{"id":6499,"date":"2024-03-26T01:40:09","date_gmt":"2024-03-26T05:40:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/advertisingweek.com\/aw360\/2024\/03\/26\/is-user-rewarded-content-the-new-mfa-a-look-into-the-hidden-impact-of-urcs-on-brands\/"},"modified":"2024-03-26T12:55:00","modified_gmt":"2024-03-26T16:55:00","slug":"is-user-rewarded-content-the-new-mfa-a-look-into-the-hidden-impact-of-urcs-on-brands","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/advertisingweek.com\/aw360\/news\/is-user-rewarded-content-the-new-mfa-a-look-into-the-hidden-impact-of-urcs-on-brands\/6499\/","title":{"rendered":"Is User-Rewarded Content the New MFA? A Look into the Hidden Impact of URCs on Brands"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By <\/em>Jacek Chrusciany<\/em><\/a>, CEO & Co-Founder, <\/em>Adfidence<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n

Made-for-Advertising (MFA) sites, primarily designed to display ads vs. provide quality content, face criticism for compromising brand integrity. But they\u2019re not the only category that stewards should be looking out for when doing their brand safety checks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

User-Rewarded Content (URC), offering incentives such as in-app currency or access to content for viewing ads, represents another controversial channel for campaign investments, applicable across various platforms. In fact, a study by Adfidence recently revealed that over 90%<\/a>\u00a0 of video campaigns purchased through DV360 did not filter out URC placements<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Those with some passing knowledge of the category might not have an issue with this number \u2013 at first. They may even seem like a smart option. After all, who can argue with guaranteed engagement? But delve a little deeper, and the value is not so straightforward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

URC, by design, offers an incentive for viewing ads. The problem is that it\u2019s hard to know if the engagement is genuine. Users may just be tolerating the ads for the reward.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

That means those ‘engagement’ and ‘view\u2019 metrics could be lacking in quality. A brand might be making impressions \u2013 just not the kind they want. In addition, the bargain URC seems to offer can be misleading. These cheaper options often yield less meaningful engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

The more important question media planners and strategists should ask is what type<\/em> of impressions these ads are having:\u00a0 are they fostering a positive brand image, or are they just a necessary evil for users to get to their reward?<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

If the answer to that question isn\u2019t immediately clear and measurable, as Adfidence’s research suggests, this gap in campaign setup could be leading to significant ad spend on unqualified views. Campaigns without the URC filter spent on average 14% of their budgets via URC. However, this expenditure wasn\u2019t consistent across the board. While most campaigns report URC below 1%, others reached 40-60%, and even as high as 80%. These ads also showed up across a wide array of games.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

The ANA’s recent report<\/a> on programmatic media supply chain transparency already highlighted how a large chunk of ad spend isn\u2019t hitting the mark. URC could be contributing to this scattershot landscape, leaving brands with a muddled view into where ad dollars are actually going and the impact they’re truly having.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Of course, URC is not inherently bad. They can be an effective tool for increasing app engagement for a select audience. If brands are looking for clearer insights into the ROI of URC, they should consider these tips:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n