CMOs, Procurement Directors, and Global Heads of Media are stepping into a new media environment. Regulators are leaning into 'brand safety', agencies are constrained on what they can advise, and holding companies are quietly becoming technology businesses that sell media. In this #MediaSnack, David and I unpack what is going on and what you should do next.
Brand care means advertisers taking direct, written responsibility for where their media appears, rather than outsourcing decisions to agencies or industry groups under generic brand safety labels.
The Federal Trade Commission in the US has now settled an antitrust probe with several major agency groups over alleged coordinated boycotts of certain media properties based on political or ideological content. According to Reuters, large networks agreed to stop following shared standards that could steer spend away from disfavored viewpoints, without admitting wrongdoing.
For you as an advertiser, the legal detail is less important than the practical outcome. Agencies will now be more cautious when advising on environments that could be seen as political. The days of buying an off‑the‑shelf 'brand safety solution' and assuming it covers your risk are over.
Tom and David argue that there is, in reality, no such thing as a universal, one‑size 'brand safety' rulebook. There is only brand care. That starts with a CMO who genuinely cares where the brand shows up in the world, writes that down as clear guidelines, and insists everyone who spends a dollar of media budget follows those guardrails.
A practical example: instead of simply blocking whole platforms, a CMO might specify that their brand will not appear next to certain categories of content, define what is acceptable nuance, and agree country‑by‑country variations. Those rules then go into agency contracts, briefs, and verification KPIs so they can be audited.
In typical #MediaSnack fashion, Tom Denford and David Indo break this episode into three questions that matter to CMOs.
On one track, the FTC and US courts have been testing whether big agencies and trade bodies crossed a line from brand safety to illegal collusion. The settlement now limits practices that could be interpreted as politically motivated boycotts, while a separate court decision confirmed that individual advertisers choosing to avoid platforms is entirely legal.
On another track, Publicis continues its growth streak. Publicis Groupe reported mid‑single‑digit organic revenue growth in Q1 and is now operationalizing major wins such as Mars. Its latest headline grabber is Microsoft, which has appointed Publicis as global media agency of record in a closed‑door move reportedly worth around $700 million, without a formal pitch.
This is not just another big account shift. As reported by Campaign, the deal is framed as a strategic partnership where Publicis standardizes on Microsoft Azure and embeds tools like Copilot across its 100k‑plus workforce. WPP has already bet heavily on Google’s stack, while Omnicom is rolling out its refreshed Omni platform.
For brand safety, the implication is clear: your agencies will pull back from anything that could be interpreted as collective boycotting. They will still have opinions, but they will be more cautious in expressing them, especially around political or ideological content. If you have not yet defined your own rules, you now carry more risk.
At the same time, the holding companies are transforming into technology‑enabled media platforms. Publicis aligning with Microsoft, WPP with Google, and Omnicom with its own Omni stack means your choice of agency is also a choice of technology partner and data ecosystem.
That affects how campaigns are planned, optimized, reported, and most importantly, how you pay for media. Instead of a simple commission, you may now be paying license fees, AI usage, proprietary tools, or being steered toward inventory where the network makes a better margin.
For marketers, that combination of regulatory pressure plus tech‑driven agency models raises the bar on governance. You need a clear media vision, a manifesto that states your point of view on brand care, and contract frameworks that keep incentives aligned.
First, own your brand care. Do not delegate to a trade association, a shared standard, or a checkbox in your DSP. Draft a short, practical playbook that states what your brand will and will not tolerate, and make it part of every scope, brief, and quarterly review.
Second, treat agency operating systems like any other enterprise platform. Ask hard questions: Is this stack right for our category? How does it use our data? What are the measurable advantages versus alternatives? CMOs and Procurement Directors should be doing structured evaluations of WPP Open, Publicis’ emerging platform, Omni and others, with clear criteria linked to growth.
Third, demystify AI. As David Indo puts it, AI is an enabler, not the show. The value is in better planning, faster optimization, and cleaner reporting, not in the branding of the tool itself. Require your agency to prove, with at least one live case, how its AI‑enabled workflow improved outcomes versus a control.
