Good news! The MIXX Awards Europe and the IAB Europe Research Awards are now open for entries! Enter before the early bird deadline for a discounted entry fee.

The MIXX Awards Europe are an opportunity gain industry recognition for your European campaigns and to educate the marketplace about what works and why in digital marketing, as well as inspire the industry by highlighting new ideas and future trends.

All European campaigns that have won a digital award in a national or international award competition are invited to participate.

The IAB Europe Research Awards are an opportunity to gain industry recognition for your digital research projects to be showcased and the show the contribution they have made to the development of the digital advertising industry.

Why Enter?

• Get your work recognised at a pan-European level
• Get your work in front of Industry leaders
• Develop business opportunities
• Benchmark your work against competitors
• Inspire the community
• Challenge and reward your team

Entry deadline & fees

Entrants that enter 3 or more categories or projects will be eligible for a 30% discount off the regular Interact 2019 ticket price.

CMPs must adhere to TCF Policies and UI/UX requirements

Last year’s enforcement decision by the CNIL against French mobile ad tech company Vectaury has sent shockwaves through the CMP community, due to Vectaury’s CMP being deemed by the French regulator to be in breach of GDPR requirements for valid consent. Key shortcomings of Vectaury’s CMP could have been easily avoided had it followed TCF Policies for CMPs more closely. We therefore urge all CMPs to ensure that they are implementing TCF Policies correctly. This is even more important given the responsibility CMPs have for the Publisher’s they work for, as well as for the Vendors who rely on the consent signals they create.

In addition to the need to register CMPs with the Framework in order to be able to send TCF-compliant consent signals, the signals CMPs generate are only reliable if they comply with the law. IAB Europe and its members have been making considerable efforts in understanding legal requirements of the GDPR with respect to consent and published a Working Paper on Consent since adoption of the GDPR in 2016. These efforts have been woven into the TCF Policies, notably into Appendix B on UI/UX Guidelines and Requirements. The TCF FAQs give further clarity on UI requirements (see p. 11-13 and p. 22).

In summary, these are some key elements of a compliant CMP UI under the TCF Policies:

• Initial layer of the UI must be prominently displayed, covering all or substantially all of the content of the page or app. Information to be provided on this initial layer of the UI must at minimum include:
  • Multiple parties will be accessing and/or storing information, such as cookies, on the user’s device and process their personal data and examples of the type personal data.
  • A link to the enumerated list of named third parties (Vendors).
  • The Purposes for which the Publisher and its third party Vendors wish to access and/or store information, such as cookies, on the user’s device and process their personal data using the standard names provided in the Vendor List.
  • An explanation that the user is asked to provide their consent and can change their mind at any time and withdraw consent, as well as an explanation of how to do so (e.g. link at the footer of the page or in the privacy policy that allows resurfacing the CMP UI). A user should also be informed of the consequence of consenting and/or not consenting.
  • Calls to action of equal visual prominence that at a minimum include a way to consent and a way to access advanced options and information.

• Options and information that must at minimum be provided in secondary layers of the UI includes:
  • Users must be able to review the Purposes, including their standard definitions, and (if applicable) exercise granular choices regarding these Purposes.
  • Users must be able to review the enumerated list of named third parties (Vendors), and have access to information made available on the Vendor List by Vendors. This information must at a minimum, include:
    • Vendor’s name
    • Link to Vendor’s privacy policy
    • The Purposes for which the Vendor processes personal data
    • The legal basis or bases relied upon by the Vendor by Purpose
    • The Features the Vendor relies on when processing personal data

Moreover, it should be noted that consent signals, by their very nature can only be created on the basis of a clear affirmative user interaction with the CMP that unambiguously signifies their consent to the processing. Creation of consent signals by CMPs or others absent such a clear user interaction is therefore not permitted.

Brussels, 28 January 2019 - We have taken note of media reports regarding an update to complaints made by ad-blocking browser developer Brave and Polish activist group Panoptykon Foundation to a number of European data protection authorities.

As with previous submissions made by Brave et al., we believe that: (1) the complaints are fundamentally misdirected at IAB Europe or the IAB Tech Lab; and (2) they fail to demonstrate any breach of EU data protection law.

• Technical standards developed by IAB Tech Lab are intended to facilitate the effective and efficient functioning of technical online advertising processes, such as real-time bidding. IAB Europe’s Transparency & Consent Framework helps companies engaged in online advertising to meet certain requirements under EU data protection and privacy law, such as informing users about how their personal data is processed. The responsibility to use technologies and do business in compliance with applicable laws lies with individual companies.
• The Content Taxonomy Mapping document cited by the complainants does not, as Brave and Panoptykon seem to contend, demonstrate that taxonomies of data types that would qualify as special categories of personal data (and are subject to stricter protections under EU data protection law) are used by individual companies; nor can it be considered to prove or demonstrate that any companies making use of those taxonomies are doing so without complying with applicable EU data protection or other law.

