Brands, in seeking the best exposure for their products, now must tip the safety balance to more on the risk side as they operate in increasingly uncontrolled digital environments.
Is cheap reach a good trade off for brand safety, following Meta axing fact-checking in favour of community-led system?
“What a strange world we live in,” said Ben Willee, general manager and media director at Spinach.
“Mark Zuckerberg, the CEO of Meta, recently announced that they are getting rid of fact-checkers and publicly stated that they aim to be more like X (formerly Twitter) — as if that’s a good thing.
“It’s being framed as a noble stand for free speech, but anyone with even a passing interest in US politics can see it for what it truly is.
“So, what does this mean for advertisers? More unfiltered nonsense delivered at the speed of light.
“Meta is arguably one of the most powerful mid- and lower-funnel channels available, and for most brands, it’s more significant than X. The real question is: will advertisers have the courage to risk campaign performance in the name of brand safety?”
Jessica White, CEO of Kinesso, said brands must make critical decisions: either work harder to reach consumers across fragmented platforms that prioritise journalistic integrity and brand safety; or accept the increasing risk of public scrutiny in less controlled spaces
“In Australia, the effectiveness of user created content is evident,” White said.
“Eighty one per cent of consumers indicate that recommendations and referrals are important in their buying decisions and the investment has followed.
“With Meta and X doubling down on constitutional free speech protections to drive greater user engagement, it would take a mass consumer and brand boycott to see a swing back to moderation practices.
“Brands are going to have to get more comfortable with the risks if they want to reap the benefits these platforms provide, despite what future political powers might legislate against.
“This shift requires a delicate balance between leveraging user-driven content and protecting brand reputation in an unpredictable digital landscape.
“With the majority of advertisers having a significant portion of their investment tied up in Meta platforms, if the choice is either to stay the course no matter the change, or diversify, risking everything built so far—few would be willing to take that gamble.
“However, when X faced disruption and brand safety issues prior, many advertisers pulled back with little concern due to the platform’s comparatively smaller advertising footprint.
“If social media giants aren’t held to the same brand safety standards as other platforms, and the goalposts keep shifting, advertisers will need to adjust their own brand safety expectations to evolve with the market.”
Sam Terminelli, head of strategy, Magic, said advertisers may just have to cope with a more relaxed approach to moderation across multiple platforms.
“However, historically we’ve seen brands pull spend when their ads are aligned with questionable content.
“It previously occurred with YouTube in 2019 when ads were being seen alongside extremist content and conspiracies, and then more recently we’ve seen platforms like X experience drops in advertising revenue for consecutive years on the back of relaxed moderation.”
Nick Grinberg, head of strategy, Next&Co, said the risk for advertisers, and users alike, is that the content moves further away from verifiable truth.
“The effectiveness of a ‘crowd sourced’ approach to information verification is unproven, but there is evidence to suggest that fact checking worked when it came to a user’s trust in the platform (eg: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10584609.2019.1668894),” he said
“The perception from advertisers will now be placing their brands in a lower-trust and less brand-safe environment which is something that may have an impact. This impact will need to be quantified as Meta’s products are still a mainstay of the digital media mix.
“Long term, Meta may find itself churning users if they are not able to create an environment where their community finds value in their content, which will in turn hurt the long-term viability of their platform for advertisers and users alike.”
Sally Lawrence, executive director-Media, Enigma said a lot of marketers, if we assume a similar trend to what happened across X, will be pondering the point of whether they distance themselves from Meta.
“The reality is this change is not going to have a significant impact on whether audiences use the Meta platforms or not, so ultimately, if you’re wanting to reach audiences effectively and efficiently, then Meta should still be a part of your buy,” said Lawrence.
“The other consideration is that competitors will likely still be there, so can you afford to not be there too?
“So, what next? There are options across the platform that we can use to mitigate risk including choice of placement, and utilising Meta’s brand safety and suitability centre. “Ensuring these are being utilised is important, but ultimately, we do need to get used to the fact that Meta may be a less brand safe space moving forward. It is the reality of the world that we live in where large tech companies monopolise our industry, and tech is changing at a rapid pace.
“Let’s not forget that everyone is in the same boat, and this is not the first time that we have lived in a world where third party fact checking wasn’t happening across Meta. We’ve succeeded through it before, and we will succeed through it again.
Elise Hedley Dale, founder and media director, Media Words, said the question isn't whether advertisers should get used to less brand safety but rather whether it's time to challenge our reliance on platforms that prioritise reach over responsibility.
“Meta's shift away from fact-checking arrives precisely when brands are investing more than ever in sophisticated brand safety frameworks and tools to combat misinformation,” said Dale.
“While Meta's dominance in digital advertising stems from its unmatched reach and efficiency metrics, which is particularly appealing for brands with smaller budgets, this latest change should prompt advertisers to scrutinise what they're really getting.
“Are we too accepting of vanity metrics and high-volume, low-quality impressions that may compromise brand safety?
“Rather than simply accepting a new normal of reduced brand safety, this could be the catalyst for brands to be braver in their channel selection.
“While Meta will likely remain part of the media mix due to its scale and targeting capabilities, advertisers should question whether chasing cheap reach is worth the potential brand safety trade-off.
“It's time to evaluate channels that might appear more expensive on surface metrics but ultimately deliver better quality engagement in genuinely brand-safe environments.”
Marelle Salib, chief investment officer, OMD, said brands will be considering three key factors:
- Brand safety and Suitability – has always been a fundamental consideration across nearly all advertising and marketing channels. However, the interpretation of what constitutes ‘safe’ and ‘suitable’ content varies by brand, reflecting their unique values and objectives. Social media, with its vast range of UGC, has always been at the forefront of these discussions. While the infrastructure for avoiding undesirable content on these platforms is advanced, the challenge of maintaining brand safety is dynamic.
- Adapting to evolving standards – in 2025, marketing teams will increasingly need to adapt to a global, particularly American, standard of content safety and suitability. This shift will require a deeper understanding of the technologies and tools that help manage content placement, ensuring alignment with evolving standards.
- Performance, Purpose, and principles – beyond campaign management, a critical consideration for brands will be the alignment of their marketing spend with the principles of media vendors and platforms. As the social and ethical priorities of businesses evolve, marketing teams will face growing pressure to balance performance driven decisions with commitment to purpose and consistent principles. These factors will likely drive fundamental shifts in how some brands allocate their marketing budgets in response to a rapidly changing landscape.
Have something to say on this? Share your views in the comments section below. Or if you have a news story or tip-off, drop us a line at adnews@yaffa.com.au
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.