One reason rep firms have come back into vogue is that they offer transparency of the sites they represent-- a security blanket for advertisers who want to be sure they steer clear of the web's sloppier, less desirable sites.
But many online advertising networks don't provide full site disclosure, which makes some advertisers a bit nervous. Where will my ad be seen? Am I risking my brand's reputation? How can I be sure I'm reaching my target if I don't know where my ads are? Am I wasting my money? This unease causes some advertisers and agencies to forego the inherent reach, efficiency and performance of a network for the security of a site list. Big mistake.
The fact is, there's nothing nefarious about non-disclosure. Some of the best and most reputable networks don't offer full transparency-- but it's not because they have something to hide.
Does transparency equal quality?
As counterintuitive as it may seem, the best networks often don't disclose their publishers because they can include some of the most sought-after sites-- not because they are hiding junk.
Premium publishers are willing to sell ads via a network, but they don't want them to compete with their own salespeople. (It's the same reason designer fashions at deep-discount retailers often have their labels removed.)
The truth is, full transparency can actually be a sign of lesser quality. It could be that sites willing to disclose through a network may not be able to get advertisers any other way and have nothing to lose by throwing their names around.
Here's a tip: Reassure yourself about a non-disclosing network's quality by closely evaluating its policies on the types of sites it accepts and its privacy standards. A good network is likely to be just as picky as you are.
Reach and site count are not the same thing
One enormous advantage of a good network is reach. But it takes careful analysis to determine if you're really getting to your largest possible audience. In general, the bigger the network, the bigger the sites they work with and the greater their reach.
But look closely. If a network has 30,000 websites but 50 percent online reach, it likely contains smaller sites with fewer visitors vs. a network with 3,000 sites and 80 percent reach. Even a network that discloses a huge list of sites may not cover much of the web, because those sites may be small or fail to attract many visitors. On the other hand, a network with a smaller number of sites or one that does not disclose a site list may in fact reach a greater number of unique visitors because the site quality is higher.
Here's more good advice: Ask your network how many people it reaches across the top ranked online properties. This is a powerful indicator of a network's overall quality, and it is information any good network can provide without compromising its disclosure policy. You may not get specific site names, but you'll know if the network is a player among quality publishers.
With quality comes capabilities
A disclosing network may have 30,000 sites, but are they able to segment those sites to target your desired audience? Furthermore, can they prove they reached those people?
With the right network, you can reach even the most specific audiences on a large scale-- without any kind of site filtering on your part. And some networks can provide varying levels of disclosure for these targeted "subnets"-- allowing you to block certain sites or site categories if you choose.
Do you want a site list? Or do you want results?
At the end of the day, it's all about results. Whether your campaign hits your desired conversion rates, clickthrough rates, costs-per-acquisition or other defined metric is all that truly matters.
With or without a site list, the best networks can deliver and quantify performance on a campaign and/or brand level. The right network can report to you with precision metrics like the exact lift in brand impact generated by your campaign or whether it reached your specific target audience. Make no mistake-- knowing that you've reached your goals is much more important than having every site in a network listed on paper.
Getting beyond transparency
It's understandable why the transparency issue gets advertisers in a tizzy. The internet is full of low-quality content and half-baked sites, and no advertiser wants to be associated with them. But of all the characteristics that define a network's quality, site transparency should not be at the top of the list. Often, non-disclosure is publisher-driven, not network-driven. Good networks often must conceal their inventory because premium publishers don't want their network partners competing with their own advertising sales forces.
The good news is that even without a site list, you don't have to take a leap of faith. Carefully examine the network's reported reach, its technological and targeting capabilities, and the results it can quantify. These factors can tell you all you really need to know.
Mollie Spilman is chief sales and marketing officer of Advertising.com. Read full bio.
