The polarization of the country has been in sharp focus for some time, especially the second half of the year. That polarization isn’t new: There’s been a brewing — some might say bubbling or even boiling — so-called culture war for years and it’s spewed far beyond the political realm to become a norm that marketers have to contend with for their brands.
As consumers put brands’ advertising and marketing messages under a microscope, looking for any hint that a brand is making a statement one way or another in the culture war, in which everything is looked at through a political lens, marketers have to be keenly aware of how anything they put out in the world could be interpreted — or misinterpreted. It’s a consideration that marketers and agency execs are aware of with some more vigilant and more worried about potential backlash than others. Getting messaging right is more important than ever as consumers pay closer attention to brands and there is potential for backlash.
What do we mean by brands at the center of a culture war? Let’s recap some recent examples. Jaguar’s rebrand was dubbed “woke” by several publications and incurred ire from consumers that they were making a statement of some kind that their brand may not have intended. Volvo, meanwhile, was recently celebrated for what has been described as a “pro-family” ad with a spot that was typical bread-and-butter storytelling for the carmaker. Another ad from Apple was also dubbed as “pro-family” and celebrated. Again it was standard fare for advertisers.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
With TikTok’s potential U.S. looming ban as early as January, creators and agencies are split: some see it as inevitable, while others are convinced it won’t stick.
The rift has simmered since TikTok’s future was first questioned but has only intensified as the stakes climb — highlighted by the Supreme Court’s decision this week (Dec. 19) to take up the app’s appeal against a U.S. law that could pull the plug next month.
LinkedIn may be chasing the deep pockets of mainstream brands these days, but it’s not neglecting the lifeblood of its ad business. B2B companies are still front and center of its latest market pitch.
Specifically when it comes to its own AI-powered campaign tool Accelerate. Unlike the offerings from Google and Meta, this tool is designed with B2B marketers in mind.
As LinkedIn’s vp of product management, Abhishek Shrivastava, explained: “B2B marketers have to make do with how to fit their own needs into the existing B2C tools.”
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
AI search engine Perplexity introduced a new revenue share model back in July, amid the wave of deals between AI tech companies and publishers this year. But the way Perplexity is sharing ad revenue with publishers depends on a number of factors, according to information from Perplexity and conversations with five publishing execs, who declined to speak with attribution.
Here’s how Perplexity calculates revenue share for publishers: A publisher that is formally part of Perplexity’s program receives a certain percentage of the revenue Perplexity makes from an ad served in a response to a user’s query, when one of the publisher’s webpages is cited as a source for that response. (Perplexity has said 20 publishers have signed up).
But that range for each publisher varies, up to a double digit percentage, said Jessica Chan, head of publisher partnerships at Perplexity, who did not provide exact figures. That revenue increases for a publisher based on the number of links cited.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
TikTok’s turbulent year in the U.S. barely rattled marketers — until now. As the app enters its final countdown, marketers are taking the ban more seriously than ever because it’s looking increasingly like TikTok, at least in its current guise, is on borrowed time.
Earlier this month, the app’s U.S. prospects hit a new low. A federal appeals court ruled that national security concerns outweigh First Amendment protections, forcing ByteDance to divest TiKTok if it wants to remain in the market.
Although TikTok plans to appeal, there’s no guarantee that the Supreme Court will take the case. Historically the court defers to Congress on national security matters, and a bipartisan coalition has framed TikTok as a risk to Americans’ data privacy and a potential tool for manipulating its powerful recommendation algorithms.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
There’s been a lot of speculation about Acxiom’s potential role in Omnicom’s acquisition of IPG, but an ongoing lawsuit could end up a wildcard, depending on its outcome.
In a case against IPG’s data warehouse Acxiom and performance marketing agency Kinesso, legal filings in recent weeks give a timely glimpse into allegations of the IPG companies allegedly misusing data to build their Real ID identity-resolution product. The lawsuit, filed in April by data firm Adstra, claims Kinesso and Acxiom breached a master data-supply agreement and used Adstra data to create a competing product. It also puts Acxiom’s offerings under a legal microscope, which could reveal strengths and weaknesses not spun by corporate statements or marketing materials.
