Google and Facebook monopolized the digital ad market to the detriment of newspapers, the owner of the West Virginia Charleston Gazette-Mail alleges in a new antitrust lawsuit against the companies.

“There is no longer a competitive market in which newspapers can fairly compete for online advertising revenue,” HD Media alleges in a complaint filed Friday in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

The complaint relies on the key allegations in an antitrust lawsuit brought against Google late last year by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and nine other attorneys general.

Their lawsuit -- one of three antitrust cases brought by government officials against Google last year -- alleges that Google rigged online ad auctions, to the detriment of publishers. Among other claims, Paxton said that publishers attempted to combat Google by adopting header bidding but starting in 2018, Google and Facebook allegedly collaborated to undermine header bidding.

Google's Adam Cohen, director of economic policy, recently issued a detailed denial of those claims. Cohen wrote in a Jan. 17 blog post that Google created an alternative to header bidding in order to solve problems associated with the technology.

“Header bidding auctions take place within the browser, on your computer or mobile phone, so they require the device to use more data in order to work. This can lead to problems like webpages taking longer to load and device batteries draining faster,” Cohen wrote. “And the multilayered complexity of header bidding can lead to fraud and other problems that can artificially increase prices for advertisers, as well as billing discrepancies that can hurt publisher revenue.”

Cohen added that Paxton's claims about Facebook's involvement with Google's alternative to header bidding are misleading.

Facebook is facing a separate antitrust lawsuit by the Federal Trade Commission and attorneys general.

HD Media -- which owns other newspapers in West Virginia -- says in the complaint that the allegations are drawn from the other antitrust lawsuits against Google and Facebook by government officials.

“If proven to be true," HD Media writes, referring to government officials' claims, "Google and Facebook have monopolized the digital advertising market thereby strangling a primary source of revenue for newspapers across the country."

HD Media's lawsuit explicitly blames Google and Facebook for the well-publicized decline in newspapers' ad revenues which, according to the complaint dropped from $49 billion in 2006 to $16.5 billion in 2017.

“Since 2006, the news industry has been in economic freefall, primarily due to a massive decrease in advertising revenue caused by defendants’ anticompetitive and unlawful conduct,” the complaint alleges.

While the lawsuit casts blame on Google and Facebook, industry watchers have long noted that newspapers lost a significant chunk of ad revenue to Craigslist and other online classified listings.

Ad industry executives say Facebook will suffer after Apple implements its privacy changes in iOS, as it becomes more difficult for the social media company to collect user data and prove that ads on its platform work.

Sabio, a mobile-first connected TV platform, launched a program in October 2019 called Cares that paid major dividends for a variety of non-profits during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.

Last year, advertisers had the opportunity to donate their added-value CTV impressions to a variety of non-profits such as Feeding America, Destiny Rescue, and Wags and Walks to help support their businesses.

The value of the impressions would be between $8,000 and $10,000,” said Joao Machado, senior vice president of marketing at Sabio. “Rather than writing a check to one of the charities, the advertisers would donate their added-value impressions.”

When an advertiser runs a campaign, it typically gets what Machado calls added value, a percentage of the overall impressions. If a brand runs a campaign with 1 million impressions, for example, it might have an added value of 100,000 impressions.

Brands typically run their normal creative spot within that added-value impression range, which helps with their eCPM. Rather than use the added-value impressions, the advertiser will donate them.

The program launched in October 2019, but the program began to send traffic to websites like Feeding America in 2020 during the pandemic, making a major difference for non-profits as the pandemic hit the U.S. economy.

Between 25 and 30 brands have participated since the program began.

One thing Sabio can do that others cannot is identify an app of a charitable company on a consumer’s phone, and then target an ad related to that organization, he said. “If we have a client running a CTV campaign, part of the way we target households, through our household brand, is using mobile data to identify in-market intent,” Machado said. “These types of consumers tend to be community minded and willing to give back.”

The idea is to conduct targeted-media campaigns to drive awareness, he said.

The donated added-value impressions must be used by the non-profit during the same time the advertiser runs its ads.

Email marketers need data systems that can pull information from anywhere in an organization. And they may be getting them, according to The State Of SQL And BI: The Data Analysts’ Perspective, a study by Ascend2 in partnership with bipp, a business intelligence firm.  

Business intelligence (BI) budgets are significantly rising in 49% of companies, and moderately in 36%. Another 12% say their BI spend remains the same, and 3% are decreasing it.

Of the professionals polled, 75% utilize Structured Query Language (SQL) databases, 57% use Google Analytics and 46% use Excel sheets. 

