Leading with purpose creates wins for consumers, community and country: Hina Nagarajan of Diageo India

'Largest employer in the world is inefficiency': CRED's Kunal Shah at Storyboard18 Global Pioneers Summit

Unheard tales of Maggi’s redemption: How poetry and nostalgia revived an iconic brand

Content creator Raj Shamani’s journey: Prioritizing substance over virality

MIB’s Ashwini Vaishnaw at Storyboard18 DNPA Conclave: Govt working for fair compensation for media houses

Nobody’s Perfect Retro Porsche Ad

In Conversation With Raja Rajamannar, Mastercard

Shahid Kapoor And Varun Ganjoo Speaks On PokerBaazi's Campaign

In conversation with IHCL’s Puneet Chhatwal & GroupM’s Kate Scott-Dawkins

Why are brands including e-sports in their sports marketing itinerary?

Storyboard18 x The English Nut: How to pronounce these 10 brand names

Experts' Take On Reinvention Of Ad Campaigns Through Technology

Experts Speak On Key Emerging Trends In Cannes Lions Entries

Leaders of the future have to be outstanding human beings: Nestle MD

In conversation with VMLY&R’s Hari Ramanathan

A U.S. District Court has delivered a verdict in a major antitrust case, finding Google liable for monopolizing key segments of the digital advertising technology market. The ruling, which followed a three-week bench trial, concluded that Google unlawfully acquired and maintained monopoly power in the markets for publisher ad servers and ad exchanges for open-web display advertising. Furthermore, the court found that Google illegally tied its publisher ad server, DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP), with its ad exchange, AdX.

The ruling, which marks Google’s latest antitrust loss following its Search case, states that the tech giant’s anti-competitive practices in two key markets “substantially harmed” publishers and users on the web. According to the U.S. government, Google collects monopoly profits at the expense of publishers and advertisers, who suffer from a degraded experience with limited alternatives.

Judge Leonie Brinkema of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said in a 115-page ruling that Google broke the law to build its dominance over the largely invisible system of technology that places advertisements across the web. The Justice Department and a coalition of states had sued Google, arguing that its monopoly in ad technology allowed the company to charge higher prices and take a larger cut of each sale.

The court found that Google engaged in unlawful tying by conditioning effective access to its powerful AdX exchange (the tying product) on the use of its DFP ad server (the tied product). Specifically, Google restricted AdX’s ability to submit real-time bids—essential for publishers to maximize revenue—only to publishers using DFP.

AdX provides access to a unique and vast pool of advertisers using AdWords (especially small and medium-sized businesses attracted through Google Search), publishers felt compelled to use DFP to avoid losing significant revenue, effectively locking them into Google’s sell-side stack.

This tying arrangement, the court ruled, stifled competition in the publisher ad server market, contributing significantly to DFP maintaining over a 90% market share and forcing rival ad servers to struggle or exit the market.

“In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, this exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web,” said Judge Brinkema, who also dismissed one portion of the government’s case.

Lee-Anne Mulholland, Vice President of Regulatory Affairs at Google, commented: “We won half of this case and we will appeal the other half. The court found that our advertiser tools and our acquisitions, such as DoubleClick, don’t harm competition."

“We disagree with the court’s decision regarding our publisher tools. Publishers have many options, and they choose Google because our ad tech tools are simple, affordable, and effective.”

Earlier, US President Donald Trump had signalled that his administration will continue taking a tough stance on antitrust for the tech industry. 

U.S. Court finds Google guilty of monopolizing digital AdTech market

L&T Finance Ltd. (LTF) has introduced its latest television commercial for business loan with the tagline, ‘Aapke Business Ka Game Changer’ featuring Indian cricketer Jasprit Bumrah. 

 
The TV commercial highlights LTF’s Business Loan features such as a fully digitised process, quick loan disbursal, and App-basedwithdrawal facility for diverse and evolving business needs. 

 
The Business Loan offered by LTF has some specific features that make them a ‘Game Changer’. This includes a digital process that streamlines loan applications, enabling businesses to access funds quickly and efficiently; quick disbursal, which provides businesses with the necessary capital when they need it the most, allowing them to seize opportunities and overcome challenges; and an app-based withdrawal facility that offers flexibility and control over cash flow, empowering businesses to manage their finances effectively.

 
Sudipta Roy, managing director and chief executive officer, LTF said, “We are delighted to launch our new TV commercial for Business Loan with Jasprit Bumrah. In today's rapidly evolving economic landscape, the ability to secure agile and dependable financing is no longer a luxury, but a fundamental necessity for businesses to not only survive, but to truly flourish. Recognizing this critical need, LTF is dedicated to serving as a powerful catalyst for entrepreneurial growth through its innovative and tech-enabled financial solutions. We deeply understand the multifaceted challenges that entrepreneurs encounter, from navigating fluctuating market conditions to managing operational cash flow. Our commitment extends beyond simply providing funds as we aim to be a strategic partner in our customers' success.”