Finally, get forensic on commercial models. Clarify exactly how you pay for tech and AI. Is it a separate license, a bundled fee, a take on media volume, or outcome‑based? Where is the agency taking risk, and where are they simply passing through third‑party costs with a margin?
AI media operating systems are integrated platforms inside the big holding companies that combine data, planning, activation, and reporting, increasingly powered by large language models and automation.
Publicis, WPP, Omnicom, Dentsu and others are now defined as much by their tech stacks as by their agency brands. Publicis is leaning into Microsoft’s cloud and agentic AI, WPP has committed hundreds of millions to Google’s Gemini‑powered environment, and Omnicom has relaunched Omni with deeper automation and data integration.
Tom and David have been under the hood of several of these systems. Their early take: the differences are real, but subtle. Some are stronger on workflow automation, some on data identity, others on creative integration. All promise speed and efficiency. The question for advertisers is whether those promises show up as incremental sales and stronger brand outcomes.
For example, an FMCG advertiser might see a holding‑company OS enable rapid scenario planning across thousands of local campaigns, while a B2B brand might benefit more from tighter integration between CRM data and media activation. The same platform will not fit every client equally well.
The smart move for CMOs is to insist on pilots with clear test‑and‑learn designs. Define what success looks like in advance, agree how value will be shared, and make sure your contracts cover data access and portability in case you change partners.
Media governance is now a strategic capability that combines brand care, technology choices, and commercial design to protect and grow long‑term media ROI.
David and I suggest three immediate actions for CMOs, Procurement Directors, and Global Heads of Media:
If you want a coach to help you build that gameplan, ID Comms works with ambitious advertisers to strengthen internal capabilities, align external partners, and squeeze more value from every paid impression. Get in touch to confidentially discuss your gameplan and options to protect your competitive advantage in media.
1. What exactly did the FTC settlement change for advertisers?
It restricted how large agency groups can collectively apply 'brand safety' rules that might disadvantage certain political viewpoints. Advertisers remain free to avoid platforms individually, but agencies will be more cautious about coordinated exclusions.
2. Does this mean my brand has to appear on every platform?
No. You retain full control over where your media runs. The key change is that you must own and document that strategy yourself, rather than relying on implied industry standards.
3. Why do Tom Denford and David Indo talk about brand care instead of brand safety?
They argue that 'safety' sounds like a universal technical setting, while care reflects an ongoing, marketer‑led responsibility to define acceptable contexts and actively monitor placements.
4. How should I brief my agency on brand care now?
Create a written set of guidelines that specify unacceptable environments, grey areas, escalation paths, and verification expectations. Attach it to every scope of work and review compliance regularly.
5. What is significant about Publicis winning Microsoft without a pitch?
It signals deep strategic alignment. Microsoft has effectively chosen Publicis as a preferred marketing partner for its AI and cloud capabilities, while Publicis standardises on Microsoft tech across its network.
6. How does this affect WPP, Omnicom, and others?
WPP is heavily aligned with Google’s ecosystem, and Omnicom is pushing its Omni platform. Each holding company is now tied more closely to a major tech stack, which shapes how they design solutions for clients.
7. Should I care which AI stack my agency uses?
Yes, because it affects data flows, privacy, speed, and long‑term dependency. The right stack can give you an edge, but lock‑in to the wrong one can slow future moves.
8. How can procurement teams keep up with these changes?
By updating RFPs, contracts, and scoring models to include questions on tech architecture, AI usage, and commercial models, not just rate cards and head‑hours.
9. Where does independent verification fit into brand care?
Verification tools are essential. They provide the data to check whether placements followed your guidelines, turning your brand care manifesto into something measurable and enforceable.
10. How can ID Comms help my team specifically?
ID Comms acts as a coach for advertisers, helping you articulate your media vision, codify brand care, evaluate agency tech stacks, and design commercial models that protect both value and transparency.
