Who to blame for the spread of MFAs?

Who to blame for the spread of MFAs?

Sites created for advertising — a complex topic for both advertisers and publishers. One thing is certain — these sites have become widespread.

Made-for-Advertising (MFA) are sites designed to generate advertising revenue. They often contain minimal original content but are filled with numerous ads to maximize profits. Various methods may be used to attract traffic and ensure high ad visibility, but user interaction on such sites is generally poor. MFA sites pose a problem for advertisers as they can lead to expenses on low-quality impressions that bring little real value.

In the second quarter, Digiday+ Research surveyed specialists from advertisers, agencies, and publishers in the USA to understand how the industry reached this point. It turned out that publishers do not consider themselves responsible for the spread of MFA, while a significant number of advertisers acknowledge their "contribution" to this issue.

Who benefits?

  • SSP: Increased inventory volume and, consequently, ad revenue.
  • DSP: Expanded reach and access to more inventory, attracting more advertisers.
  • Publishers: Quick traffic acquisition and increased ad revenue through mass low-quality content placement.
  • Verifiers: Panic among advertisers and increased demand for traffic quality control services.
  • Advertisers: Opportunity to meet their KPIs at a lower cost.
Everyone makes money from MFA

Publishers

The main culprit, according to publishers, is the SSP — 60% of publishers believe they are responsible for the widespread of MFA. They are followed by DSP — 58%.

Similarly, 57% of advertisers believe they are responsible for the growth of MFA. About 21% of publishers also indicated that they consider them the main culprits.

Looking at the issue from the other side, it's surprising that only 29% believe publishers are responsible. Meanwhile, 53% of publishers disagree, and 31% strongly disagree with this view.

Advertisers and Agencies

Advertisers and their agencies blame the publishers, though the situation is more balanced with no significant differences in responses. That is, advertisers blame almost everyone around them, including themselves.

58% of specialists agreed that the primary responsibility lies with publishers, followed by SSP (56%). 13% fewer respondents (43%) blamed DSP for the spread of "advertising sites".

It's interesting to note that only 15% of advertisers fully agree that the responsibility lies with publishers, and only 13% place it on SSP.

About 54% of advertisers believe that other advertisers contribute to the spread of MFA. 15% of them fully agree with this statement.

Who doesn't benefit?

  • SSP, DSP, publishers: Loss of trust and decline in traffic quality.
  • Advertisers: Low ad efficiency and budget losses.
  • Verifiers: Complicated mechanisms for traffic quality verification.

Other related materials