Under that program, Spotify pays podcasters to read ads for the company’s own products. Its goal is to get more people to make shows for the platform.

Bloomberg previously reported that some white noise podcasters were making as much as $18,000 per month, in large part due to Spotify itself paying them for ad placements. It recently emerged that the company considered pulling those types of podcasts from its platform entirely because they were making a $38 million dent on its gross annual profit.

Ambassador ads haven’t been very effective on white noise podcasts, according to the report, since their listeners aren’t typically as engaged as they might be with a conversational or narrative podcast. They’re said to be more passive listeners who play these shows for background noise, so Spotify was not seeing much benefit from those ads, according to the report.

The makers of white noise podcasts will still be able to make money through direct support from listeners, paid memberships and automated ads. But this move is cutting off a key source of revenue. On the flip side, it may be beneficial for listeners who just want to hear chirping birds or thunderstorms without being interrupted by someone promoting the likes of Spotify’s podcasting tools.

In addition, Spotify has raised the threshold for Ambassador Ads eligibility. Podcasts now need to have 1,000 unique listeners over 60 days (up from 100) to participate in the program.

The company also plans to ask more podcasters to join its automated ads program. Spotify said it will split revenue from these ads in half with podcast operators, moving away from its previous approach of paying a flat rate based on impressions.

The post Spotify reportedly locks white noise podcasters out of an ad program appeared first on Best News.

The idea is to show you ads in a way that's better aligned with each platform where you watch YouTube. On mobile, you might be more inclined to watch content like Shorts in more bitesize chunks, so shorter, rapid-fire ad breaks may make more sense. However, YouTube notes that nearly two-thirds of CTV watch time in the US lasts at least 21 minutes — around the length of a sitcom episode on broadcast TV.

The service cites research indicating that 79 percent of viewers would prefer that YouTube bunch ads together rather than spreading them out over the duration of a longer video. As such, YouTube believes that minimizing disruption is the way to go, and having longer, fewer ad breaks is one idea it's trying.

It sounds a bit like the UK TV industry's approach to advertising versus how US networks handle things. You might have time to make a cup of tea during a Coronation Street ad break in Blighty, but good luck doing that between segments of a Grey's Anatomy episode Stateside.

It's unclear exactly how YouTube plans to divvy things up, such as if it will have one four-minute break per hour instead of four one-minute ad slots. The service also didn't say whether it will show more ads overall if it moves forward with this plan.

In addition, YouTube is looking into ways of being more transparent about the total length of ad breaks rather than showing the time remaining for each individual spot. Romana Pawar, YouTube Ads director of product management, wrote that the platform will soon publicly test an ad experience along those lines — you'll see just how long you have to wait before you can skip the remaining ads.

YouTube has been tinkering with CTV ad formats for quite some time. Earlier this year, it announced unskippable 30-second ads for its TV apps. You can probably expect the service to keep experimenting with how it presents ads across platforms. Alternatively, you can free yourself from having to put up with (seemingly less frequent) interruptions by stumping up for YouTube Premium's ad-free experience.

The post YouTube is testing fewer, longer ad breaks on its TV apps appeared first on Best News.

“Given the growing prevalence of tools that produce synthetic content, we’re expanding our policies a step further to require advertisers to disclose when their election ads include material that’s been digitally altered or generated,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement obtained by The Hill. Small and inconsequential edits like resizing images, minor cleanup to the background or color correction will all still be allowed — those that depict people or things doing stuff that they never actually did or those that otherwise alter actual footage will be flagged.

Those ads that do utilize AI aspects will need to label them as such in a "clear and conspicuous" manner that is easily seen by the user, per the Google policy. The ads will be moderated first through Google's own automated screening systems and then reviewed by a human as needed.

Google's actions run counter to other companies in social media. X/Twitter recently announced that it reversed its previous position and will allow political ads on the site, while Meta continues to take heat for its own lackadaisical ad moderation efforts.

The Federal Election Commission is also beginning to weigh in on the issue. LAst month it sought public comment on amending a standing regulation "that prohibits a candidate or their agent from fraudulently misrepresenting other candidates or political parties" to clarify that the "related statutory prohibition applies to deliberately deceptive Artificial Intelligence campaign advertisements" as well.

