Ad fraud technology is helpful until it isn’t. Many publishers, brands, and agencies work with multiple solution-providers, which gets pricey, frustrating and even confusing. Their laundry list of grievances includes sizable data discrepancies between solution-providers, outlandish pricing, and network infrastructure shortcomings. All of these problems are solvable. They require solution-providers to stop pouring money into marketing activities and instead invest in their product. They also require the industry to band together to define ad fraud measurement standards and rethink MRC accreditation.

 

When I ask agencies why they use multiple ad fraud solutions, they usually tell me it is because their clients demand it. One brand prefers Solution A while another wants Solution B, so the agency is forced to invest in both. That is not the real reason. Most of these solutions work well when they are judged by themselves. But if there is a superior tool, why would you need more than one. What their clients are actually saying is that the agency’s data needs to line up with theirs. A client wouldn’t care what tool the agency used as long as it effectively eliminated fraud, based on the client’s preferred metrics.

 

Read the rest of CEO Rich Kahn's thoughts here.

Related Post: How to Select the Right Ad Fraud Solution

CTA-Anura-Fact-Sheet-Horizontal-with-thumbnail