The IAB recently released the final version of their Networks and Exchanges Quality Assurance Guidelines. Overall, these guidelines have the potential to improve the quality and transparency of network and exchange inventory. They should also make it easier for buyers to compare inventory and assess value and risk.
Whether these guidelines deliver on their promise is still an open question. Will the IAB's self-policing approach work, compared to other standards that require a 3rd party audit? Will networks and exchanges adopt the IAB's taxonomy or continue to use their own? And will agencies vote with their dollars, rewarding those networks and exchanges that go to the trouble of getting certified? These are a few of the questions that only time will answer.
A Ticking Clock
This release signals the start of
a six-month countdown, during which time Networks and Exchanges can self-certify by assigning a compliance officer, attending training, vetting their inventory and submitting a compliance checklist. At the end of the
six months, the IAB will publish the initial list of certified networks and exchanges; those certified can display a compliance seal (at left). After the initial list is published, additional
networks and exchanges can submit their certification documents at any time, and the list will be updated.
How the Guidelines Work
Unlike the EU's IASH guidelines
which require a twice yearly 3rd party audit, the IAB guidelines require only that the network or exchange "self-certify." The IAB does create a process for registering complaints against a network
that doesn't seem to be living up to the guidelines; three unresolved complaints in a six-month period will get a member de-certified.
While this self-policing approach would seem to be a bit looser than the IASH approach of third-party audits, it does have the benefit of reducing costs (which inevitably get passed on to advertisers) and is perhaps also a bow in the direction of practicality. Audits can be difficult and time consuming to perform. Nevertheless, this is one of the questions about the IAB approach: will networks and exchanges effectively police themselves?
What do the guidelines cover?
The guidelines primarily cover four areas:
A certified network/exchange must reveal their degree of transparency in the following areas:
You Say Tomato and I Say Tomahto
The IAB proposes a two-tier
contextual taxonomy, with 23 tier 1 categories and 371 second tier categories. Networks may also add their own tier 3 categories, and may map their proprietary taxonomies to the IAB's standard
taxonomy. Content can be categorized at the portal, site, section, page or unit level. It will be interesting to see if the networks adopt the IAB's taxonomy or simply provide a rough mapping of
their own proprietary taxonomies to the IAB.
Inventory Vetting
Networks and exchanges are required to vet their inventory initially and at least once per quarter.
They may use a 3rd party rating service, but are not required to do so. The vetting is done along three dimensions:
Data Disclosure
In order to be in compliance, networks and exchanges must disclose to publishers when leveraging their data for off-site behavioral
targeting and inform advertisers when buying third-party data, typically for ad targeting. Although many agencies negotiate data disclosure in their contracts, this is a good addition to the
guidelines.
A Good Step
The final publication of these guidelines is a good step in the direction of greater transparency and improving the quality of inventory
available from networks and exchanges. Given the increasing amount of inventory that is purchased every year from networks and exchanges, this is a good thing.
Whether the guidelines are successful or not depends of course on the rate of adoption, and to a certain extent on whether buyers vote with their dollars, rewarding those networks and exchanges that go to the trouble of getting certified, and punishing those who don't.
I'm betting on their success.
Good distrinction on transparency, Jim. Overall, the adversarial nature of most verification services towards ad networks and exchanges is confounding. At the end of the day, it's the networks who benefit most from technology that allows them to control and verify their own downstream inventory. The IAB guidelines help confirm the approach of partnering with networks to give them back control.