August has brought an increased focus on brand safety, particularly due to the lawsuit filed by X against the Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), and several advertisers.
This legal action has significantly impacted GARM, leaving uncertainty about the future of its suitability standards. Elon Musk’s legal challenge is not isolated, as companies like News Corp and Rumble have also accused the WFA of obstructing their advertising revenues, signaling a broader discontent within the industry.
The resolution of these legal disputes will likely be protracted, consuming considerable time and resources. This Marketing Briefing aims not to predict the outcome but to explore the current state of brand safety conversations among advertisers and agency executives.
As the election cycle intensifies, with deepfake AI content becoming a concern, it is crucial to understand how brand safety is being approached beyond the immediate legal issues.
Despite the evolving landscape of digital advertising, discussions around brand safety and suitability have been ongoing for years. Marketers have long utilized inclusion and exclusion lists to navigate these challenges.
Brand Safety Takes Center Stage Amid X’s Legal Battle with GARM and Evolving Advertising Strategies
However, some agency executives believe that brand safety education is still necessary, highlighting a gap in engagement and understanding. According to Deva Bronson of Dentsu, many people either neglect brand safety or rely on outdated practices, underscoring the need for regular updates and proactive management.
Bronson emphasizes the importance of routine checks, recommending that clients review their brand safety settings at least monthly or quarterly. This approach aims to address issues arising from outdated applications of brand safety standards, ensuring that clients remain vigilant and responsive to potential risks.
The discourse around brand safety has evolved, with a shift in terminology and focus. Megha Parikh of VML notes that clients now prefer to discuss whether content aligns with their brand rather than using the term “brand safety,” which may seem outdated.
The current conversation often revolves around assessing the potential risks and benefits of being present in certain spaces or discussing specific subjects, reflecting a more nuanced understanding of brand suitability.
For some, brand safety discussions have shifted towards evaluating risk tolerance. Marketers, particularly those targeting younger audiences on riskier platforms, may prioritize capturing attention over strict adherence to brand safety.
This reflects a broader acknowledgment of the complex online environment where brand content can inadvertently end up in controversial or problematic contexts. Shuree Jones from Rain the Growth Agency emphasizes the importance of understanding the “vibe” of a platform to anticipate potential risks associated with high-emotion content.
Nicole Williams, VP of brand and product marketing at ByHeart, an infant nutrition company, highlights the unique challenges of operating in a highly regulated category. She discusses difficulties in measuring and attributing the impact of various marketing channels, especially those that are less trackable like billboards.
Despite these challenges, Williams stresses the importance of investing in upper-funnel channels to build brand awareness, which ultimately supports lower-funnel efforts and drives overall success.
