I’m glad he did. Protecting America’s children is morally right and absolutely necessary.

But as we move forward, I hope he’ll remember that investing in America’s future must include the free and open, ad-supported internet.

Since IAB began measuring the economic impact of the internet in 2008, the internet’s contribution to GDP has grown eightfold, from $300 billion to $2.45 trillion. More than 17 million jobs in the U.S. were generated by the commercial internet.

The President’s calls for a total ban on personalized advertising to kids might sound good, but digital ads fuel innovation. Without ads to subsidize free children’s content, parents would pay more. Kids in the richest ZIP codes would continue to receive access, while kids in the poorest would lose it.

In an already divided America, is that what we really want?

What’s needed is not a total ban, but common-sense legislation providing the right protections for kids. We don’t totally ban toys or playground equipment or swimming pools because they could be dangerous. Instead, we create legislation to make sure they’re safe and age-appropriate.

Maximizing safety, while maximizing the positive effects of innovation, is among the most fundamental roles of good government.

According to a recent IAB study, the vast majority of consumers agree that the free and open internet is a social good, they appreciate the role of digital advertising, and say it would be unfair to lower-income Americans to raise barriers.

Other studies show consumers value the total internet at $38,000 a year. That’s more than half of the real median U.S. household income.

GenZ, the first generation to never experience life without the internet, values it even higher at $54,000 a year. Maybe that’s because GenZ grew up with great free content.

Americans are not anti-tech. We’re not anti-innovation. We want a free and open, ad-supported internet — but we also want sturdy guardrails.

Yet some of the agencies under the Biden administration have been going well outside established norms in an effort to win short-term political points.

The Federal Trade Commission is redefining ordinary data collection and analysis as “commercial surveillance,” a definition so broad that potential rules would criminalize the internet itself. Proposed rules from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau threaten consumers’ access to online banking and budget apps, tax assistance, and more.

The positions being taken by these agencies seem to start from an extremist idea that advertising and marketing are inherently unfair and deceptive.

I’m glad the President continues to focus on online safety for kids. Let’s give America the free, open and innovative internet we want, with common sense protections kids need.

The post How President Biden Can Really Protect Kids Online appeared first on IAB.

IAB Public Policy Blooms In D.C

The 2024 IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit is taking place on Tuesday, April 2nd, in Washington, D.C. Have you booked your spot yet? Act quickly. This event was a sold-out success last year, featuring experts and insiders from leading brands, publishers, agencies, ad platforms, law firms and federal agencies, exploring the latest legislative, regulatory, and legal developments affecting our industry. 

Whether you’re a privacy counsel or government affairs executive, brand strategist, marketer or ad tech guru, IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit offers valuable insight to guide you through the thorniest questions surrounding AI, data privacy, measurement and attribution, protecting children online, and more. Join your peers for a day of learning and networking just steps from the White House, when cherry blossom season in our nation’s capital will be in full effect.  

Not only does IAB provide educational and advocacy opportunities for our members, but our leading trade association also provides policymakers overseeing digital advertising issues in Congress with information to better protect consumers and our vital industry. After hosting a six-part educational series for congressional staff last year, in February IAB hosted a trip to New York City for our first-ever graduating class, where they learned about the “life of a digital ad” from IAB members Google, Nielsen, and NBCUniversal. 

IAB’s Public Policy Team is constantly conducting outreach to Congress and state houses across the U.S. to help policymakers understand digital advertising’s contributions to innovation, jobs, and the economy. Internet for Growth, a nationwide coalition of small businesses and creators, is helping legislators and regulators understand the important role digital advertising plays on Main Street and to prevent bills banning personalized advertising from harming opportunities for every American.  

We need more IAB members to get involved. To inquire about joining or sponsoring initiatives like IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit, our Congressional Education Series, or Internet for Growth, please email Lartease Tiffith, Executive Vice President for Public Policy, at lartease@iab.com,

Related Coverage:
Consumer Study: Personal Data and the Value of the Free and Open Internet (IAB)
Data-Driven Digital Advertising is Crucial to Entrepreneurs and Under Threat (Entrepreneur)

CFPB Joins FTC In Attacking Digital Advertising

Digital advertising creates jobs and economic growth, not only at IAB member companies. Our industry is critical to virtually every other, including small businesses and creators, who rely on relevant, data-driven online advertising and marketing to reach bigger audiences, or even niche, small ones. Digital advertising is also a form of free speech. 

Targeted communications on a variety of platforms help individuals and organizations share their viewpoints, gather support, and foster community. But at agencies like the FTC,  the portrayal of digital advertising is almost entirely negative. Recent rulemakings paint digital advertising, and the internet itself, as inherently unfair and deceptive.

Under Chair Lina Khan, one of the earliest signs the FTC would be breaking with precedent, pursuing vast new powers, was its proposal to regulate “commercial surveillance,” a grim term that would criminalize most online activity. IAB pushed back forcefully. 

“Commercial surveillance” rules appear to be on hold, but the agency is pursuing other lines of attack. Proposed rules for auto-renewals, integral to the online subscriptions, could dissuade people from subscribing in the first place, burdening customers with unnecessary information, while preventing businesses from offering useful information, such as better deals. 

The idea is that people are easily fooled by “dark patterns,” another buzzword, like “commercial surveillance,” for standard marketing and advertising practices the FTC itself employs. In a recent amicus brief to a federal circuit, IAB pointed out the dangerous hypocrisy.  The agency is seeking nearly unlimited authority to punish truthful commercial speech, everything from marketing language that’s too convincing to text size and color. 

Fortunately, IAB is winning battles on behalf of digital advertising and our members’ constitutional rights. A judge insisted our amicus brief be included in the “dark patterns” case against Amazon with potential consequences for every advertiser. Despite FTC objections, an administrative judge recently ordered more hearings to investigate the agency’s subscription rules, more costly than the agency estimates. 

Other FTC actions threaten free speech, too. Proposed rules for consumer testimonials and reviews would prohibit employees from speaking and hold companies liable for unsolicited comments. Purchasing fake reviews is wrong, but banning incentives for real customers to share their thoughts is also wrong. IAB has warned the agency against new rules that would punish truthful statements and companies operating in good faith to moderate user comments.

Other federal agencies are getting in on the act. Digital advertising helps Americans understand and access banking and budget apps, tax assistance, and other financial tools, but the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has announced a proposal to ban financial institutions from using customer data to advertise their products and services. 

