Why the Advertising Industry Needs Standards on Spammy ‘Made for Advertising’ Sites
New ANA research shows advertisers are spending $13 billion on these sites each year, accounting for 21 percent of all ad impressions each year and 15 percent of the global $88 billion spent each year on programmatic advertising. That is an astonishing tax on the ad industry and beyond the obvious waste it’s fueling an ecosystem that damages brands, creates excessive carbon emissions, spreads toxic health and extreme polarizing content, and competes with real news and information for clicks, search traffic and revenue.
If you’ve been on the internet over the past two decades you’ve seen the headlines: “The 25 Hilarious Beach Photos That Raise Eyebrows;” “Your IQ Is 140 If You Can Name 10 Of These People;” or maybe, “Heart Surgeon Begs Americans: ‘Stop Doing This To Your Avocados.’”
Perhaps you’ve laughed about them (they’re funny!) or even clicked and ended up trapped in a slideshow, your computer fan kicking on as it struggles to contend with the barrage of ads on sites with names like Boredom Therapy, Buzzfond, or Health Dish.
These are Made for Advertising sites and new research from the Association of National Advertisers shows they’re no laughing matter: they’re big business. New ANA research shows advertisers are spending $13 billion on these sites each year, accounting for 21 percent of all ad impressions each year and 15 percent of the global $88 billion spent each year on programmatic advertising.
That is an astonishing tax on the ad industry and beyond the obvious waste it’s fueling an ecosystem that damages brands, creates excessive carbon emissions, spreads toxic health and extreme polarizing content, and competes with real news and information for clicks, search traffic and revenue.
