Recap for the Public Masses, Now With Extra Mold🗓 Originally published as an ADOTAT+ exclusive two months ago. Now, we’re summarizing it for everyone brave enough to look under the hood.
Once upon a time, the SSP — that’s Supply-Side Platform for those still pretending not to be complicit — was sold as the magical fix for digital advertising.
Transparent! Automated! Democratic!
It would elevate premium publishers! Connect buyers to quality! Usher in a golden age of programmatic purity!
Spoiler: none of that happened.
What we got instead is a Frankenstack of fraud, curated PMP fairy tales, and banner ads infested with more malware than a LimeWire download circa 2005. The supply chain is now a chain of grift — where your ad dollar gets sliced thinner than a Lox special at a deli with overhead problems.
And the kicker? Media buyers still show up like it’s opening night at Lincoln Center. They’re buying theater:
🎭 Fake stage
🪑 Fake audience
☁️ Fog machine powered by shiny dashboards and made-up metrics
Ask a buyer which SSPs their DSP is routing through. You’ll get a blank stare, maybe a nervous chuckle. Push harder, and they’ll offer you a PDF with a hundred acronyms and the phrase “brand safe” slapped over a domain last registered in Moldova.
Let’s not pretend anymore:
SSP-H, as detailed in Confiant’s MAQ Index, is a radioactive trash fire.
It’s serving malware, forced redirects, cloaked scam ads — all while wearing a bowtie labeled “curated.”
Everyone knows who it is. No one wants to say it. (We do. Inside ADOTAT+.)
Meanwhile, in an actual plot twist, OpenX is trying to be clean.
They’re cutting shady CTV inventory.
They’re ditching spoofed resellers.
They’re even building tools that let buyers see what they’re actually buying.
In ad tech, that’s like a used car dealer offering a Carfax without being asked.
So, if you're still trusting dashboards that sparkle more than they inform, odds are you’re buying MFA sludge, cookie-stuffed garbage, and impressions that would fail a CAPTCHA.
Want the names? Want the receipts? Want the playbook?
Then you should’ve been here two months ago.
But lucky you — we’re giving you this taste.
Decoding the SSP Hall of Shame: Who's Selling the Rot in Programmatic? 🗓 Originally published in ADOTAT+ two months ago. Today, we bring the data to daylight.
If Part 1 told you the programmatic supply chain is rotten, Part 2 shows you exactly who’s spoiling the barrel.
At the center of the stench is Confiant’s MAQ Index — a comprehensive report that tracks malvertising, ad quality violations, and security threats across dozens of SSPs. And while the index stops short of naming names, it gives us just enough data to identify the worst offenders. Codename style.
Let’s decode the hall of shame.
🔍 SSP-H: The Radioactive Disaster
Security Violation Rate: 0.29% (tied for worst)
Daily Peak Violation: 11.45% (May 14, 2024)
Quality Violation Rate: 2.44% (highest in index)
Response Time: Abysmal
Threat Types: ScamClub, malware-laced redirects, fake downloads
Regions Hit: U.S., Spain, Italy
🕵️ Likely Identity: Magnite
Why?
Magnite has long struggled with indirect inventory and video VPAID abuse.
Conclusion: SSP-H is the ecosystem’s worst performer. If you're running through this pipe, you're either unaware or in denial.
🤡 SSP-O: The Quiet Co-Conspirator
Security Violation Rate: 0.29%
Peak Day: 3.11% (May 17, 2024)
Threat Types: Cloaked investment scams, auto-play video, scam overlays
Response Time: Better than SSP-H, but still problematic
Regions Hit: Czechia, Denmark, pan-Europe
🕵️ Likely Identity: PubMatic or Media Dot Net
Why?PubMatic’s footprint in resold video and lack of true curation makes it a suspect. Media.net’s scale and history of being tied to long-tail, low-quality contextual placements earns it a spot in this lineup.
Conclusion: SSP-O is the platform that wrecks your weekend and then gaslights you about it on Monday.
🌟 SSP-F: The Lone Bright Spot
Security Violation Rate: 0.005%
Quality Violation Rate: 0.05%
Response Time: Fastest in the index
Threat Mitigation: Cloaking, ScamClub, heavy ads — all actively filtered
🕵️ Identity Match: OpenX
OpenX’s transformation isn’t PR fluff — the numbers back it up. After being sanctioned by the FTC in 2019, they’ve invested heavily in fraud prevention, identity infrastructure, and real-time filtering. Today, they’re reaping the benefits of a cleaned-up exchange.
Conclusion: SSP-F isn’t just better — it’s arguably the only SSP in the report that deserves to be in a media plan without caveats.
🔒 The Anonymization Loophole
Here’s the dirty little secret: by using codenames like “SSP-H” and “SSP-O,” the industry avoids accountability.
Advertisers don’t blacklist bad actors because they don’t know who they are — and many verification firms don’t want to trigger lawsuits or alienate data partners.
Result? Platforms with double-digit malware rates still get seats at the RFP table.
💰 Why Bad Actors Still Win
Even with high violation rates, scale trumps scrutiny in programmatic. SSPs that flood the pipes with “cheap reach” continue to receive spend because:
DSPs prioritize bid density over quality
Agencies optimize for CPMs, not user experience
Brands rarely audit pipes unless forced
And of course, rebates and private deal incentives don’t hurt.