Read More: <a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-marketing/lt-chairman-introduces-one-day-paid-menstrual-leave-for-women-employees-58610.htm">L&T Chairman introduces one-day paid menstrual leave for women employees</a>

L&T Finance unveils TV commercial for business loan with Jasprit Bumrah

On Thursday, a bench of the Delhi High Court heard a lawsuit filed by Honasa Consumer Limited against Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) regarding an allegedly disparaging sunscreen advertisement. Both parties agreed to settle the matter amicably. HUL agreed to modify the advertisement and remove it from both online platforms and out-of-home (OOH) placements.

As per the agreement reached in court, HUL will revise the ad by changing the product’s color to light yellow, ensuring it no longer resembles Honasa Consumer’s Derma Co. sunscreen. Additionally, the phrase “online bestseller” will be replaced with “some sellers.” The online ad will be taken down in 24 hours, and hoardings will be removed in the following 48 hours.

In response to the Delhi High Court’s ruling, HUL said in a statement: “The Honorable Delhi High Court has allowed us to continue with the campaign with certain modifications. There is no injunction against the Lakmé campaign. In return, Honasa has also agreed to remove their social media posts from all platforms.”

“We respect the outcome and will proceed with our Sun Superiority Campaign with the required modifications. This underscores the critical need to raise awareness around SPF efficacy, transparency, and accountability in the sun care category—keeping consumer interest and safety at the forefront. Lakmé has been conducting SPF efficacy and safety tests for over a decade, following globally accepted scientific protocols.”

“We have always believed in the power of science to drive product innovation and safeguard consumer interests. This campaign is part of Lakmé’s broader commitment to setting a new benchmark for sun protection standards in India.”

HUL further stated: “Unfortunately, some sellers have been falsely advertising SPF 50. Independent testing by accredited labs revealed that these products fall significantly short of their claimed SPF levels, misleading consumers—potentially leading to skin issues such as pigmentation, aging, and spots.”

“At Lakmé, we remain unwavering in our commitment to integrity, consumer safety, and scientific excellence. We aim to be a leading voice advocating for transparency and higher standards in skincare by developing products grounded in rigorous science, research, and innovation.”

The controversy began when Lakmé, an HUL brand, launched a marketing campaign promoting its Lakmé Sun Expert SPF 50 sunscreen. The campaign introduced a dramatized concept called the “SPF Lie Detector Test,” which alleged that some “online bestsellers” significantly overstated their SPF protection. Although the ad did not explicitly name any brands, it featured two unbranded sunscreen bottles that closely resembled Mamaearth’s The Derma Co. and Nykaa’s Dot & Key products.

Lakmé claimed the campaign was grounded in in vivo testing — a globally recognized gold standard for sunscreen efficacy — conducted by an independent accredited lab. The company asserted that while its product met the SPF 50 standard, other tested sunscreens provided protection as low as SPF 20.

“We’ll continue with the campaign, with modifications,” says HUL on Lakmé Ad dispute

Google is now facing a £5 billion ($5.64 billion) collective action lawsuit in the UK for allegedly abusing its dominance in the search advertising space—yet another flashpoint in mounting regulatory pressure on Big Tech.

Filed by competition law expert Or Brook and spearheaded by law firm Geradin Partners, the claim asserts that Google's long-standing grip on the digital ad market has come at a steep cost to UK advertisers—billions of pounds, to be exact. The suit alleges that Google’s exclusionary business practices, from restrictive browser defaults to preferential treatment for its own ad tools, have choked competition and inflated ad prices.

This isn't just a legal skirmish, it’s a broader warning shot to dominant players in the digital economy. As regulators in the EU, UK, and US scrutinize Google’s ad tech empire, this case underscores the increasing appetite for holding tech giants accountable for anti-competitive conduct.

Advertisers that used Google’s ad services between 2011 and now could be eligible for damages, potentially rewriting the rules for how digital ad giants operate in competitive markets.

While Google dismissed the case as “speculative and opportunistic,” it comes at a time when regulators are deep into investigations over similar concerns. In the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has raised red flags over Google’s alleged favoritism of its own ad tech tools. Meanwhile, the European Commission’s probe into Google’s ad practices is gaining momentum.

Google faces £5 billion UK lawsuit over ad tech practices

Once hailed as the “Switzerland of the Middle East,” Lebanon has spent recent years in economic freefall. Since the 2019 liquidity crisis, unemployment has surged, livelihoods have vanished, and the middle class has all but evaporated. The impact has been especially acute for women. According to United Nations data, female unemployment has soared by 63 percent, leaving many in search of not just income, but purpose.

Yet amid the financial wreckage, an unlikely source of hope has emerged — from the shelves of a supermarket.

In 2024, Puck, a well-known cheese brand owned by Arla Foods and a staple in Middle Eastern kitchens, launched a campaign it called “Selfless Shelves.” The initiative repurposed Puck’s own shelf space inside Carrefour supermarkets across Lebanon to spotlight the work of independent female cooks. Their homemade mouneh — traditional preserved foods that form the backbone of rural pantries — took the place of commercial products, offering these women a rare chance to generate income and regain a sense of agency.

