What you need to know:

• As buying groups push publishers to move on decarbonisation, publishers are pushing back – they want industry-agreed standards, not individual firms setting the agenda.
• Meta exec warns against industry being corralled by “a company who holds a single metric and touts that as the one thing that you should be focused on.”
• News Corp backs that view.
• Other publishers concerned that ESG-carbon drive could lead to next wave of “tech tax”.

Who's counting?

A race to develop carbon metrics could backfire according to some of Australia’s digital publishers as buyers ramp up pressure to move faster.

GroupM has been pushing hardest on bringing carbon-based media buying to market, with the Australian operation in trials with circa 25 local advertisers, following a template set by global boss Christian Juhl.

Last month local investment boss Seb Rennie suggested publishers have 12-24 months before the money starts to move to publishers based on their carbon footprint. Globally, GroupM has open-soured its carbon calculator methodology in a bid to set standards and move faster in order to hit its own decarbonisation targets, with scope 3 or indirect emissions from media buying making up the lion's share of WPP's carbon footprint.

But senior execs from News and Facebook this week warned that industry rather than individual firms must be the standard-setters before the money starts to move. Other publishers fear that carbon-based buying could end up becoming the next wave of publisher “tech tax”.

Speaking at an IAB Australia event, Meta Group Industry Director Naomi Shepherd said a push for sustainability is key, but warned against industry being corralled by “a company who holds a single metric and touts that as the one thing that you should be focused on.” She called for the IAB to drive industry standards to “guide businesses and publishers in this sector to think about it in a consistent and cohesive way [so that industry can] actually make a meaningful impact”.

News Corp’s Suzie Cardwell backed that view.

“There are a number of players now starting to come into the market who are claiming to be able to measure that carbon impact. And that's exactly what we should be working towards. But it's really important that we get clear on standardisation of that measurement,” said Cardwell.

“I've been in this industry long enough to have seen a number of different types of measurement come in and almost be imposed on the industry. But it's not until we all agree on exactly what that measurement looks like and the methodology for getting to a particular number that we're able to actually move the industry forward. For us to become truly sustainable, we must first agree on what that methodology looks like and what the numbers should be.”

Industry groups including the AANA and the IAB are working on those standards and codes, but it is not yet clear how long they will take to materialise. In the meantime, platforms in particular may be reluctant to open up their walled gardens to carbon-based buying trials now in market.

While GroupM ANZ chief Aimee Buchanan has rejected outright suggestions that media buyers will force publishers to pick up the cost of decarbonising media supply chains, some remain unconvinced.

“There’s a risk it becomes the new tech