Nandini Jammi’s Post

Brand Safety tech not only fails to protect you from actually bad content but blocks your ads from content that you would want to support. #adtech #brandsafety #digitalmedia

"Should Feminist be a blocklist word?" Ali Hanan "What do a feature on Taylor Swift, a profile of Sam Altman & a piece about the James Webb telescope all have in common? Last year, all 3 TIME stories were deemed unsafe for brands to advertise against. The issues came from brand #safety #technology errantly flagging broad swaths of Time’s reporting as unsuitable for #advertising, said CEO Jessica Sibley to a crowd of marketers at the Possible conference in Miami....Taylor Swift’s Person of the Year feature—her first interview in 5 years—was classified as non-inclusive of women because of language related to #feminism, according to Sibley." Mark Stenberg in ADWEEK article below. "How do they get away with this? They hide URL-level reports from advertisers and publishers — making it impossible for anyone to hold them accountable." Nandini Jammi in her #OnRepeat #InspiredByYou post below + MUST Read comments and repost messages such as these below and the one by Ali Hanan above. "The algorithms we all rely on are still created by humans with biases. I would be livid if my female focused brand missed out on being featured in one of the biggest stories of the year next to the most famous woman in the world because a rudimentary algorithm decided 'feminism' was a slur." Chase Varga "#Adtech biases that cause brands to divest from #storytelling will inevitably #impact the stories that get funded. Pay Attention." Joy Donnell "When the mere mention of *feminism* is determined to be #unsafe for brands we've got a problem." Gabriella Mirabelli #HeyAlgo: #IamaFeminist and even scarier - I am a financial feminist, a person who fights for women and gender identifying women to have economic and societal freedom. No where in this definition am I using equality b/c perhaps women deserve more when they outperform. Why is the world afraid of women growing in #power & #influence in #music, #sports #government & #business? Women's growth is economic growth! #Talent is an asset class. #InvestDifferent! #branding #marketing #narrative #investing #diversity #equity #inclusion #economy #boardsofdirectors #money #cultureofmoney

Part of my research involves examining how media disinvestment is linked to the overall phenomenon of networked disinformation. What I have come to realise is far from 'disinformation' or hate-speech being a natural result of the freedom of interaction afforded by social media, investments are strategically made to ensure the proliferation of such content. Entrenched interests have invoked the "woke agenda" whenever people have asked questions about right-wing entities being funded by particular brands. However, companies actively defunding particular terms are presented as an apolitical choice. #brandsafety

Navigating brand safety in the digital age isn't just about avoiding controversy – it's about dismantling biases that disproportionately affect Black-owned media like @Blavity Inc. From outdated algorithms to keyword-blocking bias, these challenges hinder growth and revenue, but with collective action, we can reshape the landscape and continue uplifting underrepresented voices. For anyone interested in learning more about this, I highly suggest giving this a read! #InclusiveMedia https://lnkd.in/eVMvNHBf

What do a Taylor Swift 🎤 feature, a profile of Sam Altman, and a piece about the James Webb telescope have in common? They were all deemed unsafe for brands to advertise against. 🚫 Are you using blunt brand safety tactics like keyword blocking? Advertisers should be clamoring to have ads appear in something like Taylor Swift's Time Person of the Year cover story, not needlessly shunning the story because of a word like "feminism." Just so you know, GumGum's MRC CONTENT-LEVEL accredited brand safety tech, Verity™ knows that the Time article was brand-safe. 😉 https://bit.ly/3QpK5v8

We've said it before and we'll say it again: stop using blunt brand safety tactics like keyword blocking. Advertisers should be clamoring to have ads appear in something like Taylor Swift's Time Person of the Year cover story, not needlessly shunning the story because of a word like "feminism." When evaluating a contextual targeting partner, ask crucial questions like: - Do they own their own technology? - How do they validate their approach? - Is their technology audited and accredited by a third-party? - Can their technology understand the full context of a page including video, audio, and images for classification? If you're not getting sufficient answers to the above, let's chat! I'd love to talk about how Verity™ can help drive your brand safety goals, without needlessly blocking quality content and journalism. https://bit.ly/3QpK5v8

One more post about Taylor Swift and then I'll stop. Probably. For this week at least. Raise your hand if you've been personally victimized by your favorite website shutting down with "declining ad revenue" as the primary reason? Now raise your other hand if the shuttered website focused on "controversial" women's content — like access to healthcare — that might be deemed "feminist." Currently, I have two hands in the air, so typing this is tough. And here's where Taylor Swift comes in. Time Magazine's 2023 article about Swift, their person of the year — her first interview in five years — was demonetized after being flagged "not inclusive of women" for discussing "feminism." Want to know how many times a variation of the word "feminine" appears in the article? Four. In a 6,456-word article. Hardly a feminist manifesto. So, what happened here? Time's interview was deemed not "brand safe" because of automated systems that scan content and flag articles where brands may not want their advertisements to appear. But these automated tools get it wrong a lot of the time. Block lists have a serious capacity to kill journalism of all kinds, legacy to independent. But independent publishers will always be more impacted. These lists penalize diverse voices covering cornerstone cultural moments more frequently than their legacy counterparts. And legacy journalism, like Time, has other avenues to survive a temporary drop in ad revenue. We know the problem. Now what can we do about it? To start, advertisers, brands and media buyers would be well-served by moving toward diverse inclusion lists that ensure small, independent publishers — and legacy media — aren't erroneously de-monetized by an algorithm that can't determine context or nuance. As readers, we have to support journalism in its many forms and pay attention to the brands that are willing to go where we are. If you made it this far, thanks for sticking with my musings! I'd love to hear your thoughts, even if your thought is "wow, I've never realized this before."