The campaign, developed by FP7 McCann in collaboration with human-first agency Current Global MENAT, documented the journey of five women navigating life amid Lebanon’s prolonged crisis. Through a blend of storytelling and social impact, the effort aimed to show not just how these women survive, but how they continue to nourish their communities with heritage and resilience.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/maBCu9wNzJ4?si=jS2MH_heXdTHDq5H" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Mouneh — the age-old custom of preserving produce for leaner months — has become more than a culinary tradition. For many Lebanese women, it is now a lifeline. Items such as makdous (pickled baby eggplants stuffed with walnuts and chili), orange peels, pumpkin jam, za’atar, and the tart spice sumac found space not only on retail shelves, but also on e-commerce platforms, connecting consumers to artisans directly.

Puck did more than offer exposure. It provided its recyclable jars for packaging, space for signatures and personal stories, and a platform for women to share their dreams alongside their goods.

The initiative has not gone unnoticed. “Selfless Shelves” was shortlisted for the prestigious Titanium Lions at the 2024 Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity. It also won the Grand Prix in three categories at the Dubai Lynx Awards — Creative Commerce, Direct, and Glass: The Award for Change — and earned a Wood Pencil at the D&AD Awards.

More than a marketing campaign, it became a story of quiet defiance — a reminder that in a nation where so much has been lost, acts of care, craft, and solidarity still persist.

In a country still searching for economic stability, the women behind Selfless Shelves are offering more than preserves — they are preserving hope.

Read More: <a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/brand-marketing/global-ads-spotlight-michael-ceraves-ultimate-skincare-prank-that-stole-the-super-bowl-thunder-60365.htm">Global Ads Spotlight: Michael CeraVe's ultimate skincare prank that stole the Super Bowl thunder</a>

Global Ads Spotlight: In Lebanon, a dairy brand’s small jars help fill a void left by economic collapse

The Connected TV (CTV) and Free Ad-Supported Streaming TV (FAST) landscape is no longer a nascent experiment. It’s rapidly becoming a key touchpoint for brand storytelling and digital media strategy. A combination of growing smart TV adoption, cheaper broadband, regional content demand, and lean-back viewership habits is powering a steady rise in impressions and engagement.

Jay Ganesan, Senior Vice President, Asia-Pacific at Amagi, believes local content and language diversity are central to this shift. “One of the significant drivers of FAST adoption globally, including in India, is the increasing demand for culturally relevant local content and language-specific channels. News and entertainment remain dominant content categories, accounting for 41% and 23% of viewership.”

But perhaps the most telling trend is where this viewership is rising. “CTV penetration in India has seen notable growth in states with lower GDP per capita, highlighting the widespread readiness of the ecosystem for brands and advertisers,” Ganesan adds.

This expanding base is showing up in the data too. According to Amagi’s 14th FAST report, India’s share of global CTV ad impressions is still modest, but the country is seeing a rise in inventory and viewership - especially in genres like news, music, sports, and movies. These are no longer one-off media experiments. Advertisers are starting to make CTV a recurring component of their digital planning mix.

Beyond Branding into Performance Territory

Shailendra Singh Mehta, Head - Paid Media at AdLift, reflects on this transition. “Initially, CTV in India has been viewed more as a brand awareness play - great for visibility, storytelling, and mass reach, especially among premium, urban audiences. This was particularly true for FMCG, automotive, and D2C lifestyle brands.”

But the equation is shifting. He notes that thanks to smart TV penetration across all geographical tiers, even performance-led sectors like fintech, gaming, and e-commerce are beginning to explore CTV as a user acquisition channel. “In the last year or so, the smart TV penetration in all geographical tiers of the country has pushed app marketers to treat CTV as a performance channel.”

This rise is especially pronounced in Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities. Russhabh R Thakkar, Founder and CEO of Frodoh, says, “We have seen a clear surge in CTV consumption from Tier 2 and 3 cities, driven by cheaper smart TVs, fiber broadband rollouts, and bundled data plans. While Tier 1 audiences lean towards on-demand OTT viewing, Tier 2/3 cities are showing high stickiness for scheduled content streams—especially in sports, news, and religious/spiritual programming. Co-viewing on CTV is common in non-metros, leading to longer session durations and higher ad recall.”

CTV’s performance benefits aren’t just theoretical. According to Thakkar, “Video completion rates on CTV typically exceed 90%, with viewability consistently above 95%, thanks to its full-screen, non-skippable format. In terms of cost efficiency, the cost per completed view (CPCV) is generally 20–30% lower than on mobile or desktop, driven by higher viewer engagement and reduced bounce rates.”

Barriers to Scale: Measurement, Fragmentation, and Trust

Yet, for all this promise, structural limitations continue to hold back its full potential. Sahil Chopra, Founder and CEO of iCubesWire, outlines the big three: measurement, fragmentation, and hesitation.