Far from being unfair, deceptive, unreasonable, or unnecessary, digital advertising levels the playing for small businesses, increases competition, spreads useful information, and supports our economy, including Americans’ financial independence. IAB supports punishing bad actors who abuse the public’s trust and confidence, while we’re also promoting the benefits of digital advertising to the FTC and other federal agencies with the wrong idea about our industry. 

Related Coverage:
IAB’s Tiffith Warns Against Overregulation in Digital Advertising (Beet TV)
The FTC’s Proposed Rule Banning Fake Consumer Reviews and Testimonials: An Update (JD Supra)
Media Trades Blast Proposed ‘Click To Cancel’ Rules (MediaPost)
Lina Khan’s Rough Year at the FTC (New York Magazine)

What President Biden’s AI Order Gets Right and Wrong 

In The Drum, IAB EVP for Public Policy Lartease Tiffith reviews the President’s Executive Order on Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence, mostly praising the order while warning against an over-reaction to AI, holding more promise than peril. 

“When new technologies arrive, they are almost always accompanied by apocalyptic predictions,” writes Tiffith, citing the New York World at the dawn of electricity. According to the now-defunct newspaper, “Everything that will hold electricity is becoming more or less charged.. the earth, especially in the case of large cities, and the houses are being more or less saturated with it. It is time to call a halt before this thing goes any farther.”

“Those dystopian narratives are back now,” writes Tiffith, “this time about artificial intelligence AI.” For years AI has been helping advertisers improve data privacy, boost ad personalization, and drive cost-efficiencies and revenue, but the rise of generative AI, which can create text, images, video, code, and other output, has captured the public’s attention and prompted presidential action. 

According to Tiffith, the White House has correctly focused on preventing deception and bias. He praises stronger protections for content creators and publishers. “The most important thing this Executive Order got right is that it didn’t allow a focus on challenges and dystopian thinking to lead its decision-making. There is enormous opportunity ahead, and we need to steer toward it and not away from it,” he writes. Read the entire article here. 

Protecting Kids Online

In his most recent State of the Union address, President Biden again mentioned digital advertising. In each of his annual speeches to Congress, his particular focus has been protecting children online, and last week he called for bipartisan legislation, such as an update to Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0) or Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), to address the issue. The latter bill recently gained enough support to pass the Senate. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), its lead sponsor, headlined ALM this year. 

IAB was proud to have Sen. Blackburn at our premier event in January. We agree the internet should be a safe place for children to learn, play and communicate. However, we also believe KOSA could be a better bill, preempting conflicting state laws and avoiding overlapping enforcement among government agencies. Our members are also concerned about a “constructive knowledge standard” that could erect barriers to access to safe content for people of all ages, not just kids. In fact, bills like KOSA could require companies to collect more information than necessary to verify every user. 

COPPA 2.0 is another bipartisan bill with similar problems. A new constructive knowledge standard would increase the chances of fines and penalties for any online content or service provider, including those without a natural audience of young people. The bill would extend a ban on targeted advertising to anyone under 17 years old from a previous threshold of 13, more reasonable. Both bills, KOSA and COPPA 2.0, would create more barriers to online access for all ages, raise costs for currently free content for families, and generally muddle the legal landscape for online companies. 

To protect kids online, including their access to educational and other beneficial content, IAB is urging Congress – as well as the FTC – to make necessary changes to legislation and regulation under consideration. This week, IAB submitted public comment in response to the FTC’s rewrite of regulations for children’s online privacy, mirroring mistakes in KOSA and COPPA 2.0. We’re pleased the agency is operating within its legal authority but disappointed the FTC is proposing multiple layers of consent for parents that likely result in frustration, fatigue, and fewer online opportunities for kids and their families. 

What all these bills and rules have in common is an under-appreciation of digital advertising’s role in supporting safe, healthy content for working- and middle-class families, especially, unable to afford paywalls and subscriptions. Register now for the 2024 IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit to learn more about issues in Washington, D.C., and around the world affecting your company.  

More IAB Public Policy News:
Congress is Considering Bills That Could Regulate How Advertisers Interact with Children (Marketing Brew) 
Expect Enforcement of Consumer Privacy Laws to Ramp up in 2024 (Marketing Brew)
How Much Can States Regulate Social Media? The Supreme Court Hears Cases (Digiday)
Without The Right Precautions, Influencers Could Be At Risk For Legal Trouble (AdExchanger)

GET INVOLVED

IAB holds regular meetings with members of its Public Policy Council. If you are interested in getting involved, please email Lartease Tiffith, EVP, Public Policy at lartease@iab.com.

This newsletter is intended for U.S. audiences and is not for those in the European Economic Area or the United Kingdom.

The post IAB Public Policy Newsletter – March 2024 appeared first on IAB.

With more than a dozen privacy laws in effect or coming into effect, each of which provides for an opt-out of “sales” and targeted advertising, digital advertising is increasingly becoming a regulated industry. This change in the law must be met with a change in business practices, including how we conduct diligence around privacy in digital ad transactions.

Liability is shifting

One of the fundamental changes in state privacy laws is the inclusion of accountability. There are new requirements around what partners can and cannot do with the personal information you provide them. Indeed, you must take “reasonable and appropriate steps” to make sure that your partner uses that personal information consistent with the law — for example, by including mandatory audit provisions in your contracts.

Perhaps the most significant change is the California Privacy Protection Agency’s (CPPA) regulation stating that whether you conduct diligence of your partners with whom you disclose personal information is a material factor in determining whether you will be liable for their wrongdoing.  In other words, due diligence and third-party risk management should now be integral aspects of your data privacy program.

Enforcement is getting tougher — and digital advertising will face new scrutiny

Not only is liability shifting, but enforcement is too. Upon the effective dates of the dozen-plus privacy laws, each vests enforcement in its attorney general’s office. In California, both the Attorney General’s Office and the CPPA each have enforcement powers.

Those enforcers have shown a clear intent to protect consumers under their privacy laws.  On January 26, the California Attorney General’s announced a sweep of streaming services under the CCPA.  The Connecticut Attorney General’s Office announced its enforcement priorities for the digital advertising industry at the IAB State Privacy Law Summit on November 15, including setting bright lines on the right to opt-out of the disclosure of personal information to vendors for measurement and frequency capping (where those vendors do not serve as your processors), as well as parameters on the categorizing information as deidentified.

Colorado’s Attorney General Phil Weiser has said “Enforcement of the Colorado Privacy Act is a critical tool to protect consumers’ data and privacy (…) If we become aware of organizations that are flouting the law or refusing to comply with it, we are prepared to act.”