📊 TL;DR – Who’s Who in the Confiant Hall of Shame
SSP Code | Likely Identity | Risk Level | Key Offenses |
|---|---|---|---|
SSP-H | Magnite | 🚨 Extreme | Malware, redirects, worst quality in the entire index |
SSP-O |
| ⚠️ High Risk | Cloaked scams, autoplay video, long-tail junk |
SSP-F | OpenX | ✅ Best-in-Class | Cleanest inventory, fastest response, real transparency |
Want the full MAQ breakdown, charts, and publisher-side response tactics?
That’s in the ADOTAT+ archives. This is just the topsoil — the roots of the rot go deeper.
🚨 Correction (Yeah, Turns Out I Was Wrong This Time)
Well, color me surprised and consider this my official mea culpa.
In today’s ADOTAT+ article dissecting the MAQ Index and naming names, I incorrectly tagged PubMatic as SSP-O in Confiant’s report. That’s on me. Turns out, according to fresh receipts shared directly from Confiant, PubMatic is—and has always been—SSP-G, one of the top-performing SSPs on the index.
How good? Try this:
0.006% violation rate on security (that’s basically zero)
0.59% violation rate on quality (still elite status)
So no, PubMatic isn’t part of the SSP rogues gallery this time. Quite the opposite—they’re topping the charts.
Consider the record corrected. And yes, I’ll even eat that crow with a nice Chianti.
Stay Bold, Stay Curious, and Know More than You Did Yesterday.
—Pesach Lattin, Editor, ADOTAT
📱 UX or Die — Fewer Ads, More Revenue: The New Math of Monetization 🗓 Originally released to ADOTAT+ subscribers. We're now sharing it publicly — because some of you still think fill rate is a flex.
Let’s get one thing straight: fill rate is dead.
Not sick. Not struggling. Dead.
We’re in a post-fill-rate economy, and the publishers still chasing 100% like it’s 2013 are leaving real money — and real users — on the table.
The new currency?
Time-in-view. Scroll depth. qCPM. UX metrics that actually reflect attention, not just noise.
🥩 UX Isn’t Garnish — It’s the Main Course
Once upon a time, publishers treated UX like parsley on a steak — a decorative afterthought.
That era is over. Now, user experience is the product, and it directly correlates to ad revenue.
Junk layouts kill engagement, viewability, and loyalty.
Clean, intentional design improves every metric that matters.
Translation?
You don’t need more ads. You need better ads in better environments.
📚 Case Studies: The Smart Kids in the Room
🧼 Dotdash Meredith ripped out autoplay garbage, cleaned up clutter, and leaned into AI-powered contextual targeting. Result? Strong CPMs, higher time-on-site, and fewer user exits.
📰 The Telegraph invested in attention-based metrics and saw premium pricing rise — not from volume, but value. Advertisers want engagement, not just impressions.
📈 Freestar reduced ad density across partners and watched bounce rates drop while session lengths and CPMs climbed. In one case, a 40% cut in ad slots led to a 28% increase in traffic. Yes, less led to more.
🗣 Vox Media redesigned for simplicity, saw a 40% jump in premium revenue, and finally made their pages feel like 2025, not a 2009 Craigslist experiment.
🧠 DSPs Are Watching — And Judging
Here’s the part many publishers still don’t realize:
DSPs and buyers are now algorithmically scoring your site based on UX.
They’re tracking:
Time-on-site
Scroll depth
Viewability
Ad density
Page speed
Bounce rates
Bad scores = lower bids.
Great UX = premium pricing.
Your layout is no longer a matter of taste — it’s a financial signal.
🛠 Bonus Playbook: Monetization That Doesn’t Alienate Users
💡 Ad Layout Templates
Mobile (2-slot strategy): Top banner + mid-article rectangle. Stickies optional — only if they behave.
Desktop: Fewer, bigger units. 300x600 sidebar, in-article every 3–4 paragraphs, no content collisions.
Do not load 5+ ads above the fold. Ever.
📊 Top Tools
Hotjar/CrazyEgg – see where users rage-click and bounce
Google Lighthouse – audit your own mess
DeepSee, Moat, IAS – quantify attention and quality
Prebid/TAM – streamline header bidding chaos
GA4 – map UX to monetization in real time
📋 Interview Questions for Your Monetization Partner
“How do you handle sticky refresh logic?”
“Can I see RPM by placement, not just average?”
“What’s your ad density target by device?”
“Which SSPs do you block — and why?”
If they squirm, you’ve got your answer.
📌 Final Dashboard Tips & Publisher Cheat Sheet
✅ Set up a dashboard that tracks:
Viewability vs. scroll depth
RPM per ad slot
Page speed vs. bounce rate
Layout changes vs. revenue
🧹 Run site audits monthly.
📉 Kill underperforming placements.
📱 Prioritize mobile UX.
🔁 A/B test layouts quarterly.
🏁 TL;DR: Want to Avoid Becoming SSP-H?
Then stop treating your site like an ad slot buffet.
Your readers aren't dollar signs — they’re your product.
Want higher CPMs, better brand demand, and fewer headaches?
Then clean up. Or get cleaned out.
Because buyers have already started ghosting the junkyards.
And if you’re not optimizing for attention, you’re optimizing for abandonment.
👉 Want the full tactical monetization checklist?
Still locked inside ADOTAT+ — for those ready to treat UX like revenue strategy, not decorative fluff.