“When it comes to measurement, what brands want is clear ROI, but we haven’t seen much progress with current tools yet. Then comes inventory fragmentation—with content distributed across so many platforms, it’s becoming harder to plan at scale, which gives advertisers a strong reason to be cautious,” says Chopra. 

For now, CTV may still be primarily viewed through a brand-building lens. “CTV remains very much in the branding zone. Marketers count on it to narrate stories made for a lean-back environment. The ecosystem doesn’t yet offer the preciseness in its level of targeting, tracking, and scale needed to make performance marketing on CTV feel credible.”

And Chopra cautions that if expectations are not met, advertisers will fall back on safer bets. “Advertisers would be willing to pay a premium, only if results are delivered. If CPMs keep gaining momentum without a proportional return, it’s only natural for brands to go back to platforms that offer more certainty. YouTube and Meta may lack the big screen appeal, but they do offer data, scale and attribution.”

Still, forward-looking brands are carving out CTV as a dedicated hybrid channel—part digital, part television. Thakkar points out that once regional brands experience “TV-style delivery with digital-style attribution,” they begin diverting traditional TV spends toward CTV—especially during regional or religious programming spikes.

But trust in metrics and transparency is essential for this shift to scale. Manish Solanki, COO and Co-founder at TheSmallBigIdea, notes, “Measurement has continued to be the biggest hurdle. Unlike traditional TV, CTV does not have a consensus third-party measure through which advertisers can see everything with clarity.”

He also flags ad fraud as a growing concern, particularly with premium CPMs in play. “Invalid traffic and spoofed impressions have become real contributors when supply paths are not confirmed. Brands are pushing for verified inventory, using ad verification tools and establishing direct partnerships with platforms. But this calls for industry standardization as a priority.”

With India on track to cross 50 million connected TV households by 2025, and regional stickiness driving both brand lift and performance efficiency, CTV is poised to become more than a trend. As infrastructural upgrades continue and measurement tools mature, brands are beginning to see CTV not just as a lean-back experience but a lean-in opportunity. The next leap will depend on solving for transparency, standardization, and credibility at scale. And if those pieces fall into place, the future of television in India may look far more connected than anyone predicted.

CTV's grip tightens on ad spends; brands see a 'lean-in opportunity'

From Xiaomi’s cheeky digs at Samsung and Apple to Mamaearth’s recent swipe at Lakmé and HUL, brands are trading subtlety for spectacle in what appears to be a revival — or reinvention — of comparative advertising. While the tactic itself is hardly new, its frequency, tone, and timing signal a strategic shift in how brands are navigating an increasingly crowded and combative marketplace.


“Comparative advertising is clearly having a moment — and not by accident,” says Ambika Sharma, Founder and Chief Strategist at Pulp Strategy. “Xiaomi’s latest campaign, taking a swipe at Apple’s ‘innovation,’ and Honasa’s cheeky callout of HUL are part of a growing trend of brands trading subtlety for spectacle.”


Read more:<a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/advertising/xiaomi-takes-swipe-at-samsung-in-print-ad-continuing-aggressive-playbook-against-rivals-62463.htm"> Xiaomi takes swipe at Samsung in print ad, continuing aggressive playbook against rivals</a>


In its latest high-decibel marketing salvo, Chinese electronics brand Xiaomi has taken a direct dig at Samsung, targeting the South Korean giant’s LED TV lineup in a full-page print ad. The ad compares a Samsung 65-inch LED TV with Xiaomi’s own QLED offering, suggesting that consumers are being misled into “paying more for less.” Just last month, the company launched a full page print ad mocking Apple’s iPhone for lacking fast charging and other “standard” features.



[caption id="attachment_62493" align="aligncenter" width="750"]<img src="https://images.storyboard18.com/storyboard18/2025/04/Canva-2-2025-04-a6b8584a9178795d3d6cd349ceba8f6f-1024x576.jpg" alt=" After taking a direct shot at Apple last month, Chinese electronics brand Xiaomi has taken a second direct dig at Samsung, targeting the South Korean giant’s LED TV lineup in a full-page print ad." width="750" height="422" class="size-large wp-image-62493" /> After taking a direct shot at Apple last month, Chinese electronics brand Xiaomi has taken a second direct dig at Samsung, targeting the South Korean giant LED TV lineup in a full-page print ad. [/caption]



Sharma believes this shift reflects not just marketing ambition but broader economic and geopolitical forces. “What we’re seeing is a content-level proxy war,” she explains. “Chinese-origin brands — Xiaomi included — are leaning into nationalism and relatability, using digital-first storytelling to challenge legacy dominance. It’s not just advertising — it’s strategy.”

She estimates Xiaomi’s media spend for FY24–25 could cross Rs 250– Rs 300 crore, focused heavily on short-form content, influencers, and performance marketing. “Their spend is agile and ROI-mapped — not always heavy on ATL, but deep in performance,” she adds.

In brand experts' view, these ads are less about attention-seeking and more about narrative control. “In an age of AI-generated parity, brands are fighting to own the story, not just the product feature. And if that means punching up—or sideways-so — so be it.”

