Ad verification practices are problematic—so, where to from here?

Ad verification may not be the most glamorous part of marketing.

But it plays a critical role in the digital advertising ecosystem.

Think of it like a digital bodyguard. Its primary job is to ensure that your ads appear in appropriate, safe environments in front of real audiences—not on shady sites or in front of bot armies.

The problem is, ad verification has recently become a bit dated.

A recent Mediaocean survey has revealed growing dissatisfaction among marketers with the current 'negative' ad verification model.

Sure, it protects brands from harmful placements and wasted ad spend. But its reactive nature often leaves advertisers frustrated. Instead, they're searching for more proactive, value-driven solutions.

This call for change signals an industry-wide shift toward a more collaborative and insightful approach—one that prioritises trust, transparency, and measurable value creation.

But before diving into why this shift is necessary, let’s first explore what ad verification is and why it matters.

Because look, this sh*t gets confusing for me, too. And the seemingly endless list of ‘processes’ within our industry ensures it’s impossible to know it all.

However, ad verification is a critical process in the digital advertising landscape.

Its purpose is to ensure ads appear in safe, relevant environments. It helps ads reach legitimate audiences and deliver measurable value.

From avoiding content that could harm your brand’s reputation to combating fraudulent activity like bot traffic, ad verification acts as a safeguard.

Let’s paint a picture: You’re running an ad campaign for your brand-new, eco-friendly sneaker line. You’re expecting your ads to show up in glossy, on-brand places like Vogue or Hypebeast.

Instead, they pop up next to a conspiracy theory video about adrenochrome, or worse, an ad for Hot Local MILFs in Your Area.

That’s the exact scenario ad verification should prevent.

And the stakes are only getting higher.

According to the recent Mediaocean survey, 75% of respondents view brand safety as more critical now than it was just six months ago. 

Ad budgets are under increasing scrutiny. So marketers can’t afford to risk their reputations—or their ROI—on poorly placed or fraudulent ads.

No brand wants to make headlines for the wrong reasons. A poorly placed ad doesn’t just waste your money—it tarnishes your reputation. One bad screenshot of your ad next to unsavoury content, and suddenly you’re trending on Twitter for all the wrong reasons.

Ad verification is the safety net that stops your marketing dreams from turning into a PR nightmare.

The problem? The way we’ve been doing it isn’t cutting it anymore.

Brand safety has become an increasing priority. But many marketers worry that restrictive brand safety block lists can end up removing advertising revenue unjustly.

Over four in five (85%) respondents believe that current restrictive brand safety filters unfairly penalise publishers.

Traditional ad verification tools can flag risks.

But their reactive nature often means brands are still left playing defence, dealing with the fallout rather than preventing the issues in the first place.

Kinda like the co-worker that points out ALL your mistake but offers no solutions.

Here’s how it works right now: A verification system flags an issue—your ad was served on a dodgy site, or it wasn’t even seen by a real person. It gets blocked, and the system pats itself on the back for 'helping.'

But what about the ad budget already wasted? The impressions that never happened? The missed opportunities?

This retroactive approach feels like playing whack-a-mole with your brand reputation. It’s exhausting. Sure, it keeps the threats at bay. But it also isolates the brand from potentially valuable interactions.

Verification vendors and advertisers are supposed to be on the same team. But instead of working together, they’re caught in a game of blame-shifting.

Advertisers feel like they’re being policed, while vendors act like hall monitors handing out citations. This adversarial dynamic erodes trust and stifles innovation.

And the scope is far too narrow.

Ad verification was designed to protect against fraud and bad placements. And sure, it does that. But marketers today need more.

They want insights—who’s engaging with their content, how their ads are performing, and what’s driving conversions. Verification systems that only block and flag aren’t keeping up with the demands of modern marketing.

We need a positive paradigm shift.

The good news is we don’t have to stay stuck in this loop of negativity. The industry is ripe for a shake-up, and marketers are leading the charge.

What would a 'positive' ad verification model look like? Think of it as moving from being the ad police to becoming the ad coach. Instead of just punishing bad behaviour, the new model would guide advertisers toward better outcomes.

One where trust and transparency are at the core.

This new approach would prioritise collaboration. Verification vendors and advertisers working hand-in-hand to build systems that are fair, transparent, and useful.

With data that drives value.

Imagine a system that not only flags issues but also gives you actionable insights: Which creatives are resonating with your audience? What time of day delivers the best engagement? Which platforms are giving you the biggest bang for your buck? That’s the kind of intelligence marketers crave.

And lastly, one that is proactive, not reactive.

Rather than waiting for problems to crop up, a positive model would anticipate them. AI and predictive analytics could help advertisers avoid pitfalls before they happen. This would make campaigns more efficient and effective from the start.

Here’s the big takeaway: Just because something has 'always been done this way' doesn’t mean it’s the best way.

Ad verification has been stuck in a rut, but it doesn’t have to be.

And this applies to more than just ad verification.

Across industries, marketers often fall into the trap of following the status quo because it feels safe.

But as the call for a new verification model shows, innovation happens when you challenge the norm and take a fresh approach.

-Sophie, Writer