Now through the end of the year is prime streaming time on Roku, with viewers spending 3.5 hours each day streaming content and shopping online. Roku Ads Manager simplifies campaign setup, lets you segment audiences, and provides real-time reporting. And, you can test creative variants and run shoppable ads to drive purchases directly on-screen.

Bonus: we’re gifting you $5K in ad credits when you spend your first $5K on Roku Ads Manager. Just sign up and use code GET5K. Terms apply.

Use code GET5K now

It’s the week before Christmas, and the ad industry is ripping open the wrong kind of gifts: layoffs, lawsuits, measurement chaos, and enough buzzwords to choke a boardroom. Apple wants to jam more ads into your app search results and pretend it’s charity. Mozilla thinks it can save Firefox with voicebots. The Trade Desk is laying people off while insisting everything’s fine. Lionsgate just discovered what a CPM is. And Netflix is trying to buy its way past YouTube, which is quietly steamrolling everyone.

Meanwhile, the IAB is begging for transparency like it’s 2015 again, while Viant and iHeartMedia are trying to wrap radio and podcasts in one tidy programmatic bow. Even ad holding companies are playing musical chairs — Omnicom and IPG merged to form a $25 billion Franken-agency with fewer people and, somehow, even less creativity.

It’s all part of one ugly truth: the industry is burning its old playbooks, sprinting toward automation, and praying it still has a soul when the dust settles. Let’s get into it.

Starting in early 2026, Apple’s turning your App Store search into a digital strip mall. Ads won’t just sit at the top anymore — now they’ll be peppered throughout your scroll like banner rot. You don’t choose where your ad lands. Apple does. You don’t opt in. You’re already in.

And the spin? “We’re helping developers.” No — you’re helping Apple squeeze more money out of the ecosystem it already dominates. It’s a masterclass in platform tax 2.0. The App Store is a toll road now — and every tap pays the toll.

Mozilla’s new CEO Anthony Enzor-DeMeo has a vision: turn Firefox into an AI-first browser and pray it matters. With 80% of revenue still tied to dying search dollars, he’s betting big on “AI-native” interfaces — chat, voice, and whatever buzzwords are still lying around.

But here’s the problem: Mozilla wants to be your privacy BFF and your AI concierge. Good luck threading that needle. The AI wars are already stacked with giants, and Firefox is barely keeping its head above Safari. Bold plan. Terrible odds.

Lionsgate just tapped FreeWheel to run its ad operations — because building in-house was “exactly what we didn’t want.” Translation: we don’t know how this works and would prefer not to learn. Their FAST channels are getting real viewership, but CPMs are limp, so now they’re trying to prove they’re “premium.”

The strategy? Let FreeWheel do all the grown-up stuff while Lionsgate figures out whether “The Conners” reruns can fund another John Wick movie. It’s baby’s first ad stack — and honestly, it’s the most Hollywood thing ever.

The Trade Desk laid off about 1% of staff — but don’t worry, they hired “dozens” of execs this year! This latest “reorg” comes on the heels of last December’s Big Bang Restructure and TTD’s first-ever earnings miss. CEO Jeff Green says it’s all part of evolving with the ad tech environment. You know, like sharks do when there’s blood in the water.

Let’s call it what it is: The Trade Desk is feeling the squeeze from Google and Amazon, and it’s trimming fat before investors start asking real questions. One percent may be a rounding error — but in a company this cocky, even a ripple says something.

Nielsen’s new Big Data + Panel ratings system is giving the Video Advertising Bureau serious whiplash — with audience numbers swinging 20%, 50%, even 75% from week to week. Especially among 18–34s, where the variances look less like measurement and more like a slot machine.

Nielsen, for its part, responded with a classic “you’re doing it wrong.” Meanwhile, the VAB is screaming that billions in ad dollars are riding on numbers no one can trust. Call it what it is: a measurement meltdown in a market already losing its grip on TV attention. Just in time for upfronts!

