Some sites will give permission for a network to name them as part of a site list or on a custom media plan, but not to the point where the network will report out specific statistics such as impressions, clicks or actions. For advertisers that require full transparency from a network, this form of representation provides the site name and aggregate statistics for the campaign with individual site metrics by anonymous site identification. In all cases, the advertiser is guaranteed to not run outside a list of approved sites.

This category of representation has become quite popular recently, as it seems to be an acceptable win-win for both advertisers and publishers in working with a network. Advertisers get to run on a transparent, approved list of sites, and publishers maintain their brand and rate integrity. If being on a specific site or having specific site metrics by site name is more important than overall performance and scale, advertisers should work directly with the site. The value proposition for networks is to deliver both brand and direct response performance with maximum scale.

Key take-away:

• Disclosed sites can be named on a site list but actual campaign statistics for individual sites are typically reported anonymously. 
• Advertisers are assured of not running outside the list of disclosed sites, while publishers are able to maintain brand and rate integrity.