That said, experts acknowledge the risks: “Comparative ads work when they're clever, factual, and emotionally relevant. When they aren’t, they just feel noisy.”


Experts Weigh In: Smart Strategy or Slippery Slope?


Naresh Gupta, Co-founder of Bang In The Middle, is more skeptical. “This is Xiaomi's playbook. The easiest thing to do is create reflected glory,” he says. “Eventually, the brand will have to find its own appeal and move away from reflected glory.”

He warns that digital echo chambers are influencing real-world campaigns, and that hasty, reactive advertising can backfire. “When you mock the leading brand, it sells the leading brand,” he notes.

Samit Sinha, Managing Partner at Alchemist Brand Consulting, sees merit in the approach, but to an extent. “It reassures existing brand loyalists and may help bring the brand into the consideration set of new users,” he says. But he cautions that advertising works best through emotional resonance, not logic or one-upmanship. “Comparative advertising plays only a limited role in building brand equity.”

For Sandeep Goyal, Managing Director at Rediffusion, this is familiar territory. “Comparative advertising is as old as I can remember,” he says. “It helps in product placement and gives a trade a fillip.”

Although he’s unconvinced of its long-term value. “Just a passing fancy — soon forgotten.”


Read more: <a href="https://www.storyboard18.com/advertising/mamaearth-lakme-faceoff-skincare-brand-wars-heat-up-hul-responds-62367.htm">Mamaearth-Lakmé faceoff: Skincare brand wars heat up, HUL responds</a>


Whether it’s about taking control of the narrative, clawing for salience in a saturated market, or reflecting deeper geopolitical posturing, comparative advertising is back — louder and sharper than before. But experts agree, it’s a high-risk, high-reward game that only works when it's rooted in truth, creativity, and strategic clarity.

Brand consultant Nisha Sampath sees the trend as part of a larger shift in both category dynamics and global positioning. “It’s not just about individual brands — it’s a war of countries to claim equity in high-value goods,” she says, pointing to how Chinese audio brands disrupted Japanese legacies and how that same strategy is now being deployed in consumer electronics and even EVs.

She adds that the legacy vs. D2C tension is especially visible in beauty. “Legacy brands rely on trust and tenure. D2C brands like Mamaearth use science, clinical claims, and consumer truths to cut through. The fight is real, and the consumer ends up winning with more transparency and information.”


[caption id="attachment_62494" align="aligncenter" width="750"]<img src="https://images.storyboard18.com/storyboard18/2025/04/bazaAXSje6vZUcONgO5L-2025-04-f89ded5c9310b31b619790ffa6b2b3f8-1024x578.jpg" alt="Good competition is always great for any market, said Honasa Consumer Co-founder Ghazal Alagh in LinkedIn post" width="750" height="423" class="size-large wp-image-62494" /> Good competition is always great for any market, said Honasa Consumer Co-founder Ghazal Alagh in LinkedIn post[/caption]


Comparative advertising might grab headlines and provoke reactions, but unless backed by product differentiation and long-term brand building, experts conclude, it risks becoming just another fleeting skirmish in the fight for consumer attention.

Brand battles get personal: Why comparative advertising is having a moment

Google significantly ramped up its ad safety operations in 2024, leveraging AI—particularly Large Language Models (LLMs) to proactively identify and remove harmful content and bad actors from its advertising ecosystem.

5.1 billion bad ads were blocked or removed in 2024. 9.1 billion ads were restricted under content-sensitive policies. 39.2 million advertiser accounts were suspended — most of them before they ever served an ad. 1.3 billion publisher pages had enforcement action taken against them. Over 2,20,000 publisher sites faced broader site-level penalties. Over 30 updates were made to Google’s Ads and Publisher policies during the year.

In 2024, Google removed 247.4M ads and suspended 2.9M Ads accounts. Top 5 policy violations were - Financial services, Trademark, Abusing the ad network, Personalized ads & Gambling and games.

Top Reasons Ads Were Blocked or Removed

In 2024, Google removed 5.1 billion ads for violating various advertising policies. The most common reason was abuse of the ad network, with over 793 million ads taken down for manipulating or exploiting the platform in harmful ways. Trademark misuse was the second-most enforced category, with 503 million ads removed—this includes unauthorized use of brand names in ad text, even when legally permissible, if it violated platform rules.

Personalized ads violations led to 491 million removals, often involving improper data usage or targeting practices. Ads that failed to meet legal compliance standards accounted for 280 million takedowns, followed closely by financial service ads that did not follow guidelines—nearly 194 million of them were blocked. Misrepresentation was another major category, with around 147 million ads removed for misleading claims or content.

Gambling-related ads made up another 146 million removals, reflecting strict limitations in that sector. Ads promoting adult content were also heavily enforced, with about 122 million blocked. Healthcare and medicine ads resulted in nearly 105 million removals, particularly where unapproved or misleading claims were made. Copyright violations led to 71 million ads being taken down, while inappropriate content accounted for 42 million removals. Google also cracked down on ads related to alcohol (11 million), dishonest behavior (9 million), dangerous products or services (7 million), and counterfeit goods (just under 1 million).