Netflix wants to scoop up HBO and friends, but even with that stack, they’ll still be behind YouTube. Greg Peters admitted it himself: they’d go from 8% to 9% of TV watch time — still shy of YouTube’s 13%. In other words, YouTube is the streaming Goliath no one saw coming, because it came dressed as an app for music videos and ASMR.

This isn’t just about content anymore. It’s about default behavior. YouTube wins when users are bored, undecided, or just plain lazy. Netflix has a library. YouTube has a habit.

Former Tinuiti exec Jesse Eisenberg is now running StreetTalk — the agency formerly known as 203 Media and currently known for man-on-the-street content that doesn’t reek of ChatGPT or mid-journey stock people. With brands like Dr. Squatch and NOBS in tow, StreetTalk is pushing its “Conversation Creative” as the antidote to AI-generated garbage and influencer rot.

The pitch? Real humans, unscripted questions, authentic awkwardness. Eisenberg’s betting big that marketers are tired of synthetic slickness. And let’s be honest: if one more ad starts with “We asked AI to explain shampoo,” we riot.

The Omnicom-IPG merger is official, and along with it comes the usual bloodbath: 4,000 jobs gone, legacy brands retired, and a whole lot of consolidation jargon. The industry’s loudest warning signs about holding companies turning into media math factories just got an all-caps confirmation.

This is advertising in 2025: less soul, more scale. Less culture, more dashboards. The future may be programmatic, but it’s also depressingly efficient.

Viant is teaming up with iHeartMedia to push programmatic audio across broadcast, streaming, and podcasts, all in one DSP. It’s a big move, and probably a smart one: radio still has reach, podcasts have cred, and streaming has the Gen Zs.

This move makes sense — audio has been the under-monetized golden child of digital for years. Now, it’s finally getting the data-driven upgrade marketers demand. If only someone could make attribution in audio suck less, we’d really be cooking.

The IAB Tech Lab dropped its new Deals API v1.0, and while it sounds like another dry spec doc, it could actually fix a lot of dumb stuff. Right now, deal sync is a nightmare, with mismatched entries, under-delivery, and mystery middlemen everywhere.

This API brings clarity, consistency, and actual accountability to private marketplace deals. Less guessing, more knowing who’s selling what, and how. It’s a small step for code, a giant leap for anyone who’s ever screamed into the void about misfired PMPs.

Every few years, the television business convinces itself that this time measurement will finally catch up to reality. Bigger samples. Smarter models. Fewer arguments in conference rooms with bad coffee.

And every few years, reality responds by laughing quietly and lighting a match.

That’s where we are now with Nielsen’s Big Data + Panel (BD+P) currency. The numbers are swinging. Guarantees are wobbling. And suddenly, a trade group most of the industry hasn’t thought about in years is at the center of a very loud fight.

Which means we should probably explain who they are before pretending this is a purely technical disagreement.

The Video Advertising Bureau is a small, legacy trade group whose mission is to promote broadcast and cable television advertising. Not streaming as a behavior. Not creators. Not platforms.

Traditional, premium, scheduled television.

If the IAB exists to wrangle the chaos of digital advertising, the VAB exists to reassure advertisers that TV is still special. lol

It doesn’t set standards. It doesn’t build infrastructure. It doesn’t shape how buying systems work. It publishes research, narratives, and confidence-building materials designed to keep big brand dollars flowing into linear and cable.

That’s why much of the modern ad industry hasn’t heard of it.

The VAB lives closer to the upfront calendar than the product roadmap. You don’t encounter it in programmatic plumbing or identity debates.

You encounter it when ratings start threatening revenue.

Nielsen’s BD+P currency, which combines a traditional panel with massive household-level big data, is now the endorsed currency heading into the 2025–26 upfronts. Panel-only ratings are being phased out as a standalone option.

The promise was straightforward:
more scale,

more stability,

better demographic fidelity.