Finally, the CPPA has a fully staffed enforcement division to investigate possible violations, and it’s hard to imagine digital advertising won’t be one of its key focus areas. Importantly, you can expect announced or unannounced audits to commence soon, particularly: for companies who’ve had any history of non-compliance with any privacy law; where there are potential violations of the law; or where the subject’s “collection or processing of personal information presents significant risk to consumer privacy or security”.  And there is no longer a mandatory 30-day “cure period” — no guaranteed second chances — under the CCPA.

Companies should not underprice state privacy risk because doing so could become a big — and very costly — mistake.

Industry diligence must improve

Historically, privacy diligence has relied on two things. First, you obtained a representation and warranty in the contract that the business partner would comply with applicable law and then indemnity if it failed to do so.  Second, you typically sent out a generic questionnaire.

This approach will no longer do.

For a fully digital industry, diligence is woefully analog and outdated. It’s underfunded, understaffed, and in an underdeveloped state. Companies send out and receive dozens of questionnaires monthly in connection with transactions and partnerships. These often ask the same questions in multiple different ways, which makes responding to them a rote exercise of managing answers in spreadsheets and cutting and pasting. Worse, these questionnaires are often generic and out of date, and the majority fail to address the actual uses of personal information contemplated by the business arrangement and the entirety of each state law. Sometimes, the surveys come back incomplete — if they come back at all.

The industry must solve for privacy diligence, and it can’t do so by doubling down on its current approach. Rather, what’s needed are standards around privacy diligence that can achieve effectiveness and efficiency so that all industry participants are speaking the same language. We need standardized privacy diligence questions that address both the letter of the law and the specific data flows and business use cases for every vendor and sub-vendor. We also need a more effective and efficient means of managing the diligence process.

It’s a digital problem that demands a digital solution.

Introducing the IAB Diligence Platform

To proactively meet the needs of regulators, the IAB convened a Privacy Implementation and Accountability Taskforce (PIAT), composed of publishers, advertisers, agencies and ad tech companies.  The group highlighted the need for an effective and efficient solution: the IAB Diligence Platform.

The Platform provides a privacy diligence solution that is purpose-built for the digital advertising industry. This solution will combine new industry vertical business questions with US state law assessments in one collaborative platform to make the diligence workflow effective and efficient for both sides of the partnership.

Leading industry privacy lawyers and law firms are collaborating in the PIAT initiative to draft the right business and privacy questions of each digital advertising use case and vendor type. We know that the right questions that a publisher should ask an SSP aren’t the right questions for an advertiser or its agency to ask a DSP.  These questions will be complemented by questions specifically tailored to assess compliance with each state privacy law.

The IAB Diligence Platform will be built on the SafeGuard Privacy Platform, which features robust state law assessments and a vendor compliance hub.  Users will be able to complete the diligence questionnaire once and share it with the partners on the platform as they engage in digital ad transactions.  By moving the industry towards use of the Platform, there will be a strong network effect to drive efficiency and improve deal speed.  In fact, IAB members that are already on the SafeGuard Privacy platform are seeing 80%+ efficiency gains by managing multiple laws concurrently and automating vendor compliance. They have a single source of truth for members to handle their diligence efficiently, and they’re saving dozens of FTE hours a month.

The solution provides:

• Standardized privacy questions that will be leveraged by the industry.
• Ability to fill out assessments and questionnaires once and easily share with partners many times.
• Ability to update compliance as new laws come online or existing laws and regulations evolve.

It’s better for vendors. Automated sharing means significant time and labor savings for vendors — they answer the right set of questions once and share everywhere. Deals close faster when there are no overlapping, inappropriate, out of date, and repetitive questions to wrestle with.

It’s better for accountability. It’s auditable, fully accountable, and provides a clear record of compliance: companies that are audited can show the actions they’ve taken to ensure that control and privacy of company data was assured. The combination of SafeGuard Privacy assessments and IAB PIAT (Privacy Implementation & Accountability Task Force) questionnaires delivers what the heightened regulatory landscape calls for.

Of inertia, lack of budgets, and finger-pointing

The first challenge is for the industry to overcome inertia. We must recognize that we are now becoming a regulated industry, and expect that regulators will do their job diligently. What worked in the past will not work in the future.

Despite this, few budgets have a line item for a diligence platform. This must change.

Company leaders must not allow this to devolve into finger-pointing about which budget this should come from — especially since nobody’s going to point at their own budget first.

This needs to be a priority driven by top management, with real effort to find the resources and get a real solution in place. The good news is, the cost is lower than it might appear — and certainly lower than the financial and reputational cost of an enforcement action arising from your partner failing to properly process personal information you provided to it.

Additionally, the costs of the industry’s current approach are high, but largely hidden. Every hour that employees spend sending out questionnaires, working with vendors to fill in the inevitable gaps, and chasing down vendors who are too overwhelmed to reply has a hard-dollar cost. This is to say nothing of the opportunity cost of executives stepping in to push through contracts that have been held up in the process.

What to do now

We encourage everyone to understand the new legal landscape, and prepare for smarter diligence. If you’re not already a member of IAB PIAT (Privacy Implementation & Accountability Task Force), you can email michael.hahn@iab.com. You can also contact SafeGuard Privacy here to see a demo of the IAB Diligence Platform.

The new regulations are real, and we expect them to be enforced. The most important thing to do is to start today to prepare for new state privacy law diligence requirements.

The post Working Harder Won’t Solve Privacy Diligence. It’s Time to Work Smarter. appeared first on IAB.

Challenging Self-Assessment: The Bias of In-House Measurement and Certification

The practice of self-measurement, prevalent among various industry players from large tech companies to media publishers, inherently introduces bias. This self-certification, lacking independent audits, can pollute the ecosystem with metrics that may not be impartial.

This issue intensifies when publishers and agencies certify solutions without advocating for third-party accreditation, effectively grading their own homework. Such practices can embed bias and diminish the transparency and equity crucial for the digital advertising marketplace.

The False Assurance of Unverified Compliance

The industry is further compromised by ad tech and measurement companies that claim adherence to measurement standards without undergoing the rigors of independent accreditation. This situation demands that stakeholders, including advertisers, agencies, and publishers, approach these claims with a healthy dose of skepticism and demand accredited substantiation.

Assessing Investments Versus Accreditation Commitment

The argument that the accreditation process is prohibitively costly and complex is often contradicted by the substantial investments that companies are willing to make in research and marketing. This contrast raises the question of whether such companies are truly committed to transparency or if they are avoiding accreditation for fear of revealing deficiencies in their procedures and quality controls.