What do users seek in a BI tool? They want: 

• Security — 38%
• Data visualization — 28%
• Data source connectivity — 19%
• Data modeling language — 19% 
• Data preparation — 17% 
• Advanced analytics — 17%
• In-database — 16%
• Version control — 16%

However, analysts and executives view things in slightly different ways. 

Executives seek security (29%), reporting & analytics features (26%) and natural-language query (23%). 

The two sides also differ on the challenges they face. For 42%, the top obstacle is quality of IT infrastructure. And 41% say it is data security. But again, executives and analysts have differing views. 

Executives list their challenges as:

• Data security — 55% 
• Quality of IT infrastructure — 39% 
• Cloud/browser accessibility — 32%
• Collaboration limitations — 19%
• Mobile accessibility —  19% 
• Database connectivity — 19%
• Associated costs/budget — 13%

Analysts disagree. Their major issues are: 

• Quality of IT Infrastructure — 42% 
• Associated costs/budget constraints — 32% 
• Collaboration limitations — 32% 
• Mobile accessibility — 30%
• Cloud/browser accessibility — 28% 
• Data security — 22% 
• Database connectivity — 16%

In general, 90% agree that their BI platform should include a data modeling language that allows them to create reusable data models using SQL syntax, with 49% strongly concurring. Another 10% are neutral. 

Here are the BI platform features that respondents expect will have the greatest impact on their programs over the next two to five years:

• Cloud analytics — 21% 
• Multi-experience analytics — 18% 
• Data literacy — 16%
• Analytics catalog — 16%
• Social analytics — 15%
• Graph analytics — 15% 
• Data storytelling — 15%
• Data and analytics governance — 15%

All that said, here are the useful solutions, as rated by the respondents: 

• MySQL — 63%
• SQL Server — 43%
• Oracle — 38%
• SQL Lite — 29%
• Apache Impala — 28%
• BigQuery — 28%
• Apache Spark — 28%
• Athena — 17%
• OD BC — 13%
• Snowflake — 12%
• Redshift — 10%
• PostgreSQL — 8%
• Presto — 7%
• Panoply — 7%
• MongoDB — 7%
• Cassandra — 7%
• MariaDB  —  5%

Ascend2 surveyed 218 data professionals. 

Apple, Google, and Facebook have been increasingly communicating to consumers and advertisers about privacy changes, as Apple gets ready to roll out its App Tracking Transparency features, and Google, its FloC solution that focuses on privacy by clustering large groups of people with similar interests and anonymizes the data, keeping the user information on the device rather than sharing it across the web. 

Apple iOS users agree with the company's latest privacy update, but 74% would rather be tracked than pay for the use of sites and apps.

As brands struggle to understand and comply with each of the latest changes, the biggest question becomes: How well do you know the consumers who shop from your ecommerce sites and use your apps?

SellCell released a report Friday based on a survey of 2,012 iPhone and iPad owners 18 years and older, based in the United States.

The study was fielded between January 18 and January 26, 2021. The goal is analyze the privacy choices of iPhone and iPad users in the U.S., and understand their thoughts on Apple’s new privacy policies.

The company said the responses to the survey were collected without storing any respondents’ personally identifiable information.

About 72% of those participating in the survey said they are aware of Apple’s new privacy changes coming in the next version of its operating system.

How well do survey participants know Apple's iOS privacy policies?

• 13% said extremely
• 29% said moderately
• 9% said slightly
• 28% said not well at all

When asked to describe how concerned they are that their online activities are tracked as they traverse from websites to apps and back again, 37% said they are extremely concerned, 18% said they are very concerned, 9% said moderately concerned, 12% said slightly concerned, and 14% said not concerned at all.

And while most participating in the survey have some level of concern, a majority would rather sacrifice their privacy than make tradeoffs.  

Some 65% of respondents agree with Apple’s new policy, but 23% said the company might be taking it too far. Another 12% aren’t sure what to make of it.

More and more people are becoming aware of the privacy concerns associated with being tracked by apps and websites across the web.

Despite awareness and concerns about online trackers and privacy updates, the survey reveals that Apple users are willing to make privacy compromises in exchange for benefits.

For instance, 74% of users are willing to give in to tracking to avoid paying subscriptions on services they currently enjoy for free.

Many apps can show relevant ads and content based on peoples' interests because they track consumers across the Internet. Apple’s forthcoming App Tracking Transparency prompt feature on iOS and iPadOS devices will allow users to control whether or not to allow apps to track their online behavior.