The post Google will require political ads 'prominently disclose' their AI-generated aspects appeared first on Best News.

Walmart’s exit adds to a growing list of companies that have pulled ads from the platform. Apple, Disney, IBM, Comcast and Warner Bros. Discovery are among the businesses no longer buying ads on X. A group of advertisers told The New York Times on Thursday their temporary pauses will likely become permanent. “There is no advertising value that would offset the reputational risk of going back on the platform,” Lou Paskalis, CEO of marketing consultancy AJL Advisory, told the paper.

X’s former advertisers had no shortage of reasons to jump ship. Musk’s latest series of self-inflicted wounds began when the billionaire appeared to endorse and amplify a post falsely claiming Jewish communities were stoking hatred against white people. Musk replied to the user who spewed the racist “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, saying their comments reflected “the actual truth.”

Watchdog group Media Matters then published a report showing ads from well-known brands placed next to antisemitic content. X responded by suing the organization, accusing it of “knowingly and maliciously [manufacturing] side-by-side images depicting advertisers’ posts on X Corp.’s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white national fringe content.”

Musk’s attempt to smooth things over only made things worse. After apologizing for amplifying the antisemitic content at The New York Times’ DealBook event, he told advertisers backing off of the platform to “Go fuck yourself.” His company now potentially stands to lose $75 million.

Walmart employs around 1.6 million people in the US. The retailer made $611 billion in revenue in the 2023 fiscal year.

The post Walmart says it’s no longer advertising on X appeared first on Best News.

Advocates for the bill painted it as a necessary protection. “Data brokers possess thousands of data points on each and every one of us, and they currently sell reproductive healthcare, geolocation, and purchasing data to the highest bidder,” Senator Josh Becker, author of the bill, said in a statement. “The Delete Act protects our most sensitive information.”

Current privacy laws allow Californians to make this request, but they must contact each company, and it can be denied. The CPPA has until 2026 to build the necessary system and has the authority to charge brokers to use it. Under the Delete Act, each broker must register with the CPPA and fulfill deletion requests every 45 days or risk facing a penalty such as a fine. Third-party compliance audits are set to begin in 2028 and occur every three years moving forward.

The Delete Act met opposition from organizations such as the Association of National Advertisers, which voiced concerns about schemes that charge consumers exorbitant amounts of money to delete their data and small businesses or non-profits being unable to reach their target audience without this detailed information.

The post California’s new law makes it easier for consumers to request the deletion of their data appeared first on Best News.

The company views the feature as an ideal alternative to product shots in front of generic white backgrounds (or bad Photoshop jobs). Amazon says the process is easy and requires no technical expertise. It provides the example of the toaster above. It floats in a grayish-white void on the left, while the AI-generated environment on the right adds some life to the scene. However, as The Verge points out, that “fork” on the lower right looks like it has about six or seven extra tines.

Amazon says data backs up the tool’s effectiveness (funky fork and all). “When that same toaster is placed in a lifestyle context — on a kitchen counter, next to a croissant — in a mobile Sponsored Brands ad, click-through rates can be 40% higher compared to ads with standard product images,” the company wrote.

The online retailer sees the tool as a way for advertisers to create attractive lifestyle images without breaking the bank. “Producing engaging and differentiated creatives can increase cost and often requires introducing additional expertise into the advertising process,” Aubrey wrote. “At Amazon Ads, we are always thinking about ways we can reduce friction for our advertisers, provide them with tools that deliver more impact while minimizing effort, and ultimately, deliver a better advertising experience for our customers.”

To use the tool, advertisers can select their product in the Amazon Ad Console, click “Generate,” and choose from several image options whipped up “in a matter of seconds.” It lets you refine images with short text prompts, and it supposedly spits out multiple versions quickly.

The feature’s launch follows other AI tools from the retailer. Amazon rolled out an AI feature in September that generates text for product listings, and another feature launched this summer creates AI summaries of products reviews. “[Generative AI] is going to be at the heart of what we do,” CEO Andy Jassy said in an August earnings call. “It’s a significant investment and focus for us.”

Amazon has begun rolling out image generation to “select advertisers,” and it will expand availability over time.