The IAB Tech Lab’s Compliance Programs offer a feasible starting point towards accreditation, providing a structured yet flexible framework for companies to align with industry standards. This preliminary certification paves the way for the more comprehensive Media Rating Council (MRC) accreditation process.

Accreditation, particularly under the MRC purview, is a robust indication that a service has not only passed an audit but has also gained approval from an audit committee and the MRC Board of Directors. Maintaining this status requires passing annual audits, which serve to uphold the high standards of quality and reliability in audience measurement.

Acknowledging the non-profit status of organizations like IAB Tech Lab and MRC is crucial. They are dedicated to preserving the standards and guidelines of digital advertising, not to generating profit, ensuring that the costs of accreditation support a more reliable advertising environment.

Advocacy for Verified Measurement Standards

The digital advertising sector must demand more than simple assertions of compliance; third-party accreditation or, at minimum, independent certification, must be recognized as an essential criterion. The absence of this is a significant concern that should prompt further investigation and caution.

The industry’s move toward regularized third-party accreditation is a step toward ensuring that all partners can substantiate the impartiality and accuracy of their data. This transparency is the cornerstone upon which trust is built in the digital advertising realm.

At this juncture, the industry must embed third-party accreditation into its core practices. The hesitancy to pursue accreditation because of its perceived expense or difficulty is no longer tenable. Adherence to data privacy laws, especially in the context of preventing unauthorized fingerprinting or stitching of personal user data without consent, underscores the criticality of this effort. The collective endeavor of advertisers, agencies, and publishers to insist on unbiased, accredited measurement practices will be pivotal in creating an ecosystem where trust, transparency, and respect for user privacy are the standard.

The post Asserting Measurement Integrity in the Age of Digital Accountability appeared first on IAB.

The impact of privacy regulations and continued data signal loss in this evolving environment cannot be overstated. As stricter privacy laws and technological advancements like Apple’s App Tracking Transparency framework continue to reshape the data landscape, businesses face the challenge of operating with reduced access to consumer data. This shift requires a fundamental rethinking of data-driven strategies, with a focus on developing more resilient and innovative approaches to data collection and analysis. Companies are compelled to pivot towards more privacy-conscious methods. These changes, while challenging, also present opportunities for growth and innovation in data processing and consumer engagement strategies. As the landscape evolves, adapting to these changes will be crucial for businesses seeking to remain competitive and maintain consumer trust in an increasingly privacy-focused world.

Here is a list of top 10 trends I see unfolding in 2024:

1. Transitioning Beyond Third-Party Cookies
   We’re witnessing a pivotal transition beyond third-party cookies, moving towards privacy-by-design targeting methods like contextual and cohort-based approaches. This shift, notably marked by Google’s Privacy Sandbox set to start phasing out cookies in January 2024, is further intensified by ongoing data signal loss by Apple and evolving data privacy regulations. This is more than a mere shift; it’s a reinvention of audience targeting and measurement that demands a deeper engagement with technologies that marry privacy with targeting accuracy. This transition has been a long time coming, and the industry has been -or should have been- preparing for these changes for the past three years, underscoring the need for adaptability and foresight in the evolving landscape of digital advertising.
2. AI: A New Era in Measurement and Attribution
   Artificial intelligence is taking center stage in measurement and attribution, filling the void left by the decline of traditional data signals. The use of synthetic data, blending ad tech and martech solutions, is set to revolutionize our understanding of consumer behavior and campaign effectiveness.
3. The Challenge of Cross-Channel Measurement
   Achieving a unified view of customer journeys will continue to be a challenge, yet we’ll see significant strides in this area. Despite evolving privacy regulations and technological shifts, innovations in cross-channel measurement tools will provide new insights into consumer behaviors across platforms.
4. The Rise of Attention Metrics
   As the digital advertising industry transitions away from cookie-based metrics, the focus will increasingly shift towards attention metrics. This shift is underscored by initiatives from IAB and MRC to develop a set of measurement guidelines for attention. Such efforts are expected to lead to a more uniform and consistent approach across the industry.
5. The Strategic Use of First-Party Data
   With the decline of third-party cookies, first-party data is gaining unprecedented importance in 2024. Companies will, however, need to strike a delicate balance between leveraging this data for targeted advertising and adhering to stringent privacy regulations.
6. The Evolution of Data Clean Rooms
   Data clean rooms are poised to grow in sophistication and importance within digital advertising strategies. Looking forward, we anticipate significant advancements, expanding their capabilities in multi-touch attribution, media mix modeling, consumer journey analysis, prediction forecasting, and more. Data clean rooms will remain pivotal in addressing the need for comprehensive data analysis while navigating privacy concerns.
7. Programmatic Advertising Evolves
   Programmatic platforms will be in a constant state of adaptation as they navigate the evolving landscape influenced by the Privacy Sandbox and Apple iOS. This dynamic environment will drive a transformation towards more controlled advertising environments, such as private marketplaces, preferred deals, automated guarantees, and a resurgence of direct buys. This shift will prioritize user experience and content quality, moving away from broad-reaching, automated approaches of the past.
8. Retail Media Networks and Data-Driven Success
   Retail Media Networks (RMNs) are set for significant growth, driven by the adoption of standardized measurement guidelines. Those that prioritize data-driven strategies and foster internal collaboration will likely emerge as the leaders in this space.
9. The New Talent Landscape
   There’s a growing demand for professionals skilled in privacy management and AI. Companies that invest in attracting and developing such talent, offering the right tools and opportunities for growth, will be better positioned in this evolving landscape.
10. Increasing Ad Spend in Streaming Audio, Podcasting, and Gaming
    Anticipate a notable surge in ad spending in streaming audio, podcasts, and gaming as these platforms gain prominence in digital advertising. Advertisers recognize the value of engaging highly-targeted audiences in these immersive mediums. Streaming audio facilitates personalized brand connections, podcasts offer unique storytelling opportunities, and the gaming industry provides interactive ad experiences.

Final Thought
As the advertising and marketing landscape undergoes profound transformation, success hinges on adaptability, technological investment, and the unwavering commitment to consumer privacy and responsible data management, heralding a future ripe with innovation and growth. This evolution is shaped by the impact of stringent privacy regulations and the continuous loss of traditional data signals. Businesses are challenged to innovate and develop resilient strategies that respect privacy while still delivering insightful data analysis. This shift towards privacy-conscious methods, leveraging first-party data, and exploring AI for insights, is not just a response to regulatory changes, but also an opportunity for growth. Embracing these changes and adapting to the new privacy-centric landscape will be crucial for companies aiming to maintain consumer trust and stay competitive in a digital world where privacy is paramount.