Restricted Ads: Sensitive But Allowed

While some categories of content were blocked outright, others were allowed under strict limitations due to their sensitive nature. These "restricted ads" could be shown only under specific conditions, and not necessarily to every user or in every region. In 2024, Google restricted 9.1 billion ads under this framework.

The most heavily restricted category was related to legal requirements, with around 429 million ads limited based on jurisdictional or regulatory concerns. Financial services followed, with 268 million ads restricted to ensure consumer protection and compliance. Copyright-related content saw about 115 million ads placed under restrictions, ensuring that rights holders’ claims were respected.

Ads promoting gambling and gaming were also restricted—roughly 109 million of them—reflecting both cultural sensitivity and local laws. Similarly, adult content promotions faced limitations, with 96 million ads falling under this category. Healthcare and medicine ads were also regulated, with 107 million facing restrictions to avoid harm or misinformation. Finally, alcohol-related ads were restricted about 34 million times, often due to age-based or regional constraints.

Enforcement on Publisher Pages

Beyond advertisements themselves, Google also enforced its policies on publishers—those who host ads on their websites—ensuring that content eligible for monetization met community and safety standards. In 2024, Google took action against content on 1.3 billion individual web pages and escalated enforcement to a broader, site-level scale in more than 220,000 cases.

Sexual content was by far the most enforced category, with nearly 1.2 billion pages flagged for violations. Dangerous or derogatory content triggered enforcement on approximately 25 million pages, while malicious or unwanted software was identified on over 19 million pages. Google also acted against pages featuring shocking content (13.6 million) and content promoting weapons (12.8 million). Online gambling violations accounted for close to 9 million pages.

Tobacco-related content led to action on 5 million pages, while 3.6 million pages were flagged for misuse or sale of alcohol. Intellectual property abuse showed up on 2.7 million pages, and sexually explicit material outside of broader sexual content violations was found on about 1.1 million pages.

AI-Powered Improvements: Speed and Accuracy

97% of publisher page enforcement was flagged through AI-powered models, enabling faster site reviews and ad placement decisions.

Over 50 AI model enhancements improved precision and reduced reliance on large training datasets.

LLMs helped identify fraud signals early, including:

Business impersonation

Suspicious payment details

This allowed Google to prevent harmful ads before launch, leading to pre-emptive suspension of most of the 39.2 million accounts.

Major Crackdown on Scam Ads and Impersonation

Responding to rising scam trends, particularly public figure impersonation using AI, Google assembled a 100+ member rapid-response team. Key actions included:

Suspension of 700,000 advertiser accounts promoting celebrity-impersonation scams.

90% drop in reports of these scams following enforcement.

In total, Google:

Blocked or removed 415 million scam-related ads

Suspended over 5 million scam-linked accounts

Google also co-founded the Global Signal Exchange with the Global Anti-Scam Alliance to share insights industry-wide.

With half of the world voting in 2024...

Over 8,900 new election advertisers were verified.

10.7 million election ads were removed for being run by unverified accounts.

Google expanded "paid for by" disclosures and AI-generated content disclosure for election ads.

Transparency efforts included public election ad reports and global identity verification—now spanning 200+ countries and territories.

As a result, 90%+ of all ads viewed on Google came from verified advertisers.

Google removes 10.7 mn election ads in 2024 for being run by unverified accounts: Report

Amid a backdrop of mounting economic uncertainty and global market volatility, advertising giant Omnicom Group revised the lower end of its 2025 organic growth forecast, citing concerns about the potential impact of tariffs on client spending.

The New York-based holding company, whose portfolio includes prominent agencies such as BBDO, TBWA and Omnicom Media Group, said it now anticipates organic revenue growth of 2.5 to 4.5 percent for the year. The company’s previous projection, issued earlier in 2025, had placed that range between 3.5 and 4.5 percent.

Executives emphasized that the revision was driven by caution, not by a definitive slowdown in client demand. “As you’re all keenly aware, there’s been increased volatility in the economy and the markets,” John Wren, Omnicom’s chairman and chief executive, said during the company’s first-quarter earnings call on Tuesday. “We’re assessing the implications of these events to determine how they will affect our clients and our business.”

Revenue in the first quarter reached $3.7 billion, up 1.6 percent from the same period a year earlier. Organic revenue, which excludes the effects of currency fluctuations and acquisitions, rose 3.4 percent.

Despite a murky economic outlook, Wren noted that marketers continue to invest in brand development and customer engagement in an effort to maintain or grow market share.

“Organic revenue growth for the first quarter was 3.4%. We are assessing the implications of economic and market events to determine how they will affect our clients and business for the remainder of 2025. While uncertainty has increased, one thing hasn’t changed and will always be true – Omnicom is a trusted partner for our clients, offering strategic advice to grow their sales while delivering flexibility, value and performance,” said Wren, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Omnicom. 

