📢 Welcome to another week in the beautiful chaos that is adtech. Meta is rolling out yet another AI-powered chatbot (because that’s never gone wrong before), WPP is trying to convince investors that AI will magically fix their revenue slump, and Elon Musk is out here treating ad budgets like a pay-to-play scheme for corporate survival. Meanwhile, publishers are still living in fear of the MFA blacklist boogeyman, influencers are getting way too political for brand safety teams, and South Australia is waging war on junk food ads. Buckle up. 🚀

👉 🤖 Meta’s Business AI wants to be your new customer service rep. It scrapes your existing content and even handwritten notes to answer customer questions—because nothing says “cutting-edge AI” like training it on someone’s scribbled Post-it.

👉 📉 WPP’s Rough Year: Revenue dipped, China’s market tanked, and AI is their big distraction—I mean, strategy. Will it work, or are they just throwing buzzwords at investors?

👉 💰 The ‘Elon Tax’ is Real: Major brands are quietly crawling back to X, not because they want to, but because they fear the consequences of not spending. Brand safety? Who needs it when Musk is watching?

👉 📑 MFA Blacklist Panic: The Brand Safety Institute launched a tool so publishers can check if they’ve been secretly labeled MFA. Transparency? Sort of. Power games? Definitely.

👉 🎮 Influencers vs. Brands: Creators are getting way more political, and advertisers are sweating. The influencer marketing boom continues, but finding brand-safe voices is becoming impossible.

👉 🍔 South Australia Bans Junk Food Ads: No more billboards of greasy burgers on buses. Public health win? Maybe. A brutal loss for your cravings? Absolutely.

Will brands, publishers, and agencies finally get ahead of these shifts, or are we just watching another episode of "Adtech Chaos: The Never-Ending Series"?

Ready to embrace a new era of task delegation?

HubSpot’s highly anticipated AI Task Delegation Playbook is your key to supercharging your productivity and saving precious time.

Learn how to integrate AI into your own processes, allowing you to optimize your time and resources, while maximizing your output with ease.

Get the free guide here.

🔍 The Accusation:
Meta has unleashed its latest AI experiment, “Business AI,” an agentic chatbot designed to handle customer inquiries across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. It’s being marketed as a game-changer for small and midsize businesses, but let’s be real—AI-powered customer support has been around for years. So, is this really innovation, or just Meta slapping a new label on the same old chatbot playbook?

📜 The Evidence:
Business AI pulls from a brand’s existing social media content and whatever scraps of data it can ingest—including, hilariously, handwritten notes. It can handle customer questions, recommend products, and even process transactions. But brands are taking baby steps, using it mostly for “What are your hours?” rather than trusting it to close a sale. Meta, of course, promises 24/7 personalized service—because nothing says “personalized” like an algorithm.

⚠️ The Catch:
Meta’s AI track record is… let’s say, mixed. Remember that time its chatbot started arguing with itself? Or when AI moderation went rogue? Giving Meta’s AI direct control over customer interactions could lead to some interesting brand disasters. And let’s not forget that this system is feeding Meta’s already insatiable data machine.

🔥 The Big Question:
Will brands actually trust Meta’s AI to handle real customer interactions, or is this just another shiny toy for execs to play with before they inevitably realize humans are still better at customer service?

🎤 Industry Response:
So far, it’s mostly cautious optimism, with brands dipping their toes in but not diving headfirst. Meanwhile, customer service reps might want to start brushing up on their AI troubleshooting skills—because when the bot inevitably messes up, they’ll be the ones picking up the pieces.

🔍 The Accusation:
For publishers, being labeled as “Made for Advertising” (MFA) is like waking up with a scarlet letter on their homepage. One minute, they’re legit media sites, the next, they’re blacklisted faster than you can say “low-quality programmatic hellscape.” Enter the Brand Safety Institute’s new tool—a self-service MFA checkup. Because nothing screams transparency like publishers desperately trying to find out if they’ve been secretly shadowbanned.

📜 The Evidence:
This tool lets publishers see if they’ve landed on MFA blocklists used by ad verification firms. Companies like Integral Ad Science, Jounce Media, and Pixalate are on board. DoubleVerify? Not so much. Meanwhile, publishers have been left in the dark about why they’re flagged—sometimes for simply running Facebook traffic, like Black Enterprise in 2023.

⚠️ The Catch:
The tool is a step forward, but let’s be real—if verification firms can decide the fate of publishers behind closed doors, will this really fix the system? And what about agencies that blacklist first and ask questions never?

🔥 The Big Question:
Is this tool going to actually help publishers clear their names, or is it just a placebo to make the MFA police seem less like an unchecked cartel?

🎤 Industry Response:
Publishers are cautiously poking around, hoping to dodge revenue-killing flags. Meanwhile, ad tech firms are watching closely—because if too many legit sites are unfairly flagged, this whole MFA panic might start looking like a classic case of industry self-sabotage.

🔍 The Accusation:
Advertisers are feeling subtle pressure (read: outright coercion) to spend on X, aka Twitter, just to stay in the good graces of Elon Musk’s ever-expanding empire. Major brands that once bailed on X are quietly coming back, worried that not spending could mean political and regulatory backlash. Welcome to 2025, where ad dollars are now an insurance policy against Musk’s wrath.