The post 2024 Key Trends in Digital Advertising: Adapting to the New Privacy Norm appeared first on IAB.

New Public Policy Events to Advance the Cause

Throughout 2023, our Public Policy Team has introduced policymakers in Congress and federal agencies to the most important issues facing digital advertising, from data privacy and kids’ online safety, to competition and the First Amendment. By the end of 2023, IAB and Internet for Growth, a coalition of small businesses and creators in all 50 states, will have met with well over 100 members of Congress and their staff at individual meetings and events such as ALM, IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit, and most recently, IAB on the Hill. 

Our inaugural reception on Capitol Hill attracted bipartisan House and Senate staff, agency personnel, and industry professionals. IAB members Azerion, Frameplay, and Venatus shared a fresh perspective on digital advertising’s importance to innovation and entertainment.

In addition to gaming, AR, and VR companies on the cutting edge of technology, Internet for Growth helped to represent the full spectrum of digital advertising. The Pitch Place, an online hub for journalists, and Spartan Junk Removal, a home services company, described the importance of digital advertising to a free press and entrepreneurialism. Howard County Community College described the importance to students seeking education and employment. District Performance and Physio, a local physical therapy specialist, stressed the importance of targeted ads to serve a unique clientele. 

We were proud to host Congresswoman Deborah Ross (D-NC), Vice Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, as well as staff from the offices of Senators Ted Ted Cruz (TX) and Ron Johnson (WI), Representatives Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Yvette Clarke (NY-09), Brian Mast (FL-21) and more, who learned about digital advertising’s contributions to our economy, culture, and society. IAB described legislation and regulation that could reverse progress. For example, the U.S. needs a national data privacy law to simplify a complex patchwork of state laws. However, the American Data Privacy and Protection Act (ADPPA) would exempt state laws, broaden definitions of restricted data, eliminate targeted advertising, raise fines and penalties, and duplicate enforcement at multiple layers of government.

As we work to improve a national privacy bill, IAB is also working to improve and harmonize state laws from Maine to Maryland and Minnesota, which would ban pseudonymous data and targeted advertising, restrict data sharing even for security purposes, and open the floodgates to frivolous private lawsuits, a so-called “private right of action.” Because targeted advertising enables communication, eliminating it could bridge participants’ First Amendment rights, as we and other organizations explained to Maine legislators in our opposition letter to a state bill. 

To illuminate data privacy and other issues, in 2023 IAB introduced our Congressional Education Series, where federal legislative staff learned about the evolution of the internet; programmatic advertising; the special place of targeted advertising; the role of brands, agencies and publishers; privacy solutions such as IAB Tech Lab’s Global Privacy Platform and Google’s Privacy Sandbox; and the potential impact of the ADDPA and the AMERICA Act, a bill to prohibit all-in-one ad platforms. Early next year, staff will travel to New York City to experience the life of a digital ad, as told by IAB member companies. 

We need more IAB members to get involved. To partner with us at an IAB event and make a difference to the digital advertising discussion, contact Lartease Tiffith, EVP for Public Policy, at lartease@iab.com. ALM from January 28th to the 30th on San Marco Island is coming soon. Mark your calendars for IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit in Washington, D.C. on April 2nd.  We hope to see you at IAB on the Hill next year, too! 

Related Coverage:
Data-Driven Digital Advertising is Crucial to Entrepreneurs and Under Threat (Entrepreneur)

Protecting the Free and Open Internet at the Supreme Court 

In 2024, the Supreme Court will hear NetChoice & CCIA v. Moody / Paxton, a case involving conflicting court decisions regarding Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. “The twenty-six words that created the internet,” according to legal scholars, Section 230 protects online media platforms from liability for user-generated content. In an amicus brief filed this month, IAB, Chamber of Progress, Access Now, Consumer Technology Association and other tech and civil society groups urge the Court to uphold long-standing internet law and First Amendment protections for website owners and users, and to overturn Texas and Florida laws outlawing content moderation.

Amicus briefs, or “friend of the court” briefs from interested parties, can help to prevent rulings with unintended consequences. Supporting NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), IAB argues that online platforms and their users have the right to assemble and express themselves freely without government interference or fear of harm. A brand safety issue as well as a public safety one, content moderation has helped the ad-supported internet to prosper, and diverse voices to find community and flourish. Attempting to correct perceived “viewpoint bias,” state laws compelling objectionable speech would encourage more such laws and make the internet technically ungovernable. Ironically, they would decrease opportunities for free expression, as websites and platforms abandon the market. IAB supports Section 230’s liability protections and its protections for editorial discretion.

Related Coverage:
Supreme Court Takes Up Battle Over Content Moderation (MediaPost)

Overreaching FTC Threatens Digital Advertising

In another amicus brief in October, IAB challenges an FTC lawsuit against Amazon that could have far-reaching consequences for digital advertising and marketing, industries the FTC paints as inherently unfair and deceptive not only in its suit against the e-commerce company, but also in several proposed rulemakings this year.

In FTC v Amazon, the federal agency enforcing consumer protection and antitrust law uses buzzwords like “dark patterns” to describe truthful advertising with consumer benefits. Offering lower prices to subscribers is a “forced action.” Reminding shoppers they can save more money “evokes anxiety and fear of loss.” Design techniques such as large type, bold colors, and repetition, are “manipulative.” As we point out, they are as old as time. The FTC uses many of the same techniques in its own communications.

Over FTC objections, a federal judge allowed IAB to submit these and other important points to the court. Representing over 700 leading media companies, brand marketers, agencies, and technology companies, we have valuable information to share and serious concerns about the agency’s crusade to punish truthful marketing the FTC deems too convincing. “Whatever happens with Amazon, IAB and its members are gravely concerned about the threat to truthful speech in advertising and uneven, subjective enforcement,” according to our brief for the U.S. District Court for Western Washington.

The FTC has issued other proposed rules for digital advertising and marketing this year. IAB supports its goal to improve confidence in customer reviews and testimonials, but a sweeping proposal the agency issued in October could penalize honest opinion, running afoul of the First Amendment. Rulemaking may require companies to verify the truthfulness of subjective opinion or face consequences. Prohibiting “insiders” from sharing comments, it could unfairly silence company employees. While IAB supports penalizing the purchase of fake reviews, broad prohibitions on customer incentives could undermine a cornerstone of the online economy, our EVP for Public Policy Lartease Tiffith writes in a public comment to the agency. 

