Home Data-Driven Thinking What’s Hiding Behind That Iframe?

What’s Hiding Behind That Iframe?

SHARE:

ian-2Data-Driven Thinking” is written by members of the media community and contains fresh ideas on the digital revolution in media.

Today’s column is written by Ian Hewetson, vice president of client services at Eyereturn Marketing.

In the ongoing debate over traffic quality, there’s something few people are talking about: the supply-side choice to continue using unfriendly iframes, which is the single biggest impediment to measurability, viewability and transparency.

Quality publishers may argue that unfriendly iframes can protect premium inventory pricing and prevent third-party tags from getting too much information about a page, but by obscuring their content to advertisers, they’re contributing to the overall lack of transparency and erosion of advertiser trust in the marketplace.

Iframes are the holes in the content of web pages where ads are served. An iframe is essentially a little page within a page, with each iframe being the size of the ad that will go into it. The iframe also has its own domain, whereas the main page URL is known as the parent domain.

There are friendly and unfriendly iframes. Friendly iframes offer transparency between the domain of the parent page and the iframe itself. Basically, the advertiser can see the important details of the site that they’re buying, such as the URL and the position of the ad within that page.

Unfriendly or “jailed” iframes offer no transparency between the domain of the parent page and the iframe itself, so there is no way for advertisers to access domain or contextual info or to see where the ad is located on the page. In this scenario, the ad could appear anywhere on the page or on any domain, since the original publishers could have sold it to another domain. There is no easy oversight by the advertiser.

Unknown Quantity

Especially in the context of RTB, an advertiser buys inventory from an exchange or a supply-side platform (SSP), not the actual site itself. The advertiser must rely on that exchange or the SSP’s trust in the site. Quite often, due to automated onboarding processes and limited oversight, the exchange or SSP won’t have a close relationship with the site either. So, if advertisers buy inventory from suppliers running unfriendly iframes, they are buying an unknown quantity.

But instead of solving the problem by making friendly iframes the standard, the industry has embraced a host of additional technologies to counteract suppliers’ choice to obscure inventory behind unfriendly iframes.

Arguments For Unfriendly Iframes

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Publishers say unfriendly iframes are important because they can hide their domain from advertisers running on networks or exchanges. Their standard defense: If an advertiser sees that they’re buying a premium domain at a bargain RTB price, they’ll never buy that domain at the rack rate again. This is less of an issue than in the past since tiered pricing models are now commonplace. Advertisers know they may get some inventory bargains this way, but for any kind of volume, they must make a private deal with a publisher.

Publishers also say iframes protect their sites from third-party tags, which can scrape data from the page to create segments of the premium site’s users by dropping cookies on users and retargeting them later, while also targeting that premium audience with other, cheaper inventory. While this issue could still be a concern, it has been largely addressed through the tightening of contract terms.

Finally, publishers argue iframes protect sites against slow loading ads that might also slow the loading of the page. With faster connection speeds and updated tech that allows ads to load at the same time as the page, this issue is also fading away.

Despite all of this, advertisers continue to buy unfriendly iframe inventory because it’s generally cheaper and these blind impressions generate clicks, which is still a very popular KPI.

But if you’re buying something without the ability to see what it is, from suppliers that obscure their product, is that cheap, opaque inventory creating a false economy?

Follow Eyereturn (@EyereturnMktg) and AdExchanger (@adexchanger) on Twitter.

Must Read

The In-Game Ad Market is Expanding, One SDK At A Time

In-game ad platform Gadsme released a new SDK for non-Unity game engines. It’s the latest example of in-game ad platforms expanding SDK support in a quest for more premium inventory.

What Publishers Need To Know About Floor Pricing

At Tuesday’s Prebid Summit, a panel of publisher and pub tech execs shared tips for how publishers can get the most out their flooring strategies.

Comic: Shopper Marketing Data

Why Mondelez Piloted A Shopper Marketing Test Between Albertsons And Fetch

“I always said, I think we need to change our title, because it’s not the old school shopper marketing,” said Anne Martin, director of shopper marketing for Mondelez International, which owns Oreo, Ritz, and a variety of other snacks.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

Forget The FUD, Now DoubleVerify Wants Advertisers To Get Back Into The News

Even brand safety companies think news blocking has gone too far. DV is exploring ways to help advertisers support legitimate news and just hired its first-ever head of news.

To Reduce The Ad Tech Tax, Sovrn Expands Its SaaS Pricing Model

Sovrn is now offering its header bidding managed service, dubbed Ad Management, as self-serve software for a flat CPM fee.

play button with many coins isolated on blue background. The concept of monetization of the video. Making money on video content. minimal style. 3d rendering

Exclusive: Connatix And JW Player Merge To Create A One-Stop Shop For Video Monetization

On Wednesday, video monetization platforms Connatix and JW Player announced plans to merge into a new entity called JWP Connatix. The deal was first rumored in July.