Re: [projectvrm] VRM-adjacent: brand safety

[Don Marti < >]

On 1/31/20 10:52 AM, Doc Searls wrote:
> Do you think (or should we think) the adtech business can fix itself? Because 
> that seems to be the premise here.

Very good question.  I don't think the adtech business is all one thing. 
You could probably go through the Lumascape and split the companies into 
categories.

 * highly dependent on fraud: quiet acqui-hire

 * unable to move off 3rd-party cookies: quiet acqui-hire

 * missing piece of a future-compatible company: acquisition

 * adaptable to SSO/contextual: continue with lower growth expectations

 * enabling technology for signal-carrying ads: high growth or big exit

Back when we were both at Linux Journal, the company ran its own mail 
server, which took up a lot of one person's time. Today, most publishers 
outsource their email...but in a privacy-preserving way, so interview 
answers and freelance queries end up in the right mailbox.

Sort of like that, some of "adtech" will end up continuing even in the 
most optimistic scenario just as an IT consolidation thing...but the 
role of trusted publishers in protecting their audience data will mean 
that just administering a server doesn't give them market power.

Don

> > On Jan 31, 2020, at 12:47 PM, Don Marti 
> > <
> >  >
> >  wrote:
> >
> > "Ad fraud is funding a whole bunch of bad actors. Hate
> > sites, disinformation sites, and worse. This is bad
> > for our every day life communities, and it’s really
> > bad for the brands."
> >
> > https://branded.substack.com/p/coming-soon
> >
> > (read the whole thing.  imho it can work if there
> > is constructive feedback between individual #brand
> > marketers who want to do the right thing and brand
> > safety activists among the customers.)
> >
> > --
> > Don Marti 
> > <
> >  >
> > https://blog.zgp.org/
> > Are you safe from 3rd-party web tracking?  https://www.aloodo.org/test/