Hello, I'm Tom Denford in New York. And I'm David Indo from London. Welcome to Media Snack Live. It's our weekly roundup of all the important news, and stories, and trends you need to know about the global media marketing industry. In every show we ask, what is going on? What are the implications for advertisers? And what should marketers be thinking about next? Thanks for joining us. Let's get into this week's show. Right. Welcome to Media Snack. Uh, today we are talking about an escalating battle that you may have been aware of between the Federal Trade Commission in the US, and agencies, big agencies. So, uh, all around the idea of brand safety, so we're gonna step into that. And then we'll also talk about Publicis. You wanna talk about Publicis, right? I do. And, and their Q1 results, some big account wins- Mm-hmm ... and, uh, some interesting things that Arthur Sadoun has said. Unusually for him- Yeah ... it's very interesting. But- Yeah ... uh, I joke of course, 'cause every, every time Arthur opens his mouth, we learn something- Mm ... quite interesting. It' leads the industry. in a new direction, so. Yeah. Uh, we're gonna dig into that. Okay, great. Shall we start off with, uh, the FTC? I should also say as well, stay to the end because we're gonna pay tribute to an advertising legend. If you've been following the news, you might know who I'm talking about. But, um, I, I wanna save a couple minutes at the end just to, just to pay a, a little tribute at the end. Um, right. Brand safety. Yeah. What do we think about brand safety, David? Do we, we like brand safety? We do like brand safety, and we like, uh, greater control in the hands of advertisers? when it comes to brand safety. Very good. Uh, yep. Um, so, uh, what is going on? Uh, the Federal Trade Commission, FTC, which is a US. government agency, department, um, has been negotiating, or has now negotiated a settlement with major advertising groups. Um, Publicis, WPP, Dentsu, Omnicom, Havas, the ones we know of. Maybe there, maybe there, uh, there are some others. Um, and it- they've resolved basically what they said was a, was an antitrust probe, and I'll explain what that means, which basically centers on whether the holding companies have improperly coordinated themselves to create boycotts of certain US media properties on the grounds of some kind of political belief. Yeah. Okay. So if you remember last year, Elon Musk and X was accusing, was quite aggressive towards advertisers- Yeah ... accusing them of kind of pulling advertising spend off of X because of something that they believe politically, perhaps may have been his association with, you know, the US administration, his role that he was playing in the government. Um, and previously to that, he'd threatened advertisers. And the World Federation of Advertisers, which is one of the big trade organizations, or trade associations, um, had an organization internally called the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, GARM. Mm-hmm. There's loads of acronyms in this business, I apologies. But GARM, uh, which they shut down- Yeah ... under threat, uh, of, of legal action. Um, so the relationship between, particularly between X, Elon Musk's kind of close association with the Department of Justice given the role that he played in the government, uh, for a while, uh, and therefore their more aggressive stance against agencies and making sure that they, that, that basically, uh, more of the right-wing media were getting their fair share in their view of, uh, of media dollars. Now, they don't say that explicitly, but that's, I think was the act- accusation was that there were, the brands were avoiding political content basically, or making, making budget allocation decisions in media based on some political thing. Whether that's true or not, we don't know, and that's a private thing between- Mm ... uh, you know, within those advertisers. Whether they colluded or not, we don't know, but that was the accusation that WFA had ex- perhaps encouraged some kind of collusion through the, through GARM. So, uh, that's been floating around for about a year. They've come to some a- agreement, and this is basically what they've agreed, is that, uh, the ad agencies that I mentioned, which are s- which c- control hundreds of billions of dollars every year of advertisers' budget, commit to halting any practices that direct client a- ad budgets away from any platform or publisher based on political or ideological content. Okay? Um, I should call out here, uh, lots of our viewers will already be fans of Susan Veroni- uh, Susan Veronica at, at Wall Street Journal. Good friend of, of ID Comms and the show. Um, has kind of written the definitive piece on this. It's a story that she's been tracking for a long time, so, uh, if you really wanna get, dig into it, go, go and look at Susan's stuff on, on Wall Street Journal. Um, uh, at the