While we await an answer to our request for a hearing, the FTC has granted our request in another case. On January 16th, 2024, IAB’s EVP will appear at a virtual hearing to elaborate industry concerns with proposed rules for online subscription services, more extensive than those the FTC previewed, taking the industry by surprise. In public comments IAB filed in June, we explain the agency failed to give sufficient notice of new mandates, dictating byzantine procedures for auto-renewals that will cost consumers time and money. 

A major regulatory change for a defining feature of the digital economy could have a huge impact on businesses of every size, yet the FTC has produced neither a pattern of abuse, nor an economic analysis. “We support punishing bad actors, but conflicting and confusing rules will do more harm than good,” said Tiffith in a statement accompanying the June filing. As 2023 has been, 2024 promises to be a busy year for IAB advocacy efforts at every level of government and every branch, as digital advertising continues to capture the attention of policymakers. 

More IAB Public Policy News:
What Biden’s Executive AI Order Means for Advertising (Ad Age)
FTC to hold January hearing on ‘click to cancel’ rule (Payments Dive)
Without the Right Precautions, Influencers Could be at Risk for Legal Trouble (AdExchanger)
Lina Khan’s Rough Year at the FTC (New York Magazine)

GET INVOLVED

IAB holds regular meetings with members of its Public Policy Council. If you are interested in getting involved, please email Lartease Tiffith, EVP, Public Policy at lartease@iab.com.

This newsletter is intended for U.S. audiences and is not for those in the European Economic Area or the United Kingdom.

The post IAB Public Policy Newsletter – December 2023 appeared first on IAB.

Small business coalition Internet for Growth appeared with Azerion, Frameplay, and Venatus – gaming, AR, and VR companies on the cutting edge of technology. Policymakers learned how the ad-supported internet not only lowers barriers to access the web, but also supports content creation and innovation in the augmented reality, virtual reality, and gaming spaces. Those who attended heard from small businesses who rely on digital advertising’s efficiency and effectiveness and about the benefits consumers receive from timely, relevant messages, and thousands of dollars of free content and services every year. There can be no doubt that the “creator economy” is flourishing, and digital advertising is becoming even more intrinsic to technology, our economy, culture, and society. Events like IAB On The Hill could not come at a more relevant time as companies large and small are investing in AI and the metaverse while leading data privacy solutions that also allow for a personalized online experience.

We were proud to host Congresswoman Deborah Ross (NC), as well as staff from the offices of Senators Ted Ted Cruz (TX) and Ron Johnson (WI), Representatives Jamie Raskin (MD), Yvette Clarke (NY), Brian Mast (FL), and more, who heard a different side of the story.

Policymakers heard from brand-name companies and start-ups, not just digital advertising ones. The Pitch Place, an online hub for journalists, and Spartan Junk Removal, a home services company, described the importance of digital ads to a free press and entrepreneurs. Howard County Community College described the importance to students seeking education and employment.

At IAB On The Hill, IAB Public Policy and Legal Summit, our Congressional Education Series and other events throughout the year, we’re conveying a positive message and influencing outcomes. Subscribe to our public policy newsletter to stay up to date and participate. It’s a crucial time to get involved.

The post IAB on the Hill: Advocating for Digital Advertising to Policymakers appeared first on IAB.

The Journey So Far
The industry’s journey toward standardization began in May 2001 with the introduction of voluntary, standardized terms and conditions for direct online media buys between advertisers or agencies and publishers. Version 2.0, as these terms were called, evolved into the current version released in 2010 (Version 3.0). Now, more than a decade later, how most digital media buys occur (i.e. programmatic buying), is fundamentally different from direct deals, resulting in the Terms and Conditions being rendered inapplicable or resulting in lengthy and complex riders.

Starting in 2017, IAB has embarked on a “listening tour,” as well as an industry survey, and the feedback was clear: the top priorities were privacy and the overhaul of industry Terms and Conditions.

Unraveling Today’s Challenges
Over the next several years, IAB convened multiple meetings, conferences, and working groups, as well as conducted several comprehensive surveys to analyze and assess the contractual landscape. This exploration highlighted several challenges:

• Diverse Ecosystem: The digital advertising market is a behemoth, comprising various entities such as advertisers, agencies, trading desks, demand-side platforms (DSPs), exchanges, supply-side platforms (SSPs), publishers, ad servers, measurement and analytics providers, data management platforms (DMPs) and data aggregators, data suppliers, tag management vendors, creative optimization vendors, retargeting vendors, ad networks, and verification vendors. Typically, each of these parties has its form of contract, leading to friction in the contracting process. Standardizing these terms is a challenging but necessary endeavor to achieve efficiency.
• Complex Data Issues: The complex data flows in digital advertising, especially within programmatic realms, complicate contractual agreements. The existing ‘Non-Disclosure, Data Ownership, Privacy and Laws’ (Section XII), of the Terms and Conditions 3.0, although useful in the early days of direct buys, has become antiquated and largely inapplicable, prompting parties to frequently amend contracts, particularly concerning data flows and related rights and obligations.
• Lack of Common Definitions: The industry faces the ongoing challenge of inconsistent terminology, further complicating contractual processes. Establishing a unified set of definitions is crucial for clarity and consistency.

The Path Forward
Guided by the IAB Measurement, Addressability, and Data Center and the IAB Legal Affairs Council, the IAB Terms & Conditions Task Force has been assembled to create a standardized set of terms and conditions to comprehensively address the challenges outlined above. The task force includes representatives from across the entire advertising ecosystem, ranging from small organizations to large holding companies, and includes brands, agencies, publishers, ad tech platforms, data solutions providers, and law firms. The individuals at the helm are those who are directly involved in the negotiation, drafting, reviewing, and/or approval of digital advertising contracts.

This team, including representatives from the entire advertising spectrum, will be drafting core terms that apply across the various commercial transactions within the digital advertising industry. Such core terms may include definitions, payment terms, reporting, term and termination, force majeure, representations and warranties, indemnification, limitation of liability, confidentiality, and general terms, such as assignment, severability, notices, and waivers.

Following the completion of such core terms, the task force will likely begin drafting various addenda that will sit on top of (i.e., be governed by) the core terms and apply to specific transaction types. For example, there may be an addendum that applies to an advertiser engaging its DSP and a different addendum when a publisher engages its SSP.

Recognizing the challenge of drafting to these multiple business use cases and transaction types, the task force will, by necessity, draft these addenda over a period of time. And, the core terms and addenda will be crafted in a way that allows each party to customize them for their unique contracting needs.

Join the Movement
The current momentum for standardization, along with the dynamic nature of the data economy, heralds a unique opportunity. It is a call to action for the advertising community to unite, reassess, and collaboratively steer towards a streamlined future.