The survey asked whether survey participants would be in favor of any type of tracking, given two options.

• 35% said they would allow app tracking to see personalized advertisements
• 65% prefer not to be tracked between sites and apps for relevant ads and would be content with generic ads not based on their interests.

Many services can show content and ads based on interest because they track activities across apps and websites. In iOS, apps will begin warning users when they track online activities. The users can either grant or deny permission.

• 59% agreed they would allow tracking if that’s how the app delivers relevant content 
• 48% agreed they would allow tracking if it means not losing access to content or features they currently enjoy
• 74% would rather have tracking enabled than pay for content or features that are currently free
• 61% disagreed that  they would opt-in to being tracked if the app in question is a familiar one
• 43% said they would be more willing to accept being tracked if the app is upfront about the data collected and their applications
• 52% said tracking prompts would negatively impact their experience on the site or app

If your users are optimistic gamblers and your brand imaging already evokes slot machines, why not create your own prime-time game show?

That’s what Pepsi Wild Cherry has been working on with Fox.

The result is a 30-minute trivia show called “Cherries Wild” that will debut Feb. 14 preceding “The Simpsons.” It will be a mashup of Pepsi advertising, product placement and viewer participation via a specially designed app and QR codes on packaging.

To negotiate the “Cherries Wild” partnership, Pepsi approached Fox via The Content Collective division of Omnicom Media Group and OMD. The program was created by Wes Kauble (“Supermarket Sweep”) and will be hosted by Jason Biggs, whose credits include “American Pie” and “Outmatched.”

Initially planned for six episodes, the show will feature contestants answering pop culture trivia questions while standing behind podiums that resemble huge beverage cans. At the end of each episode, players will spin the reels on a three-story-tall slot machine emblazoned with Pepsi colors and cherries in the hopes of winning a $250,000 jackpot.

In this interview, Pepsi vice president of marketing Todd Kaplan talks about why this type of gaming experience is expected to appeal to Pepsi Wild Cherry’s younger demographic.

CPG FYI: What’s the genesis of this game show concept?

Kaplan: At a meta level, the concept of advertising or interrupting consumers with your message has a lot of limitations. Fans are going to be seeking out the content that they like, which puts a lot more pressure than ever on brands to develop creative that they want to see and new models to engage with them. We’re trying to find new ways to talk with them—not at them.

CPG FYI: Why do you think a trivia game show will resonate with users of Pepsi Wild Cherry?

Kaplan: What we know is, our Pepsi consumers are optimistic and ready to win: 68% of them believe life is a game they intend to win, 42% think they’re going to be famous some day and that they’re more likely than most people to play the lottery.

The majority of them basically want a go-big-or-go-home kind of approach to their life. When you couple this with the iconography of cherries and slot machines and the opportunity to win big, there’s really something interesting there. That led us to approach Fox with this crazy idea of collaborating.

CPG FYI: So you’re counting on multiscreen use to encourage viewer participation?

Kaplan: We know that 73% of consumers are on their phone while they are watching TV, and 55% of those are actually playing games. We thought it was important to go beyond just being a linear TV show to deliver an all-encompassing, immersive experience that will bring viewers closer to that energy and drama of a prime-time game show like never before.

CPG FYI: How does the mobile app work?

Kaplan: It’s a first of its kind. Fans can play alongside contestants in the actual show. There’s a Cherries Wild moment when five spinning wheels on the app appear at the same time that it’s happening on the television. [App users] can pull their own virtual handle of the slot machine on TV and—if they match exactly what the wheels of the contestants have on the show—they’ll win exactly what’s won on the show.

CPG FYI: Will Pepsi Wild Cherry be the show’s only advertiser?

Kaplan: This is a prime-time show from Fox, and they will be selling advertising for it to other partners. Obviously, we’ll have a good presence throughout.

On Thursday, online brokerage firm Robinhood shut down trading in the middle of the day. Investors were executing something called a short squeeze. Apparently, it made traders rich and cost Wall Street billions.

Users of Robinhood expressed their anger by leaving negative reviews on the PlayStore app, but it appears Google came in and wiped the ratings clean.

Robinhood, which blamed SEC regulations, put a temporary halt on trading on GameStop and other stocks by prohibiting the purchase of shares. App users were upset at their inability to freely trade the stock, despite the brokerage firm reopening with some restrictions on Friday.

Stock traders felt Robinhood had succumb to the wishes of the market and that the company acted to protect Wall Street insiders at the expense of the little guy.

Thousands flooded Robinhood's Google PlayStore app listing with negative reviews. The 100,000 poor reviews in which users expressed their outrage transformed the 4.3 star rating into a one-star rating for the app.

