An article from MediaPost's Laurie Sullivan out today, tells of a report from the Annenberg Innovation Lab that names both Google and Yahoo among the top 10 offenders said to be funneling cash to sites displaying pirated materials. Jonathan Taplin, (who is a director of USC Annenberg Innovation Lab) says Google's pirate sites count, is as high as 44,000.
In another article (MarketingLand) Taplin is quoted as saying: "We look forward to working with advertising agencies & networks in the coming months to address this issue."
In her article Laurie Sullivan points out that "fixing the broken system creates a double-edge sword for advertisers."
Laurie goes on to say: "The laws of supply and demand on legitimate sites would kick in creating a bidding war. For brands, the price to serve an ad on a premium site would likely rise, but at least brands wouldn't fund sites distributing pirated content. It would raise the value of ad spots on premium sites."
Unrelated (but just as important) is the advice that two of the biggest publishers on the web (Amazon and Facebook) don't use the advertising industry's standardized ad-privacy program, and that this is said to be yet another problem for even the largest digital-media buyers.
For the Publicis owned Vivaki (& depending on the size of a Brand's ad campaign) this is said to take anywhere from five to 20 hours of work to produce a required FTC compliance report relating to consumer privacy.
In both these above instances - Am I my Brother's Keeper?
The answer is NOT regulation in a free market system. Innovation should not only be rewarded but will always (ultimately), win the day.
Google, Facebook, Yahoo and Amazon should not be made to conform.
[Added Jan 6th - "...it looks like Q4 was a boon not only for AOL and Yahoo, but for MSN, Google's YouTube and Amazon"]
Does anyone stop to wonder just why Amazon is trading at nearly 150 times its 2013 earnings estimates? Why Facebook has reach that (over) 1 billion users mark?
There IS an answer (I feel) and hopefully - it's coming shortly.
Sooner or, later the "industry" (and those that 'cover', the industry) are going to 'wake-up' or, be told & made to understand that in disregarding sites & content all-together-an RTB ad/impression targeting an individual USER, is (always) only between, You-Me-and-The-Gatepost.
No one wants to Listen, it seems?
In an independent intent-based global marketplace, it's only the USER (that an ad is targeted to), that should be of any concern to advertisers. No matter where they next appear on the web & in such a marketplace, content (coming only from approved partners within the marketplace), becomes totally irrelevant.
From within the MediaPost article Jonathan Taplin rightly points out:
"Pirate sites are basically parasites on the creative economy. None of the money that flows into their coffers goes into producing content."
Yes. In that ONE (intent based) RTB marketplace, (that can be 'equal to all' - and, in being simplified), advertisers could even get to be happy about paying Google, et al) an agreed discounted rate (representing say, less 60%-80%?) on their 'share' of the spend? - For all or, any of their ads as found on Google's 44,000 "pirate" sites? (Besides any other such sites!) This would soon (quickly) see pirate sites vanish, no?
Always, only my own thoughts and opinions expressed.
LOOK: Jan 3rd: $0.89 0.03 (-3.26%) Trading below cash held.
ps; From AdExchanger.com - Jan 4th - Excellent!!
Disclosure: Long LOOK