FT社評(píng)：廣告主向Facebook和谷歌發(fā)出挑戰(zhàn)

US tech groups already face fierce scrutiny of their impact on society, from politicians and consumer advocates, activist investors and their own former employees. Now some of their biggest customers are stepping up criticism of a digital ad market dominated by Google and Facebook. Unilever, one of the world’s largest marketing spenders, is threatening to pull its ads from digital platforms if they “create division”, foster hate or fail to protect children.

美國(guó)科技集團(tuán)對(duì)社會(huì)的影響已受到從政界人士到消費(fèi)者權(quán)益保護(hù)者、維權(quán)投資者以及它們自己的前雇員等各界人士的密切審視。現(xiàn)在，它們的一些大客戶正在嚴(yán)厲批評(píng)由谷歌(Google)和Facebook主導(dǎo)的數(shù)字廣告市場(chǎng)。全球最大的營(yíng)銷支出者之一聯(lián)合利華(Unilever)威脅稱，如果數(shù)字平臺(tái)“制造分裂”、助長(zhǎng)仇恨或未能保護(hù)兒童，就會(huì)將其廣告撤下。

It is not the first time Keith Weed, Unilever’s chief marketing officer, has criticised what he calls the “murky” world of digital media. In the past, he focused on the tech platforms’ lack of transparency over data and metrics, pressing them to make sure ads were being viewed by real people. The crucial issue now, he argues, is whether consumers trust what they see online, given concerns about fake news, election meddling, trolling and the platforms’ failures to police content that glorifies terrorism or exploits children.

這并不是聯(lián)合利華的首席營(yíng)銷官基思•威德(Keith Weed)第一次批評(píng)被其稱為“陰暗”的數(shù)字媒體世界。過(guò)去，他關(guān)注科技平臺(tái)在數(shù)據(jù)和衡量指標(biāo)方面缺乏透明度的問(wèn)題，敦促它們確保廣告被真人看到。他認(rèn)為，現(xiàn)在關(guān)鍵的問(wèn)題是，鑒于對(duì)假新聞、選舉干預(yù)、網(wǎng)絡(luò)噴子以及平臺(tái)未能管束那些宣揚(yáng)恐怖主義或剝削兒童的內(nèi)容的擔(dān)憂，消費(fèi)者是否信任他們?cè)诰W(wǎng)上看到的東西。

These are generally seen as ethical issues demanding a response in the form of regulation, such as Germany’s introduction of fines for companies that fail to remove hate speech or fake news. But from the advertisers’ point of view, it is a matter of quality control: the digital platforms promise that ads will appear next to appropriate content, and they have proved unable to ensure that this is always the case.

這些通常被視為道德問(wèn)題，需要以監(jiān)管手段作出回應(yīng)，例如德國(guó)出臺(tái)了對(duì)未能消除仇恨言論或假消息的公司處以罰款的規(guī)定。但從廣告主的角度來(lái)看，這是一個(gè)質(zhì)量控制問(wèn)題：數(shù)字平臺(tái)承諾廣告將出現(xiàn)在適當(dāng)內(nèi)容的旁邊，而事實(shí)證明它們無(wú)法確保始終做到這一點(diǎn)。

The tech groups are stepping up their efforts to police content, in response to growing public concern and the threat of regulation. However, they have in general been reluctant to accept responsibility or to take action that would entail any significant change to their business model. It is reasonably clear that they could do more, if it became a commercial imperative.

為了應(yīng)對(duì)日益增長(zhǎng)的公眾關(guān)注和監(jiān)管威脅，科技集團(tuán)正在加大努力監(jiān)督內(nèi)容。但是，它們一般不愿意承擔(dān)責(zé)任，或者采取將會(huì)導(dǎo)致其商業(yè)模式發(fā)生重大變化的行動(dòng)。顯然，如果商業(yè)上需要的話，他們就會(huì)做得更多。

YouTube’s experience last year illustrates this. The video site took a hit to its bottom line when big customers quit after ads appeared next to extremist content and videos featuring children and explicit comments. YouTube is now hiring more people to review where ads run and take down unacceptable content. But it has been more hesitant about rule changes that could anger its creator community.