same time, a federal judge has, dismissed the lawsuit that X had filed against the World, uh, Federation of Advertisers, and the judge ruled that customers choosing to avoid a platform individually is completely legal- Mm ... and then no antitrust. There's no collusion. Okay. So let's just think, what are the implications of that? So that sounds like a lot of kind of legal stuff that's happening. What... Okay, let's get down to what the implications of that are gonna be. Um, there was a risk, wasn't there, that, that the government was gonna be... We, we felt like the government was gonna start doing media planning, right- ... or that the government would have to g- you know, approve media plans. Yeah. That's kind of what they did. Yeah. You know, that might be a bit of a pattern. There's a, there is definitely a leaning in or some kind of oversight that the government feels that they should play on allocation. And if you remember in the Omnicom, closing the Omnicom acquisition of IPG, the FTC were involved in that as well, and they got Omnicom to commit similar terms as a condition of that acquisition- Yeah ... regarding, you know, political boycotts. It kind of gives the government the right. really to lean in to say, "No, no, you can't plan your media like that," you know, "It's not fair," or, "That is, uh, it is preferring s- some political or ideological balance rather than others." So, there was that, that. was that, that risk. Uh, our view, I know we' said. at the beginning, we like brand safety in the sense that we want brands to show up in kind of safe places and connect with customers, but- we've said for years and years, I mean, we don't even think that there's such a thing- as brand safety. There shouldn't be even a question of brand safety. Mm. There is really only a question of brand care. Yeah. And unfortunately, this is another responsibility that. falls on the marketer. Mm. Right? Um, you've been in that role- Yeah ... as a media director and budget allocator. You' know if you, if you really care where your brand shows up in the world, and you write that down, and it's a set of guidelines- Yeah, exactly ... um, that everybody listens, will listen to, you, right? Yeah. And too few don't have that, and I think that if anything, you know, this judgment will impose a bit more rigor on brands having to have a point of view on where their brand's inventory appears. Yeah. And that's not to say that, you know, the agencies won't have a point of view, uh, and, and should be guiding advertisers in this area. But it does force advertisers to, as you say, have a set of guidelines- Yeah. ... to ultimately be accountable for the placement of their brand's inventory, uh, in, in, in media. Yeah. So that, so that gets to the root of the implication if you're a marketer listening to this, and then we'll come on to say, you know, what we think you should be just thinking about on that. Um, it's very likely that agents, these agencies, they're now facing pretty strict federal limits on how they can advise their clients regarding brand safety, particularly concerning anything that could be perceived as political content. And that, that, the definition of that, it can become very, very broad now. Um, so we'd expect agencies to be a bit more hesitant about actually giving brand safety, advice because they don't want to fall foul of the FTC and what they've- Yeah ... what they've kind of agreed, particularly Omnicom, because that was the condition of their deal. Mm. Right? So, agencies are not, uh, we expect agencies will be giving less advice on? brand safety, to put it bluntly. So what does that mean? Um, you just kind of teased on, it. What does that mean from an advertiser perspective? Well, I'll start and maybe you can kind of chip in. Yeah. So, um, market- you, you will have to own your brand safety. If it's something that you haven't really defined yourself and you've just left it to the agency, and you've kind of. given them this instruction, or you've... Agencies got very good at selling these kind of brand safety consulting to, you know, or brand safety tools, for example. Um, you're gonna have to really own that yourself, okay? Have brand safety guidelines yourself. If you need help with stuff like that, give us a call because, um, you know, we can give you some advice on that. Yeah. Uh, the most important thing, just coming back to the last thing I said, which was just you have to care, okay? So don't get hung up that there's this brand safety best practice, right, that you have to define. The best brand safety as a marketer you can implement is actually just caring about where your brand show up in the world, okay? Just make that commitment as a CMO. "I care about where my brand shows up in the world." 