📜 The Evidence:
Big spenders like Apple and Disney are back on X despite, well, no real improvements in brand safety. At the same time, reports claim that Musk’s team is pressuring agencies to push client dollars toward X—or else.

⚠️ The Catch:
X’s ad revenue is still circling the drain, and while high-engagement events might bring in advertisers, the long-term stability is questionable. If Musk keeps strong-arming ad buyers, how long before brands start looking for an exit—again?

🔥 The Big Question:
Are brands playing along to avoid political headaches, or do they genuinely see X as a must-buy ad channel again?

🎤 Industry Response:
Advertisers are grumbling but paying up. Agencies? Keeping receipts. And the rest of the industry? Watching Musk’s next move with popcorn in hand.

🔍 The Accusation:
WPP, one of the biggest ad giants, just reported a revenue drop and flat growth expectations for 2025. The culprit? Slashed client budgets, economic uncertainty, and tariffs making global operations more expensive.

📜 The Evidence:
Revenue dipped 0.7%, with China down 20.8%. The UK and US didn’t fare much better. Meanwhile, WPP is throwing its weight behind AI as the future—but let’s not forget, AI won’t make clients magically increase budgets.

⚠️ The Catch:
WPP’s AI push sounds exciting, but so far, it’s just marketing fluff. The real question is whether automation can actually drive efficiency or if it’s just another cost-cutting excuse.

🔥 The Big Question:
Is WPP’s AI pivot a genuine growth strategy, or is it a smokescreen for struggling ad sales?

🎤 Industry Response:
Investors aren’t buying it—literally. WPP’s stock took a nosedive, and competitors are eyeing its missteps as an opportunity.

🔍 The Accusation:
MNTN, the CTV ad platform with Ryan Reynolds as its hype man, is going public. The pitch? Ad tech + Hollywood star power = $$$. The risk? The ad tech graveyard is already littered with once-hot companies that fizzled post-IPO.

📜 The Evidence:
MNTN’s revenue hit $225.6M last year, up 28%, but it’s still losing money—$32.9M in net losses. Investors like BlackRock and Fidelity are backing it, but going public means scrutiny beyond Reynolds’ charm.

⚠️ The Catch:
Can MNTN keep up the growth, or is it riding the last wave of CTV hype before market saturation hits?

🔥 The Big Question:
Is this the start of a new CTV ad tech empire, or just another ad-funded Hollywood production that ends up flopping?

🎤 Industry Response:
Wall Street is intrigued, but skeptical. CTV insiders? Keeping tabs on whether MNTN can actually deliver post-IPO.

🔍 The Accusation:
The UK’s ad industry is booming, with digital advertising expected to account for a whopping 81% of all ad revenue in 2025. The traditional TV ad market? Circling the drain.

📜 The Evidence:
Revenue is projected to surpass £40B, growing 7%—faster than expected. Streaming ad revenue is climbing from 24% to 30%, while traditional TV keeps shrinking. Amazon, Google, and Meta are raking in the cash.

⚠️ The Catch:
An improving economy and lower interest rates are fueling the ad surge, but let’s not forget—this market is still heavily reliant on a few tech giants. If regulation or another recession hits, expect some turbulence.

🔥 The Big Question:
Is this sustainable growth, or just another bubble inflated by digital dominance?

🎤 Industry Response:
Ad execs are celebrating, broadcasters are panicking, and regulators? Probably drafting their next set of fines for Big Tech.

🔍 The Accusation:
Starting July 2025, South Australia will ban junk food ads on public transportation, aiming to curb childhood obesity. That means no more giant billboards for soda, candy, or greasy snacks on buses and trams.

📜 The Evidence:
Similar bans in London and Amsterdam reportedly reduced junk food consumption. But critics argue that ads alone aren’t causing obesity—convenience, pricing, and food availability play bigger roles.

⚠️ The Catch:
Advertisers will pivot. Junk food brands will just dump more money into digital ads, influencers, and sports sponsorships. The impact? Likely minimal.

🔥 The Big Question:
Will this actually change eating habits, or is it just a feel-good policy with little real effect?

🎤 Industry Response:
Health advocates love it. Ad execs are rolling their eyes. And marketers? Already planning their next workaround.

🔍 The Accusation:
Influencers are getting more vocal about politics, and it’s making brand partnerships a minefield. One wrong post, and advertisers could find themselves in the middle of a Twitter firestorm.

📜 The Evidence:
52% of consumers say they want influencers to talk politics, but brands? Not so much. Influencer marketing spend is expected to hit $9.29B in the US this year, but finding “brand-safe” creators is getting harder.

⚠️ The Catch:
Brands can’t avoid controversy forever. Consumers expect authenticity, and influencers aren’t going back to the days of neutral, vanilla content.

🔥 The Big Question:
Will brands adapt to this new reality, or will they keep trying (and failing) to find influencers with zero opinions?

🎤 Industry Response:
Agencies are scrambling. Brands are panicking. And influencers? Posting whatever they want—because engagement is engagement.