Google silent on how major Australian brand ads were served on white supremacist website
A number of major Australian brands have had ads running on a white supremacist website after Google’s ad technology systems failed to pick up the error.
On Thursday ads for Fitness First, TPG, Paypal, LastMinute.com, Xero, Sydney Harbour Bridge Climb and the Australian Institute of Management were being displayed on The White Voice, alongside house ads for the US-based white supremacist site’s book Murdering Multiculturalism.
Google has declined to explain why systems in the Google Display Network failed to pick up the ads on the site which carries articles entitled “How feminism and ‘white privilege’ are not compatible”, “5 questions whites must ask themselves after the Islamist terror attack in Paris,” and “Facts & consequences about young white women taking black men to bed”.
The Google ads have since been removed from the site.
A spokesman for Google said: “We do not allow ads on websites that promote hatred, racial intolerance or violence. We deploy a mixture of automated and human review systems to make sure that ads only show on websites that meet our policies and we are constantly investing in new resources that tackle bad website behaviour.”
Most of the brands involved told Mumbrella that they had bought the ads directly through the Google Display Network, although some indicated they have used agencies Sandbox Media, Global Red and programmatic platform Cadreon, owned by IPG Mediabrands. However, it appears in all these circumstances the final ad was placed by Google’s Display Network, which did not have the website on its banned list.
Google would not clarify how many brands had appeared on the site or how long they have been appearing, saying it does not comment on individual cases. Comment is also being sought from Cadreon and Global Red.
Xero had ads running on The White Voice
It can be a struggle for brands and their agencies to ensure their ads do not appear in non-brand safe environments. Last year Mumbrella revealed a number of Australian advertisers and most major media buying groups had been advertising on websites funnelling consumers to pirated content.
Many of the brands impacted said they were very concerned that their display ads had appeared on the site and would be taking up the issue with Google or their agency.
Jacinta Crabtree, marketing head at the Australian Institute of Management, which had banner and sidebar ads running across the The White Voice website, said: “We regret the placement, which was unintentional and against the values of our organisation.
“We immediately asked for it to be removed and can confirm the advertisement is no longer appearing on the site. We have also requested a review of the relevant systems and processes by suppliers so this does not happen again.”
Paypal declined to specify who placed the ad but said it was the result of The White Voice being incorrectly categorised.
“It is regrettable that our ad was incorrectly placed on the site, an error that came about because the website was inaccurately categorised,” said a spokesman.
“We immediately asked for the ad to be pulled down as soon as we found out about this, and have approached the relevant parties to ensure that measures were taken to avoid this happening in the future.”
CEO of industry body the Australian Association of National Advertisers (AANA) Sunita Gloster would not be drawn specifically on The White Voice incident and the brands involved, but said: “Brand safety continues to be a watchout for brand owners.
“The heart of this issue remains around the associated reputational risk and the significance of this to the brand owner.
“The AANA’s expectation is that advertisers act responsibly and do not condone knowingly illegal activity or webpages that might be a reputational risk. Advertisers, whether they buy direct or via their media agency, need to have a view on this and take steps accordingly.”
Last year the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) launched the Brand Safety Council to highlight the importance brand safety and combat the growing problem of ad fraud in the Australian market. Comment has also been sought from them.
Nic Christensen
Statements from companies contacted by Mumbrella:
Fitness First:
Fitness First has a diverse member base and workforce. Diversity and inclusion are key values across all of our operations. As soon as we discovered our advertising had appeared on a website promoting values that are the antithesis of ours, we made sure it was removed. Targeting on sites is sometimes outside of the control of the industry tools used in spite of all filters and precautions taken. Together with our media buying agency, we have reviewed the relevant processes to ensure that every available precaution is being taken to prevent a repeat of this incident.
TPG:
We use a “display network” to serve our adverts on. This website appears to be a member of the display network and earns revenue for displaying adverts. We never chose this website specifically and the advert has appeared as the site is a member of the display network.
We typically use the Google display network as well as others.
Xero:
Xero has blocked this site and investigated that this is a GDN issue
Paypal:
PayPal does not allow the use of its services for the payment of goods and services that promote hate, violence or racial intolerance. Hence, it is regrettable that our ad was incorrectly placed on the site, an error that came about because the website was inaccurately categorised. We immediately asked for the ad to be pulled down as soon as we found out about this, and have approached the relevant parties to ensure that measures were taken to avoid this happening in the future.”
Bridge Climb Australia:
The advertisement was placed by Google Remarketing. The site in question has had its Google advertisement removed following being reported. We are vigilant with our blacklists and engage a third party company to monitor this regularly.
Australian Institute of Management:
We regret the placement, which was unintentional and against the values of our organisation. We immediately asked for it to be removed and can confirm the advertisement is no longer appearing on the site. We have also requested a review of the relevant systems and processes by suppliers so this does not happen again.
Lastminute.com:
Thanks for bringing this ad appearance to our attention. In response, we have taken immediate steps to investigate.
We can confirm this is not a directly targeted site: targeting such sites is not aligned with our values or marketing approach.
We have already taken action to remove this ad and block this site. We are also reviewing our approach to avoid this happening in the future.
Online foreign exchange broker XM had not responded to requests for comment by deadline, while Just Car Insurance have also been contacted for comment.
More sites = more revenue. Google can’t be trusted to ensure sites like this don’t end up on their network.
User ID not verified.
Just another instance of the race to the bottom in online advertising. Just because you can buy ads cheaply via programmatic exchanges doesn’t mean that you should.
Whatever happened to the value of context and content when buying media? The right ad to the right person at the right time?
Advertisers and agencies have only themselves to blame – if you lie with dogs you’re going to get fleas.
User ID not verified.
@dominic c – “the right ad to the right person at the right time”… that is programmatic my friend.
The issue here isn’t with programmatic technology but more so with google allowing a site like this onto their inventory.
Sounds like you must work for a publisher that has had its budget sacked from the rise of the machines.
User ID not verified.
Maybe you should all stop trusting these ridiculous agency trading desks and their loose safety policies and start looking at independents / proven providers.
Just a thought – worked for us!
User ID not verified.
It’s naive to think that brand safety issues like this have only occurred since the age of the exchange. Ever since there has been an intermediary between buyer and seller, this has been an issue. Some dodgy (but smart) businesses are out there constantly working around existing technology to get a share of ad revenue. It’s an arms race that is constantly escalating, and it is an inevitable part of the landscape. Regardless, buyers see brand safety issues more as an opportunity for makegoods and discounts than they’re actually worried about the impact. And of course they’re gold for media blogs!
User ID not verified.
What does it matter? Nobody would’ve seen the ads anyways. Who looks at banner ads? Not even white supremacists are that dumb.
User ID not verified.
Google silent? No surprise there: Google is run by non-human bots which haven’t been programmed to act (ummm…) responsibly. Oh, and there’s no problem with Google’s massive tax shuffling tricks either.
Do no evil? Ha!!
User ID not verified.