What the industry is experiencing instead feels like turbulence.

Especially in younger demos, week-to-week audience delivery is swinging wildly compared to the old panel-only system. And when a currency moves like that, the question stops being “is this accurate?” and becomes “who pays when it doesn’t line up?”

That’s where the VAB enters the chat.

The VAB analyzed four weeks of Nielsen data comparing BD+P versus panel-only across 33 broadcast and cable networks and six demos: HH, P2+, 18–34, 18–49, 25–54, and 55+.

Their findings were framed to land hard:

Even live NFL games, long treated as the most stable measurement anchor in TV, showed double-digit swings across a meaningful portion of hours.

The VAB’s conclusion is intentionally stark:
the new currency is unstable, unpredictable, and decimating key buying demos.

That language isn’t accidental. It’s not meant to invite nuance. It’s meant to force a reckoning around guarantees, makegoods, and revenue pressure at exactly the moment deals are being locked.

Nielsen’s response has been consistent, pointed, and unapologetic. According to Nielsen, the VAB report is “seriously flawed and manipulated.”

Their main arguments:

On paper, BD+P is positioned as an upgrade:
a ~43,000-person panel combined with data from ~45 million households, modeled together using Nielsen’s HDAM system to assign person-level demographics. The methodology received MRC accreditation in early 2025, clearing a baseline bar for use.

Privately, buyers say accreditation doesn’t magically make a currency predictable enough to underwrite billions in guarantees.

Several structural factors are colliding at once:

The VAB argues that Nielsen is still overweighting the panel relative to the big-data feed, skewing results toward older demos and depressing 25–54. Nielsen counters that the panel is essential for demo accuracy. Both can be true, and that tension shows up as volatility.

Young demos rely heavily on modeled demographic assignment. Small shifts in assumptions can create large swings even when total viewing doesn’t change much. Nielsen says HDAM isn’t driving major differences. The VAB says it is. The market experiences the outcome either way.

Guarantees were set under one system and are now being reconciled against another. Even stable consumer behavior can look like underdelivery when the measurement logic changes underneath it.

The result is numbers that feel less like a steady gauge and more like a slot machine with a governance committee.

BD+P just became the endorsed currency as the industry heads into upfront negotiations. Panel-only is fading. There isn’t a clean fallback.

Publishers are reporting 18%–30% declines in 25–54 under BD+P versus prior panel-only years. That translates directly into:

Everyone is committed.
No one fully trusts the numbers.
No one can walk away mid-cycle.

This is how public fights replace private negotiations.

TV has always traded on structured compromise, not pure truth. Nielsen remains central not because everyone believes the numbers, but because everyone needs one number to keep the machine running.

Hybrid measurement was supposed to be the escape hatch from panel-era limitations. Instead, it exposed new layers of model risk exactly where the stakes are highest: NFL, 18–49, 25–54.

Alternative currencies are circling. Experiments are underway. But none have displaced Nielsen as the lingua franca for national guarantees.

So the industry keeps moving forward with a currency it debates in public and negotiates around in private.

The VAB is probably right that something is off, especially in younger demos.
Nielsen is probably right that the VAB’s analysis has technical weaknesses.

That overlap is the story.

Because when your numbers swing 50% to 75% week to week, you’re no longer arguing about measurement philosophy.
You’re arguing about who absorbs the financial risk.

And right now, that risk is being quietly passed around like a hot plate everyone pretends isn’t still burning.

Stay Bold, Stay Curious, and Know More than You Did Yesterday.

Behind the paywall is the part everyone actually cares about: the receipts, the whispered-over-latte power plays, the charts that make CMOs sweat, and the stuff PR teams wish you’d stop noticing. If the free feed is the trailer, ADOTAT+ is the director’s cut where the knives come out and the plot twists finally make sense.

Stay Bold, Stay Curious, and Know More than You Did Yesterday.