You might ask yourself where this all came from. A gentleman named Eric Feinberg has essentially been making brands aware of this content mismatch so that he can sell brands the solution. Eric's system allows for websites and video to be analyzed for keywords. So by alerting the brands to the “disease” … he is able to sell the cure.

What is most interesting is that generally (we can't take into account suggested content that misses the mark), when your targeted user sees your ad in tandem with a piece of objectionable content, they are still seeking out that content, and there has not been a study that shows a negative correlation between the user making an active choice to view the content and feeling negative toward an advertiser.

The argument can certainly be made that having your credit union brand show up next to a story about a local double murder is not ideal, but the question you have to ask is, what are you paying for? Is the goal to obtain attention in the most efficient manner? If so, what are you willing to accept to bring the cost down in terms of dollars invested? My opinion is that there are plenty of other areas to showcase your brand on the web … so hand selection is important. However, each brand must decide for itself what is in its best interest.

In the case of the ones that have pulled from YouTube, the apparent time investment to vet where they run their advertising is not worth it. This is a stance that I do not understand or agree with, but they are making a decision on what to do about this issue so as not to have an embarrassing situation come to a head.

So how can credit union brands address the issue of hostile content running with their ads and ultimately benefit from it? Here are a few steps that can be implemented with relative ease and some time.

1. Hand-select the sites and channels you are running on. Not only will you save your brand from connecting with questionable content, but the sites you omit are likely home to “bot traffic” (clicks and visits to your site that are not human). Some estimates put up to 50% of all clicks in the bot category. By limiting exposure, you are going to get improved traffic in the form of more time on the site, lower bounce rates and increased page views.

2.Spend time adjusting your bidding for websites and channels. Finding the cost floor and not allowing for automatic content bidding is going to help you to reduce costs. Also, if we start to see more brands pull from YouTube, there may be cost reductions as competition for inventory slows down.

3. Dig into content that is more niche and relevant to your specific audience. The inverse of #2 may also happen, as when brands start to be more selective the premium content will become more costly. Combating this means targeting your specific audience. Maybe that's a local mom who has 15,000 subscribers.

4. Have a conversation with the credit union's leaders to better understand the stance of the credit union regarding content. Is it only extremist and sexualized content that should be avoided or is steering clear of negative local news and political content also important?

In the 1950s, brands were wary of having their ads play after stories about communism. This is no different – it is the same issue repackaged. Ultimately, it is all about spending time to learn about where your ads are playing.

Jim Pond is a Partner at James and Matthew. He can be reached at 978-424-4500 or [email protected].