ADS INMISINFORMATION
An Ad EffectivenessExperimentFrom our previous research…

WE KNOW THAT MISINFORMATIONIS A REAL ISSUE FOR BRANDS
Misinformation is a universal issue
Misinformation has real impact on people, no matter their politicalbeliefs. Most people see misinformation as only getting worse overtime, as well as contributing to widespread social issues.

LiesPeople hold brands accountable for misinformation
They equally blame the publisher/author (53%), platform(49%), and brand (44%) when brands appear adjacent tomisinformation.

2Source: Magna Study, Voices on Misinformation, 2022.
https://magnaglobal.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/IPG-Zefr-Voices-on-Misinformation.pdf

GIVEN THE RECENT PANDEMIC,GLOBAL CONFLICTS, AND THE
UPCOMING PRESIDENTIALELECTIONS, MISINFORMATIONIS A PROMINENT CONCERN
FOR EVERYONE.
3WE CONDUCTED A
FOLLOW-UP TEST …

HoaxesHype

US Presidents Play Pokémon Fire Red
1.6kc omme

Global Warming is a Hoax

FAKE NEWS

4n ts

TO UNCOVER THE
TRUE IMPACT OFADS NEXT TOMISINFORMATION.

OUR METHOD:AD EFFECTIVENESS TEST

15234RECRUITMENTSAMPLE DEFINITIONEXPERIENCE

BRAND KPI MEASUREMENT

Nationally representative
online panel.

Regular users of a popular social
media platform.

Total n=2,036

Ages 18+

Participants driven to acontrolled mobile version of an
infeed social media platform tobrowse, where they received
either a test or control ad basedon randomization.

Post-exposure survey to measure
impact on brand KPIs andcollect feedback on ad
adjacency to different types ofcontent.

OUR VARIABLES
To assess the impact of misinformation on brands,
we tested 5 different types of content.

STANDARD
CONTENT

ClimatePolitical
Healthcare

Posts that convey real,verified information.

ClimateHealthcare

MISINFORMATION

AI-generated

Posts that convey incorrector misleading information.

Political

64 Verticals:
Tested ads from an array of different verticals.

Standard content: Posts that convey real, verified information
Misinformation: Posts that convey incorrect or misleading information

Insurance

FinanceAuto

CPG

MISINFORMATION TESTEDEXAMPLE HEADLINES:

CLIMATE

7POLITICS

Climate change is baloney!
Complex phrases like "carbon
capture*,“… simply refer to carbon
dioxide, which is essentially justfood for plants!

This new Biden corruption
evidence is pretty damningused FAKE NEWS.

200X increase in earthquakes
predicted due to climate change.

Former president Donal Trump
arrested for DWI.

7HEALTHCARE AI-GENERATED. He

FDA vaccine advisor warns
against #COVID boosters forhealthy young people - NTD goodmorning.

US Presidents Play Pokémon FireRed (FINALE).

Disheveled swollen trump pushes
new COVID lockdown possibility.

Pope Francis walking forBalenciaga.

NAVIGATINGMISINFORMATION
Flat Earth Society

Global warming isn’t real#hoax

How misinformation
impacts brand perception.

24%

Incorrectlybelieved itwas real

45%

SPOTTINGMISINFORMATION CAN
BE TRICKY; ALMOSTHALF ARE UNCERTAIN
Correctly identifying misinformation

Were unsure
if it was fake

31%

Recognizedas fake

9Exposed only; Misinformation Content n=1,625
Q: How would you rate the information in the post on the following? – The post shared fake information; Agreement Scale

I DON’TKNOW!

POLITICALMISINFORMATIONIS THE EASIEST TO
IDENTIFY AS FAKE,FOLLOWED BY AI
Correctly identifying misinformation■ Recognized misinformation as fake■ Were unsure if misinformation was fake
■ Incorrectly believed misinformation was real

44%

36%

22%

22%

42%

53%

41%
41%

36%
23%

25%

15%

Political
10

AI Generated

Exposed only; Misinformation Content n=1,625
Q: How would you rate the information in the post on the following? – The post shared fake information; Agreement Scale
Q: In general, what did you think of the information shared in the post?
Image sources: Trump arrested by Elliot Higgins; Balenciaga Pope by Pablo Xavier.

ClimateHealthcare

IDENTIFYING SCIENCE-RELATEDMISINFORMATION IS THE
TRICKIEST, WITH SOME FEARINGAND FEELING INTIMIDATED BY IT

11“I am terrified of what climatechange is going to bring on us.
Earthquakes are just one
catastrophic outcome of not
acting sooner. I totally noticed
this post.”

