If you’ve seen a big drop in fill rates on Google Ad Manager, it’s probably because of changes in how Google manages user consent for cookies, in line with GDPR and other privacy laws. In this blog, we’ll break down how Google’s decision to stop showing ads without user consent is affecting publishers and explore some alternatives to help you recover lost revenue.
A quick overview: Google Ad Manager requires cookies to track ad performance and serve both personalized and non-personalized ads. However, several alternative ad servers can deliver contextual ads that don’t rely on cookies, meaning they don't need user consent to operate. These cookie-free options offer publishers an opportunity to boost their fill rates and stay compliant with privacy regulations.
Why is Google not serving ads when users do not give consent for cookies?
In 2020 the IAB launched TCF2.0, a GDPR framework that provided the online advertising industry with the best practices for data protection and gathering user consent. Google signed up to this initiative and provided TCF2.0 integration for Ad Manager.
Google’s interpretation of the GDPR law and TCF2.0 framework has led it to decide that it will not serve any ads if users do not give consent for Purpose 1 (the right to “Store and/or access information on a device”).
This means that if a user lands on your website and does not give consent, they will only be served blanks, and the system will not show ads. As a result, many publishers have seen a sharp increase in the number of blanks served on their sites.
Why does Google need consent to serve ads?
According to Google’s EU policy, every site, app, or other property that uses a Google product must obtain user consent from users in the European Economic Area and the UK. In accordance with GDPR, Google requires this consent to use cookies for functions such as ad performance monitoring and frequency capping. Here’s a quote from Google:
“In line with our existing EU User Consent policy, consent for cookies or mobile identifiers is required for both personalized and non-personalized ads. For non-personalized ads, consent for cookies or mobile identifiers is still required because non-personalized ads still use cookies or mobile identifiers to combat fraud and abuse, for frequency capping, and for aggregated ad reporting.”
Why is Google Ad Manager stopping SSPs from filling blanks?
In August of 2020 Snigel detected that it would be possible to fill impressions without consent by using an alternative ad server. As a result, AdEngine, our header bidding solution sends all ad requests without consent directly to our own ad server. We don't need consent for Purpose 1 because we don't use any cookies in this process. Snigel can request bids from SSPs that do not require cookies to serve ads. These SSPs send across unpersonalized ads that can be shown in accordance with GDPR. The result is an effective increase in revenue and a strong increase in the website’s fill rate. If you’d like to find out about how Snigel can provide this solution for your site contact us here.
Why is Google not filling direct campaigns?
Google requires cookies for tracking and monitoring the delivery of direct campaigns. It is important to note that if publishers use GAM as an ad server direct campaigns will not be delivered if no consent is available.
Contextual trageting for impressions without consent
Contextual targeting analyses the text and resources of a web page to determine what type of ads to serve. For example, if a user navigates to a web page about computer hardware, contextual targeting will show related IT ads. This process does not require Purpose 1 consent as no user data is needed for the targeting, ensuring user privacy is maintained. Snigel’s AdEngine uses contextual targeting when Purpose 1 is not available. This allows us to recover revenue that would otherwise be lost.
Why should publishers avoid using SSP switches to fill ads without user consent?
Some SSPs have started offering switches to publishers that direct any ad request without a consent string directly to the SSP. However, as with header bidding, if the SSP does not have to compete against other advertising demand sources it will pay a much lower price to fill the request. Therefore, if you're a publisher looking to maximize your ad revenue, you should use a header bidding solution like Snigel’s AdEngine that can send ad requests without a consent string to all the top SSPs simultaneously. SSPs will then be forced to bid against each other to win the impression which increases your revenue.
If you’d like to find out about how Snigel can provide this solution for your site contact us here.
The Path Forward For Publishers
Google’s policy on cookie consent has undoubtedly affected publishers, leading to lower fill rates and blank ad spaces. However, by adopting alternative solutions like contextual targeting and cookie-free ad servers, publishers can maintain compliance while recovering lost revenue. If you’re looking to optimize your fill rate and boost revenue in this new consent-driven environment, contact Snigel today to learn how we can help you navigate these changes effectively.
Ben is one of Snigel's Co-CEO. He works on business development and marketing - spreading the word about how Snigel can help publishers supercharge their ad revenue.