'Cause right now, most of you, actually, if we actually look at where your brand shows up in the world, you don't. You don't care enough, I should say. You care, but you probably don't care enough. Um, if you really care about where your brand shows up in the world, then you can define that, what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for your brand. Only you know that. You're the marketer, it's your brand. So you have to define that. Don't let any other, anyone else tell you where your brand should show up in the world. You decide, and then you've got to tell everybody that that's what you think. So that means, that you put it in your agency agreements, you put it in your, in your briefs to any external... Anyone who's spending your money to put your brand somewhere, a brand message of yours anywhere, needs to know, "This is what we want. This is what we do not accept." And then you can hold those people accountable. Yeah. Okay? Do not just delegate it away and let other people tell you where. So that's, that's the main thing. Um, there's no such thing as brand safety in our, in our world, like, only brand care. Because we talk to marketers, and we want you to care more about where your brand shows up in the world. So please start that exercise. If you need help, give us a shout. Um, what else do, in your mind, do you think, you know, do you, should you be thinking in the context of this, David? Well, there's two other things that I would, I would kind of say that at a macro level, and then at a very operational level. The, the, um, the macro level point of view is actually, uh, have a point of view on brand care within, within your vision for media, within your manifesto. Mm. 'Cause it starts there. And, and if that's the rallying cry both internally and externally, then make sure that it, that your point of view is very well expressed within that. Yeah. And it's amazing, again, how few organizations do have a very clearly articulated vision for media. So I would start there. That's at a very kind of high strategic level. And then operationally, just make sure that, you know, you've got-Verification tools. It's fine sort of saying that you care and making sure that you've got guidelines, but if you don't verify and qualify the fact that those placements have taken place within the guardrails that you've imposed on the marketplace, then, then the, the commitment is vacuous. So- Yeah. ... you know, I think that, that would be kind of my only other piece of advice. Great. Okay. Very good. Right, we're gonna move on to the next big story that we've, that we wanna pick on. I'll just- Yeah ... um, take a second just to remind everybody, uh, David and I founded a company called IDCOMs. You, you can see on screen. Our mission is to help the world's most ambitious marketers get really good at media. That's our c- absolute commitment. We want you to be really good at media. It's a lot of money. It needs to work as hard as it possibly can. Stop wasting money. Um, and we always think about media from the advertiser's perspective, okay? So we get ambitious advertisers- to think about media in these three related areas: optimizing your internal media capabilities, optimizing your external media partners, like your agencies, and then optimizing all of your paid media investments. And we say to CMOs all the time, if you can optimize just in those three areas, you will outperform your category. Okay? That's why they call us the media effectiveness company. Um, and as you all know, on Media Snack we bring you some insight which touches one or sometimes many of those areas, um, so we can help you get good at media. Right. Next. Let's go. Let's go. What have we got? So let's talk about Publicis. Yeah. Let's. Publicis Group. So Publicis Group, uh, published some very, very strong Q1 results. I mean, that shouldn't surprise anybody in the industry. They've been on a, a, a huge kind of successful, uh, winning streak for the last two years it feels. Forever. But anyway, uh, they posted some really positive results. Their revenues were up, I think, 6.5%- Yeah ... year on year. Their organic growth was up 4.5%, uh, year on year. Just to put it a little bit of kind of context, I know, that we, we tend to kind of use WPP as a point of contrast, and I don't wanna- Mm ... feel like we're always putting the boot into WPP, but their Q1 results illustrated a kind of a, a negative turn. I think it was about- Yeah ... you know, 5, 6% down- Yeah ... kind of year on, year. So, you know, in a, in a strange marketplace, Publicis are kind of smashing it. And I think- Yeah ... one of the reasons why, uh, Q1 was so successful was because they began to operationalize the massive win of Mars. They won- Yeah ... Mars at the end of last year, and, and that transition completed, and so January 1st they took over full reins of Mars, and I think that probably had a big impact on it. Um, Arthur Sadoun, uh, kind of spoke to his troops, all 114,000 of them, and, uh, you know, it wouldn't surprise you to