The complaints are akin to attempting to hold road builders accountable for traffic infractions, such as speeding or illegal parking, that are committed by individual motorists driving on those roads. Using this analogy, the complainants’ purported finding that EU data protection law is being breached is comparable to someone pointing out that an automobile is technically capable of exceeding the speed limit, or parking in a restricted area, and adducing this fact as “evidence” that it actually does.  A technical standard may be misused to violate the law or used in a legally compliant way, just as a car may be driven faster than the speed limit or driven at or below that limit. The mere fact that misuse is possible cannot reasonably be used as evidence that it is  actually happening.  And the whole purpose of the Transparency & Consent Framework is to ensure it does not.

More information may be obtained from Matthias Matthiesen, Director, Privacy & Public Policy, IAB Europe (matthiesen@iabeurope.eu) or Helen Mussard, Marketing & Business Strategy Director, IAB Europe (mussard@iabeurope.eu).

It almost seems like an arms race to who is the most transparent in today’s programmatic ecosystem. What is really under the hood and how do we make automated ad buying safer, cleaner, and truly transparent for buyers and suppliers alike? Alliances are being formed between supply-side platforms (SSPs) and publishers, and similarly between competing SSPs, an example being six big exchanges publishing an “open letter” to the ad tech industry.

IAB Europe  has released an educational and poignant white paper on header bidding and auction dynamics. This drastically needed overview of header bidding is great for those with a bit of knowledge as well as those who think header bidding is just a futbol move. The white paper provides an overview of how header bidding is increasing revenue opportunities for publishers . That may be true, but concurrently, it is increasing the workload to connect to the many available programmatic exchanges. Supply and demand sides both benefit, but at what outgoing cost?

Evolution:

Header bidding was established in order to drive more transparency in the programmatic ecosystem and to inherently drive more revenue to ambitious online publishers. Through a simple implementation (the key implementation types are outlined below) in the header of a mobile or desktop web page, the publisher could send all ad opportunities to multiple exchanges and direct partners at once. Think of it as a super auction. Insead of having to cascade down a waterfall sequentially calling partners from the most profitable to least, they can call them all at once and see who is willing to pay the most. Sounds perfect for the publisher but what about the buyer?

Implementaion types:

• Client side: prebid, Index - Mainly self serve implementations, increasing number of managed wrappers in the market.
• Server side: Uses core servers such EBDA, Amazon TAM & UAM and can host multiple partners.
• Hybrid: both client and server. This can either be achieved by the publisher running a combo of any client and server solution. Some vendors offer one stop shop hybrid wrappers.

Prebid now offers a multi-format solution to allow publishers to put outStream/Native/banner formats in competition, however the auction is hosted for different payout models. For example, banner pays on CPM whereas outStream pays on vCPM. At Teads we predict a vCPM probability, meaning that we factor in scroll rate and creative errors to the returned bid price. The reason this is important is that it makes the auction fair, as returned bids are all for the same CPM model, not a mix which gives vCPM buyers an unfair advantage.

Buyers also benefit. Historically publishers would be reluctant to integrate too many partners, sending out sequential requests was either impossible due to latency or too costly. Now, buyers who weren’t considered in the past can now get their fair access.

All these benefits come with some challenges that are still being worked through. On the publisher side, making calls to so many partners slowed down the loading time on pages drastically. And, on the buy side, exchanges and Demand Side Platforms (DSPs) were receiving 10x the volume they had seen previously, taking a serious toll on server costs.

Some big players have shifted heavily into the header bidding space. In Europe according to a report by Roxot over 50% of Appnexus bids are on header bidding calls. Other large players are slower to make the move hoping to not have to compete with others for their ad slots.

Opinions may vary, but it is clear that header bidding is paving the way to drive much needed revenue to publishers and allowing all players, big and small to participate in the game.

Agenda: https://bit.ly/2RkACZy

Get Tickets: https://bit.ly/2RdNH6F

Discount Code: PPSIAB20  

Date & Location: 21 - 22 May, 2019. Twickenham Stadium, London

The Programmatic Pioneers Summit is the leading European event for marketers who want to transform their programmatic strategies. Whether in-house or outsourced, PPS brings together the entire ecosystem including the leading Brands, Agencies, Publishers and Tech companies who are challenging convention and shaping the future of programmatic marketing.

With 300+ programmatic experts expected to attend and over half of these attendees representing Europe’s leading brands, this is quite simply THE meeting place to benchmark with the best and shape the future of your industry.

Check out the conference agenda here: https://bit.ly/2RkACZy  to see the 70+ thought leading speakers already confirmed along with the topics they’ll be covering.

We are pleased to offer you an exclusive 20% discount code, simply quote: PPSIAB20 when booking online here: https://bit.ly/2RdNH6F

Save even more if you register as a group of 3 or more!

Simon Halstead, Chair of the IAB Europe Programmatic Trading Committee and Head of Open Demand International, Verizon Media, will moderate the following panel at 11.50 on 21 May:
Evaluating programmatic cross-border centralised vs decentralised models: How can you gain a single view across markets to deliver a consistent programmatic strategy that offers greater control over your campaigns?