YouTube去年的經(jīng)歷就說(shuō)明了這一點(diǎn)。當(dāng)廣告出現(xiàn)在極端主義內(nèi)容和包含露骨評(píng)論的兒童視頻旁邊的時(shí)候，大客戶撤出，這家視頻網(wǎng)站的利潤(rùn)大幅下降。YouTube現(xiàn)在正在招聘更多人手來(lái)審查廣告的投放位置，并刪除不可接受的內(nèi)容。但是，對(duì)于可能激怒其創(chuàng)作者群體的規(guī)則修改，它表現(xiàn)得更加猶豫不決。

However, YouTube is trying to fix a relatively clear-cut problem. Advertisers are voicing a much broader concern: that consumers increasingly dislike digital advertising and do not trust it. Hence a call from some of the UK’s biggest advertisers for tech platforms to set up an independent body to enforce common standards on content.

不過(guò)YouTube正試圖解決一個(gè)相對(duì)明顯的問(wèn)題。廣告主表達(dá)了一種更廣泛的擔(dān)憂：消費(fèi)者越來(lái)越不喜歡數(shù)字廣告，也不相信這類廣告。因此，英國(guó)一些大型廣告主向科技平臺(tái)發(fā)出呼吁，要求成立一個(gè)獨(dú)立組織，以實(shí)施一套行業(yè)通用的內(nèi)容標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

Pressure from advertisers will only go so far, though. At this stage, Unilever and those who share its frustrations still have no realistic alternative.

然而，來(lái)自廣告主的壓力也只能起到這樣的作用。在現(xiàn)階段，聯(lián)合利華和其他同樣感到失望的公司沒(méi)有其他現(xiàn)實(shí)選擇。

The latest results from Twitter and Snapchat have done something to revive sagging hopes that they might provide competition for the Google/Facebook duopoly in the long term. Snap presents itself as a safer environment through its offer of curated news. Advertisers will do what they can to foster this nascent competition. They will also seek to work with Amazon. More product searches already take place on Amazon than Google, and the ecommerce company is now looking to push deeper into online advertising.

Twitter和Snapchat的最新財(cái)報(bào)在一定程度上有助于讓人們重燃希望：長(zhǎng)期而言，它們可能會(huì)給谷歌和Facebook雙頭壟斷的局面注入競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。Snap通過(guò)提供經(jīng)過(guò)精選的新聞?wù)故境鲎约旱母踩h(huán)境。廣告主將會(huì)盡其所能地培育這種新出現(xiàn)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。它們還將尋求與亞馬遜(Amazon)合作。亞馬遜平臺(tái)上的產(chǎn)品搜索已超過(guò)谷歌，這家電商公司還考慮更深入地開拓在線廣告業(yè)務(wù)。

But the others are still minnows next to the Facebook and Google duopoly — which was set to attract more than 80 per cent of global spending on digital advertising outside China last year. With hindsight, Google’s 2008 acquisition of DoubleClick, the automated ad exchange, was a defining moment, underpinning Google’s dominance in the sale of display ads. Competition authorities, who approved the acquisition, now need to be sure the duopoly is working in consumers’ interests.

但其他公司的實(shí)力仍遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)無(wú)法撼動(dòng)Facebook和谷歌的雙寡頭壟斷——去年，不包含中國(guó)地區(qū)，這兩家公司估計(jì)吸引了超過(guò)80%的全球數(shù)字廣告支出。現(xiàn)在看來(lái)，谷歌在2008年收購(gòu)自動(dòng)廣告交換平臺(tái)DoubleClick是一個(gè)分水嶺，鞏固了谷歌在銷售“產(chǎn)品顯示廣告”方面的主導(dǎo)地位。當(dāng)年批準(zhǔn)這筆收購(gòu)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)當(dāng)局現(xiàn)在需要確保這對(duì)寡頭的行為符合消費(fèi)者的利益。