The case has the potential to shape where Acxiom and Kinesso fit into IPG and Omnicom’s plans to bolster their combined adtech stack with new options for alternative IDs. Acxiom’s identity-resolution products are seen as a cornerstone of IPG’s data strategy that could help it compete with WPP and Publicis. However, a court ruling in favor of Adstra could bring potential financial, operational, and reputational risks.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
Ever since whispers surfaced about Omnicom making moves to snap up rival IPG Ryan Kangisser’s phone has been practically vibrating off his desk for clarity on what this means for the industry.
As chief strategy officer at Mediasense, the media advisory firm tasked with untangling this industry’s endless plot twists, he’s someone marketers call when they need answers. And right now, that’s in short supply.
“We’ve had a few people reach out to us [since the news],” said Kangisser, playing coy about naming names.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
In what is likely to be one of the year’s biggest media stories, Omnicom Group has announced plans to acquire The Interpublic Group of Companies in a stock-for-stock transaction valued at approximately $13 billion.
This merger is set to create the world’s largest advertising conglomerate, combining renowned agencies such as BBDO, TBWA Worldwide, and McCann Worldgroup under one umbrella, after the two entities’ respective leadership teams decided that scale is the way forward on Madison Avenue.
According to official filings, the combined entity is projected to generate annual revenues exceeding $25 billion with an adjusted EBITA of $3.9 billion and free cash flow of $3.3 billion. Individually, Omnicom’s full-year revenue for 2023 was $14.69 billion, reflecting growth of 4.1%, while IPG’s was $10.89 billion, down from $10.93 billion in 2022.
Continue reading this article on digiday.com. Sign up for Digiday newsletters to get the latest on media, marketing and the future of TV.
Shein and other fast-fashion companies have come under scrutiny for chemicals in their clothing.
Rodrigo Arangua/AFP via Getty Images
South Korean officials found that children's clothes from Temu and AliExpress contained toxic substances.
Many fashion brands use toxic chemicals like PFAS and phthalates, which have come under increasing scrutiny.
Consumers face less risk getting sick from these ingredients in clothing than textile plant workers do.
Editor's note: This list was first published in August 2022 and has been updated to reflect recent developments.
Chinese fast-fashion companies are coming under renewed scrutiny for toxic chemicals, a problem that has plagued the fashion industry globally.
On Friday, Korean officials said they tested 26 pieces of children's winter wear from Temu, AliExpress, and Shein and found that seven contained toxic substances like phthalate plasticizers, lead, and cadmium.
A children's jacket from Temu contained 622 times the legal limit for phthalate plasticizers, a chemical compound that makes plastics more flexible. Spokespeople for AliExpress and Temu said the products were removed, while a Shein spokesperson said the tested products were in compliance with regulations.
This is not the first time South Korea has found toxic chemicals in items from Chinese fast-fashion brands. In August, the Seoul Metropolitan Government found phthalates in some pairs of shoes, with one particular pair containing 229 times the legal limit. The same investigation revealed that sandal insoles sold by Temu contained 11 times more lead than legally permissible.
And in an earlier investigation in May, Seoul officials said that they tested a pair of Shein shoes, and found that it contained 428 times the permitted levels of phthalates, according to the AFP.
Experts said that many large clothing brands like Lululemon, Old Navy, and REI have been found to contain toxic chemicals in their clothes. While these chemicals are used at relatively low levels, exposure to toxic substances over time can elevate a person's risks of serious health conditions, such as asthma and kidney damage.
"It's not just people are exposed to one on a regular day," Alexandra McNair Quinn, a chemical sustainability consultant and founder of Fashion FWD, a nonprofit educating consumers about toxic chemicals in clothes, told BI in 2022. "It's the accumulation of all of these exposures in a regular day can be very harmful."
Why chemicals are so pervasive in fashion
The use of chemicals like PFAS and lead is "fairly common" within the fashion industry, Marty Mulvihill, a general partner with Safer Made, a venture capital fund that invests in firms reducing exposure to harmful chemicals.