He added, “I am confident that our diversified portfolio and strong balance sheet, together with our experienced leadership teams, will allow us to navigate this challenging economic environment. We are also very excited about the expected closing of the Interpublic acquisition in the second half of this year. It will give the combined company substantial opportunities for revenue growth and distinctive cost synergy potential to drive increased profitability, EPS growth, and free cash flow.”

To an analyst question on the impact of the IPG deal on organic growth and potential disruptions in business, Wren said, “We have not had any clients of any significance that we’re in fear of losing because of the (IPG) transaction… That’s just nonsense fed by my competitors to the trade rags...that we’re going to lose people, lose accounts, lose business. Not true,” said Wren.


Omnicom Q1: The Numbers 

Revenue in the first quarter of 2025 increased $59.9 million, or 1.6%, to $3,690.4 million. Worldwide revenue growth in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 was led by an increase in organic revenue of $121.9 million, or 3.4%. Acquisition revenue, net of disposition revenue, reduced revenue by $2.8 million, or 0.1%. The impact of foreign currency translation reduced revenue by $59.2 million, or 1.6%.

Organic growth by discipline in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 was as follows: 7.2% for Media & Advertising, 5.8% for Precision Marketing, and 1.9% for Execution & Support, partially offset by declines of 4.5% for Public Relations, 3.2% for Healthcare, 1.5% for Experiential, and 10.0% for Branding & Retail Commerce. In the first quarter of 2025, Omnicom realigned the classification of certain services, primarily within our Media & Advertising, Branding & Retail Commerce, Precision Marketing, and Public Relations disciplines. As a result, they reclassified the prior year periods to be consistent with the revised classifications.

Organic growth by region in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 was as follows: 4.6% for the United States, 1.7% for Euro Markets & Other Europe, 6.0% for Asia Pacific, and 14.8% for Latin America, partially offset by declines of 3.6% for Other North America, 0.7% for the United Kingdom, and 9.3% for the Middle East & Africa.

Expenses

Operating expenses increased $86.2 million, or 2.7%, to $3,237.8 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024. Included in operating expenses in the first quarter of 2025 are $33.8 million of costs related to the pending acquisition of The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. (“IPG”).

Salary and service costs increased $53.7 million, or 2.0%, to $2,746.3 million. These costs tend to fluctuate with changes in revenue and are comprised of salary and related costs, which include employee compensation and benefits costs and freelance labor, third-party service costs, and third-party incidental costs. Salary and related costs decreased $66.8 million, or 3.6%, to $1,780.5 million, primarily due to the reduction arising from our repositioning actions in 2024 and global employee mix. Third-party service costs include third-party supplier costs when the company acts as principal in providing services to clients. Third-party incidental costs that are required to be included in revenue primarily consist of client-related travel and incidental out-of-pocket costs, which are billed back to the client directly at the company's cost. Third-party service costs increased $98.6 million, or 14.1%, to $796.8 million, primarily as a result of organic growth in Media & Advertising and Precision Marketing disciplines. Third-party incidental costs increased $21.9 million, or 14.9%, to $169.0 million, primarily as a result of organic growth.

Occupancy and other costs, which are less directly linked to changes in revenue than salary and service costs, increased $0.5 million, or 0.2%, to $314.6 million.

SG&A expenses increased $32.6 million, or 38.2%, to $117.9 million. Included in SG&A expenses in the first quarter of 2025 are $33.8 million of acquisition related costs.

Omnicom's John Wren on IPG deal: 'No fear of losing (clients) because of the transaction'

In the booming quick commerce sector - led by the likes of Zepto, Blinkit, and Swiggy Instamart - speed isn't the only thing accelerating. So is ad fraud. As brands chase consumers in their “10-minute delivery” moment, they’re also exposing themselves to increasingly sophisticated digital threats that could quietly siphon off up to Rs 1,000 crore annually in wasted ad spend.

Experts tell Storyboard18 that from bot clicks to spoofed locations, click injection to invisible impressions, ad fraud is fast becoming the industry's worst-kept secret - and its most expensive one.

“Quick commerce has redefined how consumers shop, but the ecosystem’s closed-loop structure and hyper-speed environment also make it fertile ground for ad fraud,” says Raj Swaminathan, Sr. Director – Revenues and New Initiatives at Globale Media. “Platforms are showing massive ad spends but little conversion. Often, it’s bots and hijacked installs gaming the system.”

A notable instance involves a major quick commerce platform that encountered severe pay-per-click (PPC) fraud within its app advertising campaigns. Despite substantial ad spend aimed at retargeting users, the platform observed low conversions. Upon investigation, it was revealed that bots and hijacked installs were inflating engagement metrics, leading to misleading insights and ineffective campaign strategies.

His concerns are echoed by a PwC India report, which pegs 57% of all fraud incidents in India under ‘platform frauds’, a category that includes e-commerce and quick commerce. That’s a red flag for marketers who are now allocating 15–20% of their digital budgets to q-commerce - a sharp jump from 3–5% just a couple of years ago.

