← Four arguments 03

Follow the incentives.

Programmatic’s waste, fraud and opacity persist because the supply chain is paid to tolerate them, not because the technology is missing.

22 pieces · 8 authored · related work since 2020

The argument

Early in my career, on the ad tech vendor side, I watched audiences get swapped or dropped to hit budgets without the client ever knowing. The performance metrics didn’t move, so nobody asked. That stuck with me. Fifteen years of audience-first buying trained a generation of marketers to chase cheap, hypertargeted impressions, and the people who benefited most were made-for-advertising sites and vendors whose incentives never matched their clients’.

You don’t fix that with another tool. You fix it with contracts and structure. At Rain, our SSP agreements prohibited resold media and MFA sites, required ads.txt compliance and restricted delivery to our inclusion list, and when a partner missed, we required make-goods. We broke tech, audience and platform fees out of working media. Look at curation markups, certification bodies losing ground or the FTC’s case against Amazon through the same lens and you see the same thing. Opacity isn’t a bug. It’s a business model.

The same goes for privacy. I’ve been saying for years that addressable advertising was a strategic mistake. An ecosystem built on broadcasting granular identity was always going to create exposure no one could control. The critics we waved off as zealots were right. In our industry, what people are paid to do beats what they say every time.

The full trail, oldest first

22 pieces