• by Laurie Sullivan , Staff Writer @lauriesullivan, July 2, 2025

Performance ads are paid for when specific actions are completed, but many advertising formats require payment even when no one is looking. 

According to a recent white paper, around 75% of MRC-accredited digital inventory receives zero active attention.

For advertisers, when a campaign falls into this gap, media spend is wasted. Consumers do not form a lasting bond with the brand and action does not follow. Yet those ads still count as delivered, and the advertiser pays a price.

When one media-measurement company wanted to know how much of their budget brands waste on ineffective advertising, it ran a study to discover the truth.

Campaigns were categorized into four groups based on how many people viewed the ad and for how long in proportion to the total advertising time-in-view – from non-dull and moderately dull to very dull and extremely dull. 

Amplified’s detailed study puts a price on media investments that fail to effectively capture consumer attention.

The data showed that low-performing campaigns would need an additional $198 billion annually -- when measured in active attention and commercial impact -- to match the highest-performing campaign categories.

That number rose to $245 billion when benchmarked against the best-performing campaigns in top-tier media, according to the study.

Amplified founder Karen Nelson-Field released the study at the 2025 Cannes Lions Festival. It is a continuation of a project the company has been working on during the past year.

Amplified wanted to explore what happens when media mixes fail, even if the quality of ad creative is good.

Analysis revealed not only that the category defined as non-dull media is approximately 11 times more effective than very dull and extremely dull formats, but also highlighted several other factors -- including that low-performing campaigns invest more heavily in “fast-decay” formats, hitting diminishing returns more rapidly and wasting more impressions.

In addition, non-dull campaigns, which comprise around 80% of formats, had slow decay, but with extremely dull campaigns, that mix flips with only 20% of formats showing slow decay.

The study also showed that very and extremely dull campaigns produce 37% lower short-term advertising strength or STAS, which means that as attention fades, so does influence. 

There is a decline in what the study identified as long-term return on investments.

The results showed that long-term ROI per $1 fell by 14%. Brand-building only works if attention is earned. Dull media strips that consumer attention and long-term value fades.

The campaign categorized as very and extremely dull experienced a 130% increase in waste in the space above the study's viewing curve. This means the portion of time that an ad was on screen but never looked at.