65% of the top advertisers in the UK had ads run in non-safe environments according to research by zulu5 and Ebiquity.
The report on brand safety found that the exposed brands potentially damaged their brands in the long term.
The question of brand safety is complicated, but previous research shows that consumers will less likely associate with brands that were negatively contextualized.
Brand perception dropped 7x, leading consumers to be less likely to recommend a brand, by 0.5X.
Ebiquity found that different categories carry different exposure risks.
Finance and health and fitness were found more likely to be placed next to extreme content more than other types of ads, while eCommerce brands featured next to content of a sexual nature.
Some sectors are likely to suffer negative consequences from exposure. For instance, pharmaceutical or healthcare brands had a more significant effect on equity than eCommerce brands.
Performance campaigns carried the most significant risk of featuring next to unsafe content because they have a higher focus on conversion.
Ebiquity categorizes brand safety into two: an objective tier that is not safe for any brand, and a subjective one that depends on advertiser preferences. Out of 100000 cases, the most were subjective tiers.
It is recommended for advertisers to try a three-tier approach to safety that starts with defining what inappropriate content is and implementing standards and monitoring practices.