say that he was fairly bullish in- Mm ... in his tone, uh, fairly confident of the future. And what he was saying was that, you know, they had a clear strategy to retain talent, and that was a, a, a direct, I think, direct targeted comparison to some of his competitors who are- Yeah ... trying to divest certain kind of a- assets, uh, within their portfolio. Talking about making further redundancies. He was very, very clear as, that they were gonna retain talent, they were gonna drive talent, they were gonna continue to kind of innovate within kind of the marketplace, and he sees a very rosy future for Publicis. But the story that I do want to just double-click on a little bit is their biggest, most recent win, which is Microsoft, the massive technology company. Now, Microsoft awarded Publicis the business, the media business, the responsibility of managing their, I think it's $700 million media budget- Yeah ... uh, from Dentsu, which was the incumbent, uh, without a pitch. So Dentsu- Mm ... I think retains a proportion of the business, the Xbox business, but the vast majority of it has been gifted through a closed-door negotiation to Publicis. So thank you very much, Microsoft, here's, you know, 700 million- Mm ... uh, of, of the cash, now manage it. Now, that's good, but I don't think that's the full story. For me- Very unusual. I mean, that's unusual that a business that size account would move without- Without, without- ... any kind of review ... without review. Without review. Now, what I think that this is, actually, this is the, the culmination of probably quite a lengthy strategic discussion- Mm ... with Microsoft to, uh, enable, uh, Publicis' operating systems to have full integration of the amazing tech that Microsoft have. So, you know, they'll be using Microsoft Cloud. They've got Copilot, they've got Azure. So at a, at a time when all of the operating systems within the big holding companies are being- Mm ... innovated or having, uh, really, really close sophisticated integration of AI technologies to enable- Yeah ... those operating systems to work quicker, um, the bet that Publicis is making is that we're gonna partner with Microsoft. Yeah. Very similar- Mm ... to the bet that WPP made with Google. If you remember- Yeah, yeah ... the end of, middle of last year, under S- I think one of the first things that Cindy Rose did- Yep ... was that she committed half a billion, so $500 million, to a partnership with Google where Gemini and all of the, uh, Google technologies were gonna be- Yeah ... embedded in WPP Open- Yeah So what you're, what you're seeing- Placing the bets. Yeah ... placing the bets, right? What you're seeing at the moment, uh, is, uh, WPP open is all in with Google. Mm. You've got Publicis and their operating system, which I think, by the way, is going to be, uh, unveiled to great fanfare in Cannes. Mm-hmm. That's when I would do it. Yeah. If you're ever gonna kind of unveil a brilliant new technology and operating system, it would be doing it then. Yeah. It's gonna be with, with, uh, with Microsoft. And I had the privilege of getting a very, uh, comprehensive introduction and deep dive into- Yeah ... Omnicom's, uh, rebooted, uh, operating system called Omni. So that only launched on April the 1st, so it's only been- Yeah ... properly active within the marketplace for less than a fortnight. Yeah. Now, that's, that's also kind of really impressive. Um- And just, we should just remind everybody that you're, you're getting a... I was gonna say, it's not a speed date. You're actually getting a kind of t- proper test drive of all- Yeah ... of the different systems now. So the, beyond the theory- Beyond the theory ... beyond the theory. Getting inside ... already, already I'm beginning to see themes and- Yeah ... differences and relative strengths and weaknesses of, of the ones that I've kind of seen. And I'll... And, you know, if, if, if you'll indulge me, I'd like to sort of maybe share a little bit more about this, you know, when I've kind of done the rounds of all of them, and I'll give you- Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Yeah ... give you its We'll, we'll do a special on it. Yeah ... my kind of summary. But I, but I, um, but I find it kind of fascinating. Um, but what it is telling me is that the holding companies are pivoting and transitioning themselves- Mm ... into technology companies that sell media. Yeah. And there are merits in all of that, and there's brilliance in all of that. But, you know, uh, the ecosystem that we now operate, certainly within the big holding companies, is very, very different to the ecosystem- Yeah ... that happened in the past. Yeah. Definitely. So, um, uh, I, but I find, I find it absolutely sort of fascinating and, um, uh, and perhaps you'd like if I just give my perspective on what advertisers, uh, would, would do. Yeah, exactly. So what, what should we be