He will be joined by:
Hanna Hourani - Head of Programmatic Display, Uber
Roberto Espinoza - Senior Media Leader, Europe, Visa
Benoit Cacheux - Global Head of Digital & Innovation, Zenith
Andrew Merritt - Head of Display & Programmatic, Europe, Hotels.com (Expedia Group)
Martin Kelly - CEO & Co-founder, Infectious Media

CMPs must register with IAB Europe and use their assigned ID

Last week, IAB Europe communicated to Vendors and CMPs registered for participation in the TCF a reminder that the Framework’s Policies requires that all CMPs register with IAB Europe, and that Vendors only work with CMPs in compliance with the Policies. The communication alerted TCF participants to the fact that any signals not associated with a valid CMP ID should be considered invalid for purposes of the TCF. This means that Publishers who operate or use CMPs that have not registered their CMP with IAB Europe, or have failed to tag their consent strings with their assigned CMP ID, will very likely see a change in Vendor behavior moving forward.

The requirement that CMPs register with IAB Europe is necessary because of CMPs’ importance in the TCF as the entity that provides transparency to users about how their data is processed and request users’ consent to data processing. Vendors rely on the signals created by CMPs to know whether information has been disclosed to users and whether users have given their consent to processing. These signals are only reliable when generated by CMPs in accordance with the technical specifications and Policies of the Framework, including UI/UX requirements. As originators of consent strings, CMPs must be clearly identified by their CMP IDs to enable Vendors reading consent strings to trace their origins. The CMP ID is only assigned to a CMP once registration is completed and approved by IAB Europe.

When CMPs register with IAB Europe, they contractually agree to adhere to the technical specification and Policies of the Framework, which allows IAB Europe to ensure and support CMP adherence to the Policies.

Without the Framework and its standardising function there is no scalable way of passing consent strings and other information in a reliable and interoperable way. Without registration, participation by CMPs in the Framework is not possible and CMPs cannot send TCF-compliant consent signals.

CMPs are therefore strongly urged to ensure that (1) they have completed registration with IAB Europe using the registration portal for CMPs; (2) they comply with the TCF’s technical specification and Policies; and (3) consent strings they generate include the CMP ID that has been assigned to them by IAB Europe. IAB Europe maintains a list of CMPs and their assigned CMP IDs, which can be consulted to determine which CMPs are registered and what their CMP ID is.

Things are going well, but there are opportunities for improvement

Since its release in Spring 2018, the IAB Europe Transparency & Consent Framework (TCF) has seen significant uptake. Already, it is the largest collaborative effort by the advertising industry to programmatically provide users with notice and choice about how their data is processed. It has been a key pillar in the advertising industry’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and ePrivacy Directive (ePD) compliance efforts. More than 460 registered Vendors are receiving and responding to consent signals created by Internet users interacting with over 170 registered Consent Management Platforms (CMPs) spanning thousands of websites and apps. EU users have more transparency and control than ever before.

Despite its success, the TCF remains a relatively new standard with potential for improvement. This is why IAB Europe and its members have been working on a Version 2 since the TCF’s initial release. Version 2 will add new capabilities, including some intended to provide  Publishers with greater control over how Vendors collect and process the personal data of Internet users visiting their websites or apps. It will also provide more flexibility to Vendors in supporting Publisher and Advertiser needs. And, of course, TCF Version 2 will further enhance transparency and control for Internet users.

IAB Europe and its members have also been monitoring the way companies implement the TCF and continue to identify opportunities for improvement. As the TCF is relatively new, it is only natural that despite best efforts some companies and implementations fall short of expectations. For the TCF to be successful, it is critical that all involved implement it correctly, which is why IAB Europe’s first priority is to ensure that CMPs are educated about the proper use and implementation of the Framework. We want to achieve this by continuing and improving our education efforts in the market. But to ensure adherence to technical specifications and Policies and enhance trust in the reliability of the Framework we must ultimately do even more. That is why in the coming months IAB Europe will also be leading a CMP compliance review program, working closely with CMPs to support adherence and compliance with TCF technical specification and Policies.

But what do we mean by CMPs? When IAB Europe refers to CMPs it refers to a defined term in the context of the TCF. Specifically, we mean the entity responsible for providing transparency to users about which Vendors want to process their personal data and for which Purposes using information published on the Global Vendor List (GVL), requesting user’s consent to the processing of their personal data, and creating and sending signals about user choices to Vendors in the form of a consent string.

CMPs must register with IAB Europe, and agree to adhere to TCF technical specifications and Policies, including UI/UX requirements. CMPs within the TCF receive a unique CMP ID that identifies a consent string as having been generated by a specific, identified, registered CMP. IAB Europe maintains a public list of registered CMPs and their assigned CMP IDs, which can be consulted to determine which CMPs are registered and what their CMP IDs are. It is not possible for non-registered CMPs to send TCF-compliant consent strings.

While IAB Europe will be providing more detailed formal implementation instructions to CMPs in the coming months as it finalizes updates to the TCF, this blog series will focus on some of the most common issues we have identified with respect to CMPs.