Just a few hours later, the number of reviews of Robinhood dropped from around 275,000 to just 175,000, after virtually all of the recent negative reviews disappeared, restoring the app’s high rating.

Did Google delete thousands of one-star reviews? One spokesperson confirmed that the company did delete the reviews based on Google's reviews guidelines, which brings into question how and when app users or consumers who purchase products can give their honest opinion of a product and how the company operates.

Google has systems in place to detect spam and abuse of it in app review systems, including detecting coordinated or inorganic reviews, a spokesperson said.

“We want trustworthy reviews in the Play Store,” the spokesperson said. “To be extra clear - we only take action on reviews found to be inauthentic or in violation of our policies. For example, you can see many one-star reviews from the past 24 hours on Robinhood's app page on Google Play.”

Google does have policies to prohibit users from leaving reviews that manipulate the rating of PlayStore Apps.

Google has public guidelines that outline its policy on app reviews and comments. For example, one policy is not to post fake reviews intended to boost or lower ratings. It’s not clear how many or whether or not those reviews were fake.

Despite the removal, Google makes it clear that developers do not have the ability to remove reviews and Google’s developer policies strictly prohibits any attempt to influence their app's rating.

App users have already filed a class action lawsuit against Robinhood for what some believe were unjustified restrictions on their right to trade.

Robinhood, the retail-based brokerage firm, has seen sharply higher national TV advertising spending year over year.

It is also the focus of a high-profile effort by individual investors in combating short-selling around specific stocks, such as GameStop.

From January 2020 through January 2021, national TV spending for the brokerage company was $32.3 million, according to iSpot.tv -- almost double its $17.3 million level in the previous year period.

Biggest spending networks for Robinhood in the last 30 days: ESPN, CNN, Fox News Channel, TNT and MSNBC. Top spending individual programs were NBA basketball, college football. Top overall program impressions from total Robinhood-bought ad inventory: “CNN Newsroom Live” and MSNBC’s “The 11th hour with Brian Williams.”

Over the last 30 days, Robinhood has spent $3.2 million on national TV advertising, according to iSpot.tv. The previous December period it spend $1 million.

Buying by individuals, small investors of under-performing entertainment/media companies and other stocks -- in large part on the small-investor friendly Robinhood trading platform -- resulted in dramatically rising stock-market company prices.

For example, GameStop, the physical store retailer of video games, saw its stock price rise nearly 1,905% since the start of the year; 251% over the last five days. AMC Entertainment, the large U.S. theater chain, has been 632% higher since January 1; 198% over the last five days.

Other big gainers: Mobile phone/device companies, Nokia and Blackberry. The list also includes mainstream consumer brands, such as retail store Bed, Bath & Beyond and Koss, a consumer audio/headphone manufacturer.

Over the past week or so, individual, small investors on a Reddit forum, WallStreetBets, talked up an effort to push some stock prices dramatically higher -- in part to combat big hedge funds that typically short stocks, firms betting stock prices will go lower.

After an initial effort to restrict trading due to an untenable rush of investor buying, at the end of week, Robinhood, and other brokerage firms, opened up limited trading.

Some members of Congress have said this unsupported stock market speculation activity has contributed to an unstable stock market, with calls for possible hearings and investigations.

Out-of-home media agency Project X is rolling out a new suite of client tools that coincides with a brand makeover and a new partnership with first-party mobile data platform MFour.

The rollout began last year with the unveiling of a reporting and attribution dashboard. That’s one component of an evolving client portal that will include tools to activate each step of a campaign including strategy decks, buy grids, production reports, proof of performance, contracts and billing.

Project X CEO John Laramie says the rollout will continue through the first half of this year.

But a number of clients have already integrated first-party data into the suite to monitor sales lift market by market. “That’s something we believe will be massively critical as brands start to ramp up spending as cities re-open” post pandemic, says Laramie.

He’s reluctant to identify by name clients utilizing the first-party data tools in the portal but says one of them is a “"a large, publicly traded payments company.” The agency is working with a number of data providers to power its analytics platform including MFour and Geopath.

“We all know COVID changed a lot and its impact on OOH has been tremendous,” Laramie says. “Advertisers need speed and partners that use tech to be smarter, faster and more effective. I challenge every OOH advertiser to ask themselves if their current specialist’s technology is built for the future.”

The brand makeover work was done in-house and includes a refreshed look and new logo, a signal to the world, Laramie says that “coming out of 2020 we are moving forward.”