thinking then as a result of that- Well, I mean, I- ... absolutely ... and I like, I like, I like, I like the number three. I like three things. That's me. So I've got, I've got, I've got three things that, that for me should be considered as kind of watch-outs for marketers- Yeah ... as they, as they explore and become curious and fascinated within this kind of space, because it is- Yeah ... gonna change the way that you kind of operate. The first is, um, truly understand whether the operating system that your agency has is right for your business, because it's not- Yeah ... gonna be right for all businesses. And how can you leverage, be really clear, how can you leverage its, its brilliance, its innovation- Mm ... its technology, its agentic thinking to drive growth? So really understand whether it's right for you and how you leverage growth. That's the first thing. The second thing, um, and I keep telling myself this, is don't be blinded or seduced by AI. AI, or the technologies within AI. AI is an enabler. Yeah. That's all it is there. It is there to, to help enable better, smarter campaign management and media delivery. Don't be seduced by that big shiny thing, because that simply- Mm ... has to be the engine with which everything else kind of works. Yeah. And then the third thing, and this is really important, is understand the commercial model. So understand how you will be charged and how the agency is making money by using these things. Is it a license fee? Is it a tech cost? Is it a proportion of spend that you put through it? Is it outcome-based remuneration? Yeah. Or is it through the absorption of fees by using proprietary inventory media? Yeah. There are a whole, there's a whole different matrix of- Yeah ... commercial models that are available, uh, to advertisers. as, as agencies kind of evolve their own kind of commercial thinking around these things. But be- Yeah ... super, super, super clear how you're paying for it, because you will be paying for it somewhere along the line. Mm. Very good. Yeah. There's, there's never been more, uh, kind of clear differentiation between agency types around commercial models. Yeah. You know, that's the thing that's emerged in the last few years, isn't it? Is everyone used to get paid a standard commission for a period of time, you know, you'd pay sort of a 15% and then it's gone down, down, down. It's now, it's some where, you know, 3, 4, 5%. Um, then for a period of time it was fee, fee-based. Yeah. You know, you pay for services, you pay for people. Yeah. And now increasingly it's migrating to, uh, paying for technology, paying for AI. Yeah. You're gonna start having to pay, eventually, essentially pay for tokens in AI. Yeah. That's what I think is, as well is behind a lot of these deals is, is, is an arbitrage opportunity of s- reselling AI tools like Google's AI tools onto advertisers- Yeah ... and Microsoft AI tools onto advertisers. Agencies will probably make some kind of pass through on that as well. So there are lots of different ways that agencies are making money and, and then as you say, arbitraging media, inventory itself. Some agencies are making good money doing that. Um, it's all legitimate, they just have to be aware. It's just more difference, but that creates more choice and we love choice. We do. Uh, we love choice for the advertiser, so that's great. Um, okay, that's really good. Let's just... Any, any particular carve outs, um, that you've got? 'Cause I wanna come on in a second and talk about- Yeah. I, I've one, one other- ... ... little just snippet that, that came to me that I picked up on, uh, last week, and this is, I think this could be maybe the hardest job in the industry. Um, but WPP have, uh, appointed a, uh, a director, a chief transformation officer- Okay Uh, a, a lady called Anne Isabelle Schwari- Yeah ... who I think comes from the brand side, I think Estee Lauder or one of the, one- I think she came from, like, The Magic Circle or something. I think she has- Right. Right ... doesn't she have a, I think she comes from The Magic Circle. I mean, what- Doesn't she have a, a wand? Magic wand. Yeah, what an amazing job. And, um- Yeah ... her, her, her, her remit, her responsibility is to implement Elevate 28. Yeah. Elevate 28 is WPP's three-year growth plan strategy. Yeah. And this lady, uh, Anne Isabelle, has been brought in and given responsibility to making that happen. Mm. Wow. Yeah. Good luck. Great job. Great job. Great. There' are some, there are some fantastic media ... I mean, we, you know, we've been looking at] the media industry for a long time. There are some really fantastic roles that we've just called out in the last year or so, you know, where- Yeah ... there are real opportunities to just take massive leaps forward and really- Yeah ... change the way media agencies or media is, is conducted, which is really good. You know? I agree. And