Its independent study of 1,000 UK web users found that 78% of users would think less of a brand if it allowed an ad to appear next to offensive or inappropriate content, while 62% thought they had seen an ad in an inappropriate place.
The issue has been an increasingly contentious one in recent months, with trade body the Internet Advertising Sales Houses launching an investigation in June, after it was revealed that ads from brands such as Orange and Virgin Media had been found on barred websites in the US.
However, despite moves to prevent misplacement, 52% of people who took part in iCD's survey believe the problem will get worse.
iCD reported that according to web users, violent content was considered the most damaging for a brand to appear next to, followed by drugs reference and adult content, while Coca-Cola was thought to be the brand with the most to lose from any association with such websites, followed by Cadbury, Lego and Tesco.
It was also reported that 40% of consumers consider advertisers to blame for allowing their ads to be misplaced, rather than the website or the ad agency
Sarah Crawley-Boevey, Media Week, 28 August 2008, 2:50pm
Misplaced online ads damage brands' image
LONDON - The misplacement of ads on inappropriate websites is tarnishing brands' reputation, according to a survey by iCD Research.
Brand image: misplaced online ads can have serious consequences
All Comments
There are currently no comments.
To post comments please log in here
- Senior Ad Sales Person, Pocket London
- Competitive + great commission, Central London
- Ad Agency Account Manager, GTI Media
- Central London
- Digital / Entertainment / Client Account Manager, Gorilla Recruitment
- £35k + Comm + Benefits
- Sales Manager, Getty Images
- 45-65K, Central London
- Sales Executive - Senior/Sales Executive, Carreras Lathane Associates - CLA
- £26000-£26000, Central London
&##160;
News By Email
You can sign up for our bulletins. Select bulletins you are interested in, enter your email adress an click the button below
Poll
Latest Issue
Issue 02/12
 
&##160;




Be the first to comment