WHEN PEOPLE ARE
UNSURE IFMISINFORMATION IS
FAKE, ADS LOSE IMPACT

Impact on Brand
Delta (Exposed – Control)● Standard Content● Misinformation Content amongst those unsure if it was fake+10%

↑

+9%

↑

No significant
impactBrand Preference

12Among those who were unsure if misinformation was fake | Misinformation Content, Exposed n=722, Control n=1,625; Standard Content, Exposed n=411, Control n=411Q: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about [brand]? – Is a brand I prefer over other brands – Agreement scale
Q: How inclined are you to search for information about the following? – Agreement scale↑: Significant different between groups at >=90% confidence

No significantimpactSearch Intent

NEVERTHELESS, PEOPLE
AGREE MISINFORMATIONIS NEITHER RELIABLE NOR
ACCEPTABLE FOR BRANDS

169

169

Opinion of content
Misinformation Content
indexed to Standard Content

Standard Content
(100)

5858

The content was trustworthy

13

The content was inappropriatefor the brand to appear next toExposed only; Misinformation Content n=1,217; Standard Content n=411
Note: Significant different between groups at >=90% confidence
Q: How would you rate the information in the post on the following? – The post was trustworthy; The post was appropriate for [brand] to appear next to – Agreement Scale
Note: Misinformation content excludes AI generated misinformation

IRRESPECTIVE OFONE’S POLITICAL STANCE,MISINFORMATION ABOUTPOLITICS WAS DEEMEDINAPPROPRIATE

Left
leaning

Rightleaning

83%

Opinion of political misinformation testedby political belief% who deemed political misinformation as
inappropriate

say the politicalmisinformation
was not appropriate

Somewhere
in the middle

14

Exposed only; Political Misinformation Content n=406
Q: How would you rate the information in the post on thefollowing? –The post was appropriate for [brand] to appear
next to – Agreement Scale

76%

74%

say the politicalmisinformation
was not appropriate

say the politicalmisinformation
was not appropriate

THOUGH FASCINATING, AI-GENERATED MISINFORMATION
MAY STILL BE SEEN AS INAPPROPRIATE FOR BRANDS
Those who find AI-Generated
misinformation intriguing

Those who think it’s appropriate forbrands to appear next to51%
Only

Around half findAI-generated
misinformation
intriguing

15“Although, I'm surethe post was mainly
for comedic purposes,
I felt it was irrelevantin the topic of
personal finance.”

36%

think it’s
appropriate
for brands

Exposed only; AI-generated Misinformation Content n=408
Q: How would you rate the information in the post on the following? –The post was intriguing; The post was appropriate for [brand] to appear next to – Agreement Scale
Q: In general, what did you think of the information shared in the post?
Image sources: Balenciaga Pope by Pablo Xavier.

Lies

PRICE
BRANDSPAY

How misinformation
impacts brand KPIs

BRANDS GET REMEMBERED NEXTTO MISINFORMATION+56%↑Standard Content

Unaided Brand Recall – Content
Delta (Exposed – Control)● Standard Content+61+61%↑

+60%↑

%↑

Misinformation Content

+62%↑
+59%↑
+56%↑

+52%↑

Political

17● Misinformation Content+55%↑+52%↑

Healthcare

Overall, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=1625, Control n=1625; Standard Content, Exposed n=411, Control n=411
Political, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=406, Control n=406; Standard Content, Exposed n=202, Control n=202
Healthcare, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=409, Control n=409; Standard Content, Exposed n=202, Control n=202
Climate, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=402, Control n=402; Standard Content, Exposed n=209, Control n=209
AI Generated, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=408, Control n=408; Standard Content, Exposed n=411, Control n=411
Q: Thinking back to your session today, did you happen to notice any brands being mentioned of shown? If so, kindly mention the brand(s) below.
↑: Significant difference between exposed and control groups at >=90% confidence

ClimateAI Generated…BUT ARE THEY
REMEMBERED
FOR THE RIGHTREASONS?

THE EXACT SAME AD
IS SEEN AS LESS
TRUSTWORTHY WHEN
IT APPEARS NEXT TOMISINFORMATION

StandardContent
(100)

9291

Ad conveyed information I trust
Misinformation Content
indexed to Standard Content

Brand’s existingcustomer base issignificantly lesslikely to trust thebrand ad when it
appears next tomisinformation,compared tostandard content.