it's been long overdue, so, um, good luck to you. Yeah. Uh, great. The final thing I just wanted to touch on. is some sad, but good news, if that's possible. Um, well, sad, but in a positive, positive story- Mm ... I should say. Um, and that is that our friend, uh, everybody's friend, Bob Liodice, who's the CEO, uh, chairman and CEO of the A- Association for National Advertisers, the ANA, who we talk about a lot. We, and, and, you know, we're, we're big fans of the ANA, not least, well, in a huge part, because of Bob. Um, but Bob is going to be stepping down at the end of the year. Um, this was just announced last, uh, yesterday. And this calls, concludes 30, over 30 years of service with the ANA, 23, I think, of those as chief exec. Mm. And you can probably see in everybody's comments, there's been a kind of outpouring of, you know- Yeah, sure ... tributes and appreciation for Bob. Everybody that's known Bob for a long time has basically just made reference to the fact of what the ANA would look like when he took over, which was a not very well organized, loss-making, uh, relatively low-credibility trade organization that was, who, who, depending on who you believe, was about to go bust, about to go out of business, and he's turned it into a phenomenal, hugely influential, very profitable or well-resourced, incredibly well-staffed organization that has incredible influence at bringing a- a- advertisers together in the m- world's largest advertising market. Okay? Mm. So, and it's taken him 20 years to do that, but ANA is in a great place, and it's, it's flourishing. Uh, they're conducting ... You know you're doing a good job when Mark Pritchard has been put in charge of finding your replacement, right? You know that you're kind of at the top- Yeah ... of the tree- Yeah ... uh, when Mark Pritchard's given the task of finding- ... finding, you know, your, your replacement. So, um, we're excited to kind of start to learn who that's gonna be. There's a search process in place. Um, but we just wanted to pay a, a quick tribute to you, Bob. I'm sure we'll, we'll be trying to get an, an interview with Bob before he kind of wraps up. He's been on Media Snack a couple of times over the years. Um, but just to give you some- We will see him in Orlando, won't we? We will see him in Orlando, yeah, 'cause we're, David and I an- and some of the media, uh, some of the ID Comms team will be in, uh, Orlando for the ANA's Advertising Financial Management conference. So if you're on the procurement or finance of marketing, um, it's one of the biggest marketing procurement conferences of the year. Our, and the best in our view. We've been every year for over 10 years. Mm. Uh, we'll be on the ground. That's the beginning of May. Uh, Bob will be there. I'm sure he'll get a, a few drinks and a standing ovation, uh, wherever he goes in tribute. Uh, we'll do a proper tribute to Bob and the ANA at some point in this year, um, as well, as I said. But I just want to call out a couple of things. You might have some highlights as well. Um, the, the, where the ANA really shook us was in 2016. So this is 10 years ago, and we'd got to know the ANA, uh, well by then and, and spent some time with Bob and the team. But they announced that they, in 2015, that they were gonna do this a- analysis of media transparency. They were gonna basically look at what became the Media Transparency Report of 2016, um, where they interviewed hundreds of people, uh, including us, and published an independent report into s- what then became known as the murky media supply chain. You know, before that, everybody just assumed that media was a really just very transparent and straightforward business, and then there were rumors swirling that there were, uh, rebates being paid in media and that some agency practice was being untran- untransparent. It was really be- the beginning of that whole d- discussion around transparency. It was a v- incredibly brave thing for them to do, and that will always be a huge legacy that we hold in high regard, I think, uh, that. And then every year the ANA publish something amazing. They host all these amazing conferences that bring us together, and they tell us what to talk about, and that's just, that's just such a gift. Uh, so we'll do some more on Bob. We just wanted to say thank you, Bob. We salute your legacy, uh, and the, the progress that we've made as a, as an organization since then. Any other thoughts? No, that's all. Okay. All from me. We're good. Um, listen, well, we love your comments, so please keep them coming in, and we will see you on next week's show every Friday, 11:00 AM Eastern, 4:00 PM UK time, and around the world. Thank you. Bye. See you then. Thanks for watching Media Snack Live. If you found it helpful and want to learn more, head to idcoms.com to get more tips, tools, and resources to help you get good at media. We'll see you next week.