‘Who cares about self-regulation’?

2528349 — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 09:35:00 GMT

The recent release of the full Digital Britain report was incredibly important for the IAB in many ways – the fact it acknowledges the role of self-regulation, emerging advertising models and even welcomed our behavioural targeting Good Practice Principles.

However, there remain some in the industry who question this, (see in particular the comments here ) and refuse to see a role for bodies that promote self-regulation such as the IAB and of course IASH. In my opinion, this is a hugely irresponsible view that when at its most extreme could actually thwart the growth of the industry at a time when the spotlight is well and truly on online, as a marketing medium.

As an industry of publishers, agencies and networks, we can sometimes forget where our main responsibility lies – with the brand advertisers.

In terms of IASH and network advertising , we want to protect these brands and prevent them from appearing against content that contains hate, indecency, obscenity, guns, illegal spyware and worse. IASH Members which comprises of Networks and Sales Houses, go through stringent audits to show that they comply with the IASH Code and do not deliver ads against such content.

Without such processes in place, we run the risk of even stricter regulation, that begins to move out of our control, straight into the hands of policy makers

‘But it’s all about money, surely?’ some may argue… I doubt very much if any agency wishes to tell their clients that they had the opportunity to trade safely and securely but turned it down because of a few pence off the CPM.

The majority of Media Agencies understand the importance of self-regulation models such as IASH. They understand the lengths the Members go to in order to ensure they can trade safely. They also understand that what they are buying is transparent – they know that the ad they booked will appear against the type of content they have agreed to. Perhaps this is why the model is being adopted in Germany, and the US.

It’s this transparency that needs to remain intact, and the industry needs to be united in this objective.

In my opinion this needs to be understood, and appreciated by ALL, as online advertising moves into this next, very critical stage.

YouTube - Content creators can now make money.... Or can they?

1321426 — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 08:25:00 GMT

So we all know Google is tryinig to figure out how to monetize Youtube.

Well, while the latest idea to let content creators sell their own ads seems like a good idea, I think Goolge needs to get a little realistic if the rumours are true!

Professional content producers, wth ad sales teams & the full mothy are now able to sell video avertising on their YouTube channels. That includes the click-to-expand overlays that run across the bottom of YouTube videos and display units on the page that hosts the video player. The revenue is split between the content creator and YouTube, just as it would be if YouTube sold the ads.

However, if we dig deep seems there are a few rumours going around that YouTube is requiring that these ads sell for at least a $15 CPM, which is ultimately a lot less than the going rate for professional content. Content producers wishing to peddle their own ad space must commit to sell at least $10,000 — $4500 of which would go to Google — per campaign. At a rate of $15 CPM, that totals 666,667 impressions, a standard that only 44 videos from YouTube's partner program met last month.

Seems rather steep don't you think?

Search results matching tag 'CPM'

‘Who cares about self-regulation’?

YouTube - Content creators can now make money.... Or can they?