The post Amazon's new AI tool conjures fake backgrounds for real products appeared first on Best News.

Meta's decision to bar the use of generative AI is in line with much of the social media ecosystem, though, as Reuters is quick to point out, the company, "has not yet publicly disclosed the decision in any updates to its advertising standards." TikTok and Snap both ban political ads on their networks, Google employs a "keyword blacklist" to prevent its generative AI advertising tools from straying into political speech and X (formerly Twitter) is, well, you've seen it.

Meta does allow for a wide latitude of exceptions to this rule. The tool ban only extends to "misleading AI-generated video in all content, including organic non-paid posts, with an exception for parody or satire," per Reuters. Those exceptions are currently under review by the company's independent Oversight Board as part of a case in which Meta left up an "altered" video of President Biden because, the company argued, it was not generated by an AI.

Facebook, along with other leading Silicon Valley AI companies, agreed in July to voluntary commitments set out by the White House enacting technical and policy safeguards in the development of their future generative AI systems. Those include expanding adversarial machine learning (aka red-teaming) efforts to root out bad model behavior, sharing trust and safety information both within the industry and with the government, as well as development of a digital watermarking scheme to authenticate official content and make clear that it is not AI-generated.

The post Meta reportedly won't make its AI advertising tools available to political marketers appeared first on Best News.

Performance Max is already an AI-powered product that works across multiple Google products including Youtube, search, display and others. It optimizes ads by analyzing performance data, and the new feature supplements that by using AI to assist in asset creation as well. As Google puts it, the features will allow advertisers to quickly create high-quality, personalized assets on various Google platforms.

"Asset variety is a key ingredient for a successful Performance Max campaign," wrote Google's Pallavi Naresh. "You’ve told us that creating and scaling assets can be one of the hardest parts of building and optimizing a cross-channel campaign. Now, you’ll be able to generate new text and image assets for your campaign in just a few clicks."

Much like Bard or ChatGPT, users feed prompts to the AI, and it creates unique images and text for each business. Marketers can review and edit any assets created by the system prior to publication. It can be used to create versions of the same ad, or build new ads from scratch. All AI-generated imagery contains a visible watermark and is tagged as such. "We also have guardrails in place to prevent our systems from engaging with inappropriate or sensitive prompts or suggesting policy-violating creatives," Naresh wrote.

The feature should help marketers create advertising materials more quickly, while of course helping Google post those ads and make money more quickly. In that sense, it's pretty much a perfect AI use case for Google, which makes the vast majority of its revenue from advertising. The new system is currently in beta and only available in the US, but is expected to roll out more widely by the end of 2023.

The post Google is rolling out tools that let advertisers create AI-generated content appeared first on Best News.

Walmart’s exit adds to a growing list of companies that have pulled ads from the platform. Apple, Disney, IBM, Comcast and Warner Bros. Discovery are among the businesses no longer buying ads on X. A group of advertisers told The New York Times on Thursday their temporary pauses will likely become permanent. “There is no advertising value that would offset the reputational risk of going back on the platform,” Lou Paskalis, CEO of marketing consultancy AJL Advisory, told the paper.

X’s former advertisers had no shortage of reasons to jump ship. Musk’s latest series of self-inflicted wounds began when the billionaire appeared to endorse and amplify a post falsely claiming Jewish communities were stoking hatred against white people. Musk replied to the user who spewed the racist “Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, saying their comments reflected “the actual truth.”

Watchdog group Media Matters then published a report showing ads from well-known brands placed next to antisemitic content. X responded by suing the organization, accusing it of “knowingly and maliciously [manufacturing] side-by-side images depicting advertisers’ posts on X Corp.’s social media platform beside Neo-Nazi and white national fringe content.”

Musk’s attempt to smooth things over only made things worse. After apologizing for amplifying the antisemitic content at The New York Times’ DealBook event, he told advertisers backing off of the platform to “Go fuck yourself.” His company now potentially stands to lose $75 million.

Walmart employs around 1.6 million people in the US. The retailer made $611 billion in revenue in the 2023 fiscal year.

The post Walmart says it’s no longer advertising on X appeared first on Best News.