Everyone

1985

Those in-market
for productExposed only; Everyone, Misinformation content n=1,217; Standard Content n=411;
Those in-market, Misinformation Content n=782; Standard Content n=205; Past-purchasers, Misinformation Content n=605; Standard Content n=202
Note: Significant different between groups at >=90% confidence
Q: How would you rate the ad on the following? – The ad conveyed information I trust – Agreement Scale
Note: Misinformation content excludes AI-generated misinformation

Past purchasersof brandBRANDS AREWASTING AD DOLLARSBY APPEARING NEXTTO MISINFORMATION

Impact on Brand | Among those in-market for the productDelta (Exposed – Control)● Standard Content+11%● Misinformation Content↑+10%↑Brands lose impact on respect &trust among their most relevantconsumers

Brands lose respect
across different forms ofmisinformation spanningclimate, politics, andhealthcare.

No significant
impactBrand I respect

20No significant
impactBrand I trustThose in-market, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=782, Control n=730; Standard Content, Exposed n=250, Control n=239
Q: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about [brand]? – Is a brand I respect; Is a brand I trust – Agreement scale
In-market: Those who are likely to look for a new car or insurance in the next 6 – 11 months, buy mouthwash once a month, are likely to visit a personal finance website/app↑: Significant difference between exposed and control groups at >=90% confidence
Note: Misinformation content excludes AI-generated misinformation

BRANDS ACROSS VARIOUS VERTICALS LOSE RESPECT
AMONG THOSE IN-MARKET
Impact on Brand | Among those in-market for the productDelta (Exposed – Control)● Standard Content● Misinformation Content

Is a brand I respect:+19%

↑+16%

↑+11%
No significant
impactInsurance

21No significant
impactAuto↑+10%
No significant
impactFinanceThose in-market, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=782, Control n=730; Standard Content, Exposed n=250, Control n=239
Q: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about [brand]? – Is a brand I respect – Agreement scale
In-market: Those who are likely to look for a new car or insurance in the next 6 – 11 months, buy mouthwash once a month, are likely to visit a personal finance website/app↑: Significant difference between exposed and control groups at >=90% confidence
Note: Misinformation content excludes AI-generated misinformation↑No significantimpact

CPG

BRANDS ALSO LOSEINTEREST AMONG
THEIR CURRENTCUSTOMER BASE

Impact on Brand | Among past purchasers of brand
Delta (Exposed – Control)● Standard Content● Misinformation Content+9%↑No significant impact
Search Intent

22

Past brand purchasers, Misinformation Content, Exposed n=605, Control n=472; Standard Content, Exposed n=202, Control n=145
Q: How inclined are you to search for information about the following? – Agreement scale
Past purchasers: people who currently or have in the past owned brand’s product↑: Significant difference between exposed and control groups at >=90% confidence
Note: Misinformation content excludes AI-generated misinformation

OVERALL,MISINFORMATIONERODES BRAND
INTEGRITY

Why people thought it
was inappropriate forbrands to appear next
to misinformation
Open-ended responses“Because I feel like itgives [brand] a badname.”

Opinion of brand when appearing
next to misinformation“It is a fake story.
Makes brand look
fake too.”47%

think the brand's integrity iscompromised when it's seenalongside misinformation.

23“Because [brand] is agood company and it
was going to be following
behind a company thatwas telling lies.”

Everyone, n= 2,036
Q: Let’s say you see an ad for a brand appear after a post that you deemed as riddled with misinformation. How would it make you feel about the brand? - Agreement Scale
Q: You suggested the post was not appropriate for to appear next to. Why is that?

GREEN BRANDSLOSE CREDIBILITY
WHEN LINKED TOENVIRONMENTALMISINFORMATION

Climate change is baloney!

Opinion if an eco-friendly
brand is seen alongside
misinformation about theenvironment% AgreeAuthor: Aaron “The Liar” Smith

44%

Would question thebrand’s sustainabilityefforts.

24

Everyone, n= 2,036
Q: Now imagine you come across an ad for a famous eco-friendly brand like Patagonia, and it's shown alongside misinformation about the environment. With this inmind, how much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the brand? – Agreement scale

IMPLICATIONS

25

Brand perception is negatively
impacted by adjacency tomisinformation

Political and AI misinformation is easilyspotted as fake, but science-related
misinformation is often missed

Adjacency to misinformation leads
to lost impact, resulting in
wasted ad spend

Advertisers should be mindful of thecontent surrounding their ads, asassociation with misinformation canerode the perceived integrity andtrustworthiness of their brand.

Advertisers should pick ad
placements carefully because
people find it harder to spot
misinformation about science topics
like climate change and healthcare.

Advertisers should consider investing
in tools and strategies that ensure
their ads are placed in reliable andtrustworthy environments tomaximize the effectiveness of theirad spend.

For more info, contact:

YOUkara.manatt@magnaglobal.com
measurement@zefr.com