For those driven be part of IAB’s efforts to shape the future of industry contracts, we invite you to join the IAB Terms & Conditions Task Force by signing up here.

The post Revolutionizing Digital Advertising: Towards Standardized Contract Terms appeared first on IAB.

Consumers and legislators have made two things abundantly clear.

First, getting privacy right is a fundamental obligation of all companies participating in the digital advertising industry.

And second, progress cannot wait.

The time to set down the standards and best practices for privacy implementation and accountability is now, but it’s easier said than done.

Implementation issues abound, both for consumer-facing and business-facing obligations.

Everyone agrees that consumers should be informed about how their data is used for advertising and how to make choices about those uses in a way that minimizes friction. But there’s no consensus about how to do it well. The result? The consumer’s privacy experience is fragmented with too many different approaches, leading to consumer confusion and frustration with ad-supported media.

As another example, businesses seeking to responsibly process consumer data and honor consumer privacy rights must conduct data discovery within their organizations. However, the many different data mapping tools available in the market today are not one size fits all and often do not neatly account for the kinds of data processed for digital advertising. The digital advertising industry would benefit from greater consensus about what level of automated and non-automated data discovery should be performed across multiple structured and complex unstructured data containers.

At the same time, the digital advertising industry faces a critical accountability inflection point. Too often, our industry has relied solely on contract language, whether representation and warranties or indemnification provisions, to manage partner behavior. But new state privacy laws require more forceful action. For example, these new laws create accountability requirements between businesses and their service providers, and the CCPA now imposes material legal risk on a company for the wrongdoing of its partners (regardless of whether those partners are service providers) unless the company conducts sufficient due diligence.

To address these challenges and continue raising the bar for privacy, ​​PIAT will bring together leading privacy technology vendors, media companies, advertisers, and the supporting ad tech ecosystem to create the shared understanding, best practices, and standards the industry needs to move forward. However, we cannot move forward on everything at once. We need to set priorities.

Putting accountability first

A survey of PIAT working group participants provided clear direction that the creation of standards around accountability needs to be our first priority.

Every new privacy law in the US includes language about accountability, and regulators have been very clear that they expect real action. All parties subject to the state-level privacy laws must be able to demonstrate their privacy compliance to enforcers and to each other. That means every service provider or processor must make a contractual commitment to demonstrate its privacy compliance to the business or controller. There are rules for subcontractors and third parties, too, including due diligence of third parties when there is a “sale” of personal information for cross-context behavioral advertising.

Our first effort will be The Diligence Project. Today, vendor due diligence is most often done by way of lengthy questionnaires that are not tailored to digital advertising data flows and that take a disproportionately large amount of time and effort to complete — all while providing only questionable value or insight into relevant privacy practices. Clearly, we must move beyond such basic efforts.

The Diligence Project will seek to define a set of standards or best practices around what steps publishers and advertisers can reasonably undertake today, based on a review of all the currently available technologies, to ensure that their partners are acting in compliance with state privacy laws and contractual obligations. We’ll examine all of the accountability and diligence requirements that apply and provide a roadmap about how they can be implemented in the digital advertising industry using privacy technology tools that are available today.

We’ll also begin our Privacy Taxonomy Project. Underlying this project is a necessity to move from first generation to second generation technology in vetting partner privacy compliance.  Marketing, media and other consumer-facing organizations must have a more refined tool set than exists today to demonstrate to regulators that their service providers are complying with the limitations imposed under state privacy laws; vendors are complying with “do not sell” requests; and vendors are meeting the contracting and subcontracting requirements that relate to “sales” under CCPA.

But the next generation of privacy tools can’t solve these problems if industry participants lack a shared language to define them.

The industry needs a common data taxonomy for publishers and advertisers to be able to organize their data and communicate with partners around its use limitations, as well as receive data validating its use.

For example, today every SSP (supply side platform) works with multiple demand side platforms (DSPs). But since everyone’s data is organized differently, to make real accountability work you’d need a mapping table for each and every vendor and then another for their client specific customizations. Hence the need for the Privacy Taxonomy Project. We first need common language around how we organize personal information before we can push the privacy vendor marketplace to build a new suite of tools that will need to be interoperable across the industry.

Bringing legal, product and technology together is critical to success.

The privacy challenges facing the digital advertising industry require collaboration between legal and technology stakeholders. The IAB Legal Affairs Council has deep experience with state level legal compliance — in particular, through its Multi-State Privacy Agreement. The IAB Tech Lab has deep experience setting technical standards that undergird the industry, including with respect to privacy. By working together across functions, we’re confident we can turn privacy challenges into privacy solutions.

Moving forward together

Getting accountability right is a fundamental part of our compliance obligations and foundational to maintaining trust with consumers. We’re committed to getting this right.

But we won’t stop there. Over time, working together, we’ll solve the thorniest privacy challenges that are embedded in industry technology, including driving consensus on privacy implementation, improving guidance or best practices involved in data discovery and mapping, developing a low-friction user interface, and more.

We’re committed to getting this right and started now.

So far, our joint effort comprises more than 100 people from across the entire digital ecosystem. We’d like to see even more people participate from legal, product, and engineering. If you’re interested in shaping the future, we hope you’ll read more and join us by sending an email to techlab@iabtechlab.com.

The post Why the IAB Tech Lab and IAB Legal Affairs Council Are Coming Together for the Privacy Implementation & Accountability Task Force (PIAT) appeared first on IAB.

A fresh new sound reverberated through a crowded rec room where a local DJ was throwing a back-to-school party for his sister. This “Merry-Go-Round” sound captivated the audience as the DJ mixed records between twin turntables creating what would be known as the breakbeat. It was August 11, 1973, in the South Bronx, the DJ was Kool Herc, and a new musical art form was taking shape – hip-hop.

Meanwhile, a decade earlier in a university computer lab, a different kind of creative expression was emerging. A group of young programmers led by a student huddled around hulking mainframe computers, coded software, and played some of the earliest video games. It was February 14, 1962, in Massachusetts, the student was Steve “Slug” Russell, and the video game – Spacewar!

At first glance, hip-hop culture and gaming seem worlds apart. But by the 1990s, both had broken through as mass culture touchstones. How did these niche interests, criticized for glorifying violence, overcome controversy to make it big? Their stories have surprising parallels.