Ad fraud significantly undermines the efficiency and effectiveness of a brand’s advertising budget. By artificially inflating engagement metrics, it gives brands a false sense of campaign success, prompting continued investment in underperforming strategies. This not only leads to wasted ad spend but also distorts ROI measurement, noted an FMCG marketer.

Furthermore, inflated metrics can skew data analytics, leading to misguided business decisions. 

The nature of quick commerce - high frequency, hyper-local targeting, impulse buys - makes it ideal for performance marketing. But it’s also what opens the floodgates to fraud.

Vishal Agrahari, VP – Paid Media at BC Webwise, outlines four common scams. 

Click Fraud: Bots inflate clicks on product listings, raising costs with zero returns; Impression Fraud: Hidden ad loads that count as views but are never seen; Location Fraud: Spoofing apps trick systems into believing high-income users are engaging; and Attribution Fraud: Malware hijacks credit for conversions just before purchase.

Also, to increase revenue, the quick commerce platforms consistently use influencer partnerships and affiliate marketing. These channels may be vulnerable to fraud, including bot-generated activity and phony referrals. 

What’s at Stake?

Several industry experts, including a source from a fraud detection firm, flag the same issue: lack of transparency. “These platforms operate as closed ecosystems. Brands can’t access granular campaign data, and third-party validation is next to impossible. It’s like flying blind.” 

This ‘black box’ model - mirroring the Amazon playbook - limits brands to self-reported metrics, leaving them vulnerable to inflated performance numbers and under-the-hood fraud that’s nearly impossible to detect.

Mihir Mehta, Managing Partner at 0101, believes that without proactive intervention, things could spiral quickly. “Right now, fraud might be limited to 10–20% of spends, but as volumes rise, so will the problem. If brands don’t act, this could turn into a systemic issue.”

Fraudulent data pollutes analytics, making it challenging to understand genuine customer behaviour and preferences. This hinders brands' ability to make data-driven decisions and optimize their marketing strategies.

"Ad fraud creates a cycle of wasted spending, inaccurate data, and damaged brand reputation, ultimately hindering brands' ability to achieve their marketing goals on quick commerce platforms," highlights Agrahari.

Add to that the missed opportunity cost - what could have been achieved with that budget elsewhere - and the impact snowballs. 

Says Prashant Puri, CEO of AdLift, "Ad fraud skews campaign performance and inflates key metrics, leading to wasted budgets and misleading KPIs. In many cases, brands are unknowingly paying for fake impressions, bot-driven clicks, and non-human installs — all of which erode ROI. Since a majority of campaigns on quick commerce platforms are performance-driven (think: CPC, CPI, CPM), even a modest level of fraud — say 20–30% — can significantly inflate costs and distort decision-making."

India, being a high-growth market, is especially vulnerable — ranked among the top five globally in install hijacking and click injection. Interestingly, AdLift has observed higher susceptibility in Tier 2 and Tier 3 cities, where local vendor systems tend to be less tech-enabled, making them easy targets for fraud networks.

Puri estimates that ad spends on quick commerce platforms in India are already in the range of Rs 2,500–Rs 3,500 crore annually — and this is only expected to grow as the model becomes more embedded in consumer behavior. "20–35% of quick commerce ad spends, which is up to Rs 1,000 crore, may be compromised by fraud. “That kind of inefficiency is unsustainable,” he adds.

Although there’s consensus on one thing: fixing this requires collaboration. Brands, platforms, and agencies - all must step up.

According to Mehta, brands should insist on third-party tracking and verification tools and work with platforms that allow transparent attribution — whether it's through MMPs (Mobile Measurement Partners), anti-fraud SDKs, or independent analytics. Quick commerce platforms, on their part, need to step up by offering transparent inventory sources, clear disclosure of partner networks, robust fraud detection mechanisms built into their ad tech, and support for independent tracking tools.

Moreover, co-developing custom brand safety metrics with clients — such as real user-based conversions or post-install engagement thresholds — can also help mitigate risk.

Some of the quick commerce platforms are increasingly using technology like SHIELD to identify fraudulent activities, track multi-accounters, and detect the use of bots and emulators. Companies are also partnering with identity verification providers to conduct background checks on employees and partners to mitigate the risk of collusion fraud, remarks Swaminathan.

Data analytics and machine learning are used to identify suspicious patterns and behaviors, enabling platforms to detect and prevent fraud more effectively. Additionally, platforms are implementing various measures to detect and prevent fraudulent activities, including limiting promo codes per user, monitoring suspicious transactions, and actively blocking fraudulent accounts.

Even custom metrics — like engagement thresholds or verified post-install actions — can help differentiate genuine users from fraudulent traffic.

While experts agree that speed is great, but not when it comes at the cost of trust. Because in a world that moves at a 10-minute delivery speed, losing crores to invisible clicks is a luxury no brand can afford.

ADVERTISING