How to Navigate the OTT/CTV Landscape

Previously article that I have written that was originally posted on the ANA Blog on January 27th, 2022

https://www.ana.net/miccontent/show/id/ii-2022-ott-tips

In July, Double Verify announced CTV ad fraud had dropped to 1 percent. At the end of 2021, IAS came out with their Industry Pulse report. In it they reported that buyers perceived vulnerability to CTV ad fraud dropped from 26 percent last year to 10 percent for 2022. This softly translates to buyers spending more in 2022 in this channel with confidence.

I am here to shatter any confidence in those misconceptions because these misconceptions are rooted in lack of understanding. Marketers don't always understand technical side of how your verification partners work. And that is OK – marketers aren't not technologists. But marketers do need to take a pragmatic approach by asking questions and understanding what report findings mean to your brand and your brand's bottom line.

Reports are put out by vendors, which means you should always take their findings with a grain of salt before taking action. These reports also don't take into consideration your data, for instance, and how you might have been impacted. When a study comes out reporting that fraud is rampant, you need to check to see what's being done to ensure your budgets are protected. On the flip side, if you read that fraud is low, you need still to check to see what's being done to ensure your budgets are protected.

Double Verify and IAS's reports are a perfect example. On the same day IAS's Industry Pulse report was released, Double Verify came out with OTT/CTV research finding fraud affects nearly 20 percent of CTV programmatic inventory (a bit higher than the 1 percent they claimed earlier in the year). However, Method Media Intelligence had published its RapidFire?report?back in August. It showed how easily OTT/CTV is being taken advantage of in the?programmatic space. Other vendors tried to dismiss the findings, perhaps leading to this perceived comfortability with OTT/CTV.

The perceived vulnerability of OTT/CTV should not only be high, but the highest. Why? While "CPM are higher" is a good answer, it's because your beautiful flat screen in your living room. It does not accept JavaScript. If JavaScript can't render, a verification problem will occur, and your vulnerability is much bigger than you even realize.

If verification vendors are not able to render their JavaScript, then most vendors will rely on IP address and User Agents. This can be?used?in pre-bid and post-bid.

To combat this, ask your verification vendors how they are tackling OTT/CTV. They will likely respond that it's "proprietary," but you can't leave it at that. You must dig deeper.

If JavaScript can't work properly, then it relies on limited signals — all of which can be gamed. Most detection is done via JavaScript. This is how most vendors' "secret sauce" is made. CTV budgets being so high, combined with the fractured ad serving infrastructure in streaming environments, makes for the perfect storm.

So how do you navigate this storm?

• Ensure that your buying platforms and bidding software require a robust set of transaction parameters to complete an auction.
• Know who you are buying from. Measure and analyze supply paths.
• Ask your DSP's to reduce your exposure to inventory resellers. If it looks like a bargain, it is worth doing extra due diligence via supply path mapping.

The vulnerability is there; this is not up for debate. What is up for debate is how you will be approaching vulnerability. Your verification vendors can help you navigate the journey, but they need to give you a GPS, not a compass. You don't want to get lost in this channel; it is going to be key to your long-term growth as a marketer.