Hard Knock Origins

Gaming arose from unassuming beginnings. The first widespread video game, Spacewar!, came from tech students at MIT who programmed a space battle simulation on a $120,000 DEC PDP-1 computer in 1962. The makers of Spacewar! were part of an early niche gaming community, centered around universities and computer science labs, who pushed the boundaries of this new interactive medium. These early gaming pioneers shared a do-it-yourself spirit with the improvisational nature of hip-hop DJs and rappers. Throughout the 1960s and 70s, gaming slowly developed through the creation of arcade games like Pong, text-based adventure games, and basic console systems. Though still mainly seen as a geeky subculture, gaming was laying the groundwork for the breakthrough hits that would eventually bring it blockbuster success.

Hip-hop emerged from humble beginnings at a pivotal time in New York City’s history. With the Bronx in economic turmoil and city services slashed, teens found escape in a new cultural movement birthed from adversity. Pioneers like DJ Kool Herc, Afrika Bambaataa, and Grandmaster Flash improvised techniques like breakbeats, rapping, scratching, and sampling. They drew inspiration from the records they spun to form a new sound. Energetic crews threw park jams, turning their art form into live performance. As hip-hop spread, its do-it-yourself ethos expanded beyond music into fashion, visual arts like graffiti, and dance like breakdancing. United by a sense of innovation and resourcefulness, the hip-hop community turned hardship into raw expression. Much like early gaming innovators, hip-hop founders built an inclusive subculture by pushing creative boundaries.

Leveling Up to Mainstream Appeal

For hip-hop, the watershed moment was the 1979 smash “Rapper’s Delight” by Sugar Hill Gang, which brought rapping to radio and the Billboard charts for the first time. Throughout the ‘80s and ‘90s, hip-hop entered its “golden age”, with artists like Run-DMC, N.W.A, Public Enemy, LL Cool J, Tupac, The Notorious B.I.G., Wu-Tang Clan, and many more vaulting the music from its urban American roots to the world stage. The sounds and styles were as diverse as the voices. Regions like Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Miami also emerged with their own distinct hip-hop styles. As the music and culture flourished into a rich mosaic, hip-hop solidified its status as a generational movement changing the sound and face of mainstream music itself.

Gaming found its mascot in Mario, the plucky plumber who starred in Donkey Kong, and whose Super Mario Bros. for NES led the industry out of the 1983 crash into a 1990s renaissance. Other landmark titles like Sonic the Hedgehog, Street Fighter II, Mortal Kombat, Donkey Kong Country, Doom, and Final Fantasy VII cemented gaming as a global force. Online connectivity also arose during hits like Quake and Diablo, allowing competitive and cooperative play. Gaming had graduated from simple diversion to complex interactive entertainment and community.

Not Just Fun & Games

With great popularity came great pushback. Critics lambasted hip-hop’s glorification of gangs, drugs, and hypersexuality. Civil rights activist, C. Dolores Tucker became the face of the anti-hip-hop crusade, fighting censorship battles against 2 Live Crew, Ice T, and Tupac. These crusades led to the now famous, “Parental Advisory” sticker that can now be found on all music deemed inappropriate. Though hip-hop welcomed its broad new audience, it refused to compromise its core essence of speaking its truth. As hip-hop artists like N.W.A., Tupac, Biggie, and others topped the charts, their lyrics and themes were not watered down or sanitized for mainstream consumption. They maintained their gritty authenticity.

Video game controversies similarly played out on the public stage. Lawmakers grilled the makers of games like Mortal Kombat and Night Trap, resulting in the 1994 creation of the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB). As graphics became more realistic, watchdogs worried games normalized violence and discouraged real-world empathy. Games like Grand Theft Auto (GTA) faced public scrutiny for their portrayal of drug use, alcohol use, gun violence, and sexual conduct despite being one of the most successful gaming franchises of all time. Showing that the industry continues to stand firm on its freedom of expression.

Culture Defining

Hip-hop and gaming overcame freedom of expression controversies, showing the deep roots of these art forms. Both continued growing their audiences and messages despite critics. This resilience intrigued businesses that saw the profit potential. Huge brands eagerly sponsored hip-hop artists and placed products in games. Advertising in hip-hop culture has become big business, and gaming seems to follow suit.

For brands craving young demographics, hip-hop’s “cool factor” proved irresistible. Coca-Cola and McDonald’s forged deals with rappers to tap into urban culture in the ‘80s. Nike’s Spike Lee Air Jordans ads turned sneaker culture into big business. The popularity of hip-hop culture also extended into the gaming industry, as hip-hop music was incorporated into the soundtracks of various sports games. Additionally, hip-hop’s influence manifests directly in video games like Def Jam: Vendetta, which featured hip-hop musicians and culture as central elements of gameplay. As hip-hop went pop, virtually every industry wanted in on the action.

Now gaming has become the new darling of advertisers. The fanbase is 80% Gen Z and Millennial – digital natives brands desperately want to reach. Energy drinks like Red Bull sponsor pro gamers. Gaming has expanded its reach from just being played on screens to movie and television screens as well. One of the biggest hits of 2023, the HBO series “The Last of Us,” was adapted directly from the popular Playstation video game of the same name. The misperceptions that once deterred brands from advertising in games are diminishing, and research has shown that brands can find success with in-game advertising. Brands craft in-game advertising and hire streaming influencers to reach a third of the world who are playing games.

The Uncanny Connection

While springing from vastly different roots, hip-hop and gaming retain striking similarities:

• Fringe origins among marginalized groups seeking voices of expression
• Turning stigmatized activities into celebrated artforms
• Fighting censorship and stereotypes around violence to be embraced by the mainstream
• Becoming big business magnets that retain their countercultural mystique

Their journeys mirror each other across the decades. And they demonstrate the irresistible power of youth-driven creativity. Their messages just beg to be heard – no matter how much the gatekeepers resist.

What’s Next?

Hip-hop now spawns global superstars like Kanye, Jay-Z, and Drake who rap about wealth and status, a shift from hip-hop’s rebellious roots. Meanwhile, gaming has surged into a $200 billion industry, rivaling Hollywood. However, as corporations rush into these lucrative markets, co-opting creative subcultures carries risks. Savvy brands must avoid exploiting hip-hop and gaming purely for profit. Instead, thoughtful partnerships that demonstrate actual respect, understanding, and affinity for these communities are needed. Authenticity matters more than ever when companies tap into youth-driven art forms.

Young audiences spot pandering a mile away. To succeed in these spaces, you must engage culturally on a deeper level. Don’t view these communities as faceless demographics. See them as people – with passions, interests, and voices deserving to be heard.

Then you may earn a seat at the table.

The post Street Dreams & Twitch Streams – A Kindred Tale appeared first on IAB.