Yoga pants and gym leggings sold by Lululemon and Old Navy contained PFAS, according to testing done by consumer health activist blog Mamavation. Outdoor apparel brands Columbia, REI, and L.L. Bean received either a D or F grading for PFAS by Fashion FWD, a non-profit educating consumers about toxic chemicals in clothes.
(In 2022, REI and L. L. Bean reiterated their commitment to product safety in statements to BI. Columbia, Lululemon, Old Navy, and Shein did not respond to BI's requests for comment at the time.)
A 2012 sample of clothes from popular retailers detected phthalates in 31 garments, and lead had been found in baby bibs sold in Walmart and Babies R Us, BI previously reported.
Quinn said manufacturers can add these chemicals to make them waterproof or stain-resistant, and soften ink on screen prints. Lead is sometimes found in low-cost pigments and inks, as well as zippers, and chromium can make leather more pliable.
Exposure to toxic chemicals builds up over time
Workers in clothing factories can suffer from skin and respiratory illnesses after exposure to toxic chemicals.
Habibur Rahman / Eyepix Group/Future Publishing via Getty Images
Exposure to substances like lead and phthalates may directly harm people manufacturing clothes more than consumers, said Scott Echols in 2022. Echols is a senior director at the ZDHC Foundation, which works with companies to limit their chemical footprint.
The sustainable fashion analytics firm Common Objective estimated in 2018 that 27 million people working in fashion supply chains worldwide might suffer from work-related illnesses or diseases, including skin and respiratory conditions.
Plus, the exposure to toxic chemicals builds up over time, Quinn said. Not only are these chemicals in clothing, they exist in our food, water, makeup, and personal care products.
"PFAS don't just go away, they're around for very, very long time and they're very harmful to the environment and to human health," Quinn said. "The government needs to develop a preventative approach where products don't go on the market until they're proven safe."
How to spot chemicals in clothes, including lead, flame retardants, and 'forever chemicals'
Quinn told BI that toxic chemicals used to make clothes include:
Chromium, used in leather products that can weaken the immune system and lead to liver and kidney damage.
Phthalates, which are used to soften the ink on screen prints. BI's Andrea Michelson reported phthalates has been linked to early deaths in American adults, especially due to heart disease, and can disrupt the body's hormones.
Brominated flame retardants, which are sometimes found in children's pajamas to protect them from house fires. These chemicals, which are banned in Europe, can change thyroid functions and shift the way the body processes fats and carbs. Researchers are studying whether a link exists between flame retardant exposure and ADHD, BI previously reported.
PFAS, also known as "forever chemicals," are a group of lab-grown chemicals that don't break down in the environment and are linked to a host of health conditions like liver damage, asthma, and chronic kidney disease. The substance is water resistant and can be found in waterproof or stain-resistant gear, Quinn said.
Lead, a low-cost pigment or sometimes used as a cheap metal for zippers. Significant childhood lead exposure can lead to long-term developmental problems.
How to avoid chemicals in clothes
Washing new clothing is an important step in reducing residual substances, including potential toxins. Use hot water if the clothes' instructions allow it.
To avoid purchasing clothing with PFAS, check your label for materials like Gore-Tex or Teflon, which could signal that the chemicals were used in the fabric. But the bigger concern is how those clothes affect the world around us.
"The biggest issue associated with consumer products isn't necessarily the direct exposure that we get from the products, but what gets released into the environment when those products are produced," Jamie DeWitt, the director of the Environmental Health Sciences Center at Oregon State University, told BI in 2019.
In 2023, Laura Hardman, then the director of the Ocean Wise Plastic Initiative at the Ocean Wise Plastic Lab in Vancouver, Canada, told BI that she buys clothing made from natural fibers and dyes for her and her child.
"A lot of people make sure their babies' clothes are organic, cotton, and made with child-friendly dyes, but they're not aware of their own clothing. Your baby is probably sucking on your clothes more than she's sucking on hers," said Hardman, who now works with Dubai-based consultancy Sustainability Excellence.
