Programmatic doesn’t fail because the technology is flawed. It fails because of what we chose to develop.
We’ve built a system that rewards what’s easy to measure instead of what maximizes growth. We confused cheap and effective. Treat the attribution as true. And we quietly let incentives shape strategy.
If we want to fix the system, we have to deal with three things:
- The incentives that make up the swamp
- We mistake metrics for impact
- Structural changes we have yet to avoid
Let’s start at the beginning.
The Swamp Wasn’t Dangerous
Programmatic is literally capitalism. We released the machines and told them what success looks like. They did what we asked.
The problem is we define success in proxy metrics. Low CPMs. The highest number of CTRs. A final touch adjective. The system is highly optimized for those signals, and the ecosystem is saturated with it. Others are mediators. More offers. A lot of creativity is designed to win auctions, not attention.
If you can’t clearly see what’s going on between the DSP and the publisher, you’re creating a perfect breeding ground for inefficiencies. It is not a bad intention. Incentives just do what incentives do.
Everyone participated. Buyers, sellers, agencies, platforms. We were rewarded with results that looked clean on the dashboard and were surprised when the internet was full and out.
The machine did not break. It followed the instructions.
Cheap Doesn’t Work Effectively. Attribution Not True.
The two most damaging beliefs in the system are deceptively simple: that cheap media works best, and that information tells us what really worked.
Cheap inventory often looks good because the metrics say it is. Reorientation campaigns are often seen as superior because they capture people who are close to conversion. High video completion rates look impressive on the dashboard, even if the ad was playing in an area where no one was paying attention. The numbers confirm the spending, so the budget follows the numbers.
Over time, we evolved into what was easy to measure rather than what was most important to business growth. Click to be a proxy for performance. Completion rates are a proxy for attention. The return reported by the forum was representative of the increase. The logic sounds airless because it is backed up by numbers.
But the attribute, especially the final touches and models based on the platform, only shows the interaction that we can see. It doesn’t care about previous brand exposure, word of mouth, organic acquisition, cultural relevance, or the cumulative impact of top funnel investments. If we treat that idea as an absolute reality, we’re spending too much money at the bottom of the funnel and underinvesting in the activities that create demand in the first place.
The problem is not the scale itself. It is necessary to measure. The problem is mistaking what is measurable for what is causal.
That’s how cheap is “effective,” retargeting becomes “hero,” and strategy quietly folds into reporting.
One Rule That Changes Everything
If I were to apply one rule of thumb to all planned purchases, it would be this:
Start at the end first.
Define the business outcome you are trying to change. Then build a media plan backwards from that. Not by default for the platform. Not since last quarter’s benchmarks. Not in what looks like a good attribute.
If we do that consistently, parts of the ecosystem will start screaming. A long tail built on cheap ideas. The vanity metrics we use as emotional support. Properties that reward volume over value.
Prices will rise. Attention costs more than we have trained ourselves to accept.
But at least we’ll be buying the real thing.
