhat frustrating for publishers.

Ad tech vendors and SSPs need to be especially vigilant to ensure that the inventory they provide is of a high-quality standard. However, there is a need for standardization across multiple vendors and platforms, due to the differences in how brand safety vendors define the various metrics on their platforms.

Why We Need Standardization for Brand Safety

As the media buying process and programmatic advertising become more and more complex, the layering of technologies is making it difficult to achieve alignment among brands or implement standardization protocols. 

One key problem is that, due to the myriad of options out there, vendors categorize the various threats to brand safety differently. These categorizations include adult content, gambling, bots, data center traffic, SIVT, and many others. Each vendor has different standards for each of the violations, as well as different algorithms and measurements to determine the fraudulent traffic. They also identify them with different names, further complicating matters. With these differences in measurement and standards for each vendor, come the inherent complexity which begs for standardization.

Ideally, standardization would allow for clearer KPIs for clean and safe traffic across the board. However, with the layering of technologies and the use of multiple vendors, it has become very difficult.

Coming together

While it’s important that one uses trustworthy brand safety vendors, especially those with accreditation from organizations like the Media Rating Council(MRC), most ad tech vendors need to work with two or three brand safety vendors, because all of their demand-side or supply-side partners will be using multiple as well. This has become necessary for partnerships to work. If two partners are using different brand safety vendors which reflect different statistics and insights, it may cause an irreconcilable strain on their partnership.

The absence of standardization among accredited brand safety vendors raises problems particularly regarding invalid traffic (IVT). Along the entire supply chain, traffic can be flagged as fraudulent or invalid due to the different metrics that vendors use, from both SSP’s and DSP’s. 

The lack of transparency for how metrics are calculated makes it difficult for companies along the chain to strategize and plan for IVT, as no two companies measure it the same. This discrepancy can account for millions of wasted dollars a year on false alarms. 

Where Do We Go From Here?

Everyone in the ad tech ecosystem, from the publisher to the buyer to the advertiser, has a role to play in the push for the standardization of brand safety. No one part of the chain is to blame, but all can benefit from uniting under a common brand safety language.

This isn’t a problem that can be solved in a year… or even two. And it’s through no fault of any party involved. It’s genuinely hard to map out a single solution for successfully unifying brand safety metrics and standards. For one, getting multiple companies to agree on and adopt the same methods will be a long and arduous undertaking. However, embracing the opportunity for dialogue and communication between SSP’s, DSP’s and brand safety vendors is the first step towards brand safety transparency and unification.

The post It’s Time for Brand Safety Vendors to Standardize appeared first on Primis.