“Welcome to the Weekly Panic Attack, Brought to You by AdTech”

If you thought this week in advertising was going to be a calm stroll through transparency and innovation, you clearly haven’t been paying attention. Grab your overpriced cold brew and let’s take a journey through the funhouse mirror that is modern media — where facts are crowdsourced, AI is the intern with too many buzzwords on its resume, and curators are just middlemen with better lighting.

First up: X has officially declared war on journalism — because why hire reporters when you can let a mob with blue checks decide what's true? Linda Yaccarino is out here serving “global town square” energy while legacy media gets the guillotine treatment. Who needs accuracy when you’ve got vibes?

Then we swing over to Google, which finally remembered that advertisers like knowing where their money goes. Performance Max went from “just trust us” to “fine, here’s the data” like a teenager cornered with a browser history.

Meanwhile, Erez Levin lit a Molotov cocktail and tossed it straight into the Outcomes Era, reminding us that optimizing for instant gratification is a great way to kill long-term value — and possibly your entire career.

On deck: AI, the industry’s favorite buzzword-shaped piñata. Everyone’s swinging at it, hoping for candy, but so far we’ve just got confetti and a few broken KPIs.

And finally, curation on the sell side? Turns out it’s just the same ad tech tollbooth wearing a monocle and calling itself premium. Publishers were promised steak; they got the sizzle — and a bill for 14% margins.

This isn’t a news roundup. It’s a therapy session for everyone still pretending we know what the hell is going on.

Stay bold. Stay curious. And know more than you did yesterday — even if it hurts.

🚨 1. X Declares Legacy Media Dead — Because Why Fact-Check When You Can Crowdsource?

👀 What Just Happened: Linda Yaccarino, CEO of X, took to the stage at Possible Miami to double down on the platform's "anti-media" rebranding. Declaring X the “global town square,” she gleefully announced that the legacy media is dustier than your grandma’s attic and that X is the shiny disruptor Gen Z didn’t know it needed.

📎 Receipts, Please: According to Yaccarino, nearly 600 million monthly active users (MAUs) are flocking to X, and about a third are Gen Z, seduced by “authenticity” and flush with disposable income (to the tune of a projected $36 trillion by 2024). And apparently, 65% of these users now claim X as their primary news source—though how seriously we should take self-reported stats remains TBD.

🎯 The Plot Twist: This pivot marks a clear break from Twitter’s original pitch as the media’s best friend—a go-to source for reliable news and trusted journalism. Under Musk, X is ditching its moderation and credibility training wheels, betting that users can collectively fact-check better than actual journalists.

🤨 Wait, What? So X has thrown out automated moderation, replaced it with "Community Notes" crowd-sourcing, and is declaring victory because Meta and TikTok followed its lead? This isn’t content moderation—it’s crowdsourced chaos with a logo slapped on it.

🔥 TL;DR: Journalism is so 2023. Why have reporters when you can outsource fact-checking to a million random strangers?

🗣️ Industry Gossip: Advertisers want brand safety assurances, but instead, they’re getting TED talks about “authenticity.” Expect a lot of nervous laughter and quiet panic from agency folks wondering if their next deal with X lands them in the news or in court.

🚨 2. Google Finally Opens the Kimono on Performance Max — Advertisers Get Real Answers

🎬 The Big Reveal: Google has rolled out detailed asset-level and full search-term reporting within Performance Max. Advertisers can now pinpoint exactly where their budgets are landing, how each channel (Search, YouTube, Gmail, etc.) performs, and even why certain apps aren't pulling their weight. Because transparency is apparently cool again.

🗂️ The Receipts: Google is providing granular data on clicks, impressions, conversion values, and spend per channel and ad format. In other words, marketers are getting a roadmap for where their dollars actually make sense—and where they're just lighting cash on fire.

🔄 Reality Check: This transparency move follows over 90 improvements last year alone, which Google claims boosted conversions by over 10%. Translation: marketers finally have reasons to trust Performance Max beyond Google’s usual “just believe us” narrative.

🙋 Quick Question: Is Google finally admitting advertisers deserve clarity? Or is this just damage control after years of opacity and black-box complaints?

🔥 Bottom Line: Performance Max is now giving marketers detailed insights—finally turning Google’s "trust us" into "see for yourself."

💬 Street Reaction: Advertisers are cautiously thrilled, agencies relieved, and skeptics slightly less skeptical—but everyone’s wondering why this took so long.

🚨 3. Ad Industry Realizes Outcomes Obsession Was a Terrible Mistake — Levin Calls BS

🗣️ Shots Fired: Angry Industry veteran Erez Levin went on AdExchanger Talks and blasted digital advertising’s “Outcomes Era,” claiming the obsession with immediate conversions has misled marketers into chasing short-term results at the expense of actual impact.

🔎 The Evidence Stack: Levin says Google’s recent monopoly ruling and repeated cookie-policy flip-flops underscore the problem. Marketers chasing attribution are repeatedly being played, with Big Tech continually rewriting the rules mid-game.

🔀 Plot Twist: After years of riding the attribution wave, Google and Meta themselves seem to be backing off, releasing open-source MMM tools and admitting that attribution might not actually, you know, work.

🙄 Awkward Question: Why did it take a literal antitrust ruling and multiple cookie fiascos for the industry to wake up and smell the manipulation?

🔥 Short Version: The Outcomes Era is officially in trouble—turns out, optimizing purely for conversions might have been a disaster after all.

💬 Market Buzz: Advertisers are starting to rethink their attribution obsession. Publishers, meanwhile, are shouting, "We told you so!" from rooftops everywhere.

🚨 4. AI Is the Industry’s Favorite Buzzword — Too Bad No One Knows What It’s Doing

📢 Here’s the Deal: Angelina Eng from the IAB has called out the digital ad industry’s AI obsession, pointing out that despite AI being "everywhere," nobody can clearly explain what success looks like or how it ties back to actual business outcomes.

📉 The Sad Reality: Brands, agencies, and publishers are rushing to slap "AI-powered" labels onto everything from dynamic creative to measurement tools—yet the ROI remains murky at best.

🤷 Truth Bomb: Operations teams report incremental improvements (faster briefs, quicker recaps), but no one's sure if this incrementalism equals actual strategic value or just technological busywork.

🙋‍♀️ Can Someone Explain? Does anyone really have an AI strategy beyond "use AI to look smarter"? Asking for an entire industry.

🔥 The TL;DR: AI’s potential is real—but so is the industry’s complete confusion about how, why, or where to meaningfully use it.

💬 Industry Gossip: Behind closed doors, execs admit they're drowning in flashy AI demos and wondering when actual measurable benefits will surface.

🚨 5. Publishers Wake Up to Harsh Reality — Sell-Side Curation is Still Ad-Tech Middlemen

🎯 The Hard Truth: A new report from Jounce Media reveals that despite the sell-side curation hype, publishers aren't seeing much improvement in revenue. Turns out, these new “curation” fees are just the same old ad-tech taxes under a shiny new label.

📊 What the Data Says: Only 18.6% of programmatic deals remain open auction, with the rest mostly multi-seller curated deals—where publishers have zero transparency and no guarantee of long-term revenue.

🔄 The Ugly Surprise: Curators are taking sizable margins (median of 14%), meaning publishers end up no better off than they were with DSP-curated deals. Shocker.

🤨 Awkward Moment: Weren’t publishers promised greater control and better margins? Funny how those promises disappeared faster than open auction inventory.

🔥 Quick Takeaway: Sell-side curation promised publishers a bigger slice of pie, but it turns out everyone else is still eating first.

💬 Street Sentiment: Publishers are frustrated but resigned—because ad tech gonna ad tech.

🚨 Sell-Side Curation: Ad Tech’s Latest Hustle in Disguise

Ad tech, you sly beast. Just when we thought we'd seen every trick up your sleeve, you've rolled out "sell-side curation"—a fancy phrase for the same ol' hustle dressed up in new jargon. But a recent Jounce Media report has finally spilled the tea, exposing that this emperor truly has no clothes. (Surprise, surprise.)

Here’s what they found—and spoiler alert: it's not pretty.

🔍 Key Findings (or: The Tea, Served Hot)

• Revenue Stagnation: Publishers were promised shiny new profits and greater control. Instead, they're stuck in a Groundhog Day of diminishing returns. So-called "curation fees" are basically old-school ad-tech taxes in disguise.

• Multi-Seller Monopoly: A staggering 81.4% of programmatic deals now fall under multi-seller curated arrangements. Publishers remain trapped in opaque relationships without clear revenue boosts or transparency.

• Middlemen Still Feasting: Curators snatch up a median 14% margin, identical to those infamous DSP-curated deals. Publishers? Still hungry.

🤔 Why Sell-Side Curation Imploded (A Tale as Old as Ad Tech)

• Fees: New Name, Same Game: Publishers were sold a dream but delivered the same nightmare—high fees, minimal control, zero accountability.

• Transparency Black Hole: Publishers remain blindfolded, unable to audit demand sources or verify actual fees. Hello, distrust, my old friend.

• Ad Tech’s Power Imbalance: SSPs and curators keep all the leverage, ensuring their margins are untouched, while publishers remain begging for scraps.

💡 Implications for Publishers (Or: Welcome Back to Reality)

• False Advertising: The sell-side curation promise diverted publishers from tackling foundational issues like auction dynamics and rampant fee stacking.

• Resignation Nation: Frustration is sky-high, but publishers feel powerless, stuck in a system blatantly rigged for middlemen.

• Time for a Wake-Up Call: Publishers need concrete transparency standards—or ad-tech’s “innovations” will keep them spinning in place.

🚀 What’s Next? (Because Hope Springs Eternal)
Publishers, listen up. Here's your new playbook:

• Demand Real Accountability: It's time to demand auditable fee structures and contractually guaranteed curation margins.

• Diversify Away from Middlemen: Experiment with private marketplaces (PMPs), first-party data strategies, or direct sales to break the toxic cycle.

• Unite or Lose: Collective advocacy—think the EU’s digital regulation playbook—could finally pressure SSPs and curators into real transparency.

🔥 The Big Picture (Or: Ad Tech’s Endless Jargon Loop)
Sell-side curation isn’t innovation; it's just "innovation theater"—a smoke-and-mirrors act recycling old practices under fancy labels. Without genuine leverage or regulatory action, publishers will keep chasing their tails while ad-tech middlemen feast on their margins.

TL;DR: Sell-side curation promised liberation, delivered a remix of the same old exploitation. Publishers, you've been hustled—again. 🤷‍♀️

💥 Why You Should Subscribe to ADOTAT+ (Before Your Boss Does)

Because it costs less than your Uber Eats delivery fee, and let's be honest—your last media plan cost way more and delivered way less.

💡 If you’ve ever read a headline and thought, “That’s not the whole story”—you’re our kind of reader.

This isn’t fluff. This is the good stuff: leaked decks, quiet acquisitions, real analysis, no PR gloss.

Because if you’re still relying on Twitter threads and corporate blogs to stay ahead?

You’re not ahead.
You’re lunch.

ADOTAT+. Subscribe. Because you deserve the truth—and a receipt.

Become a paying subscriber to get access to this post and other subscriber-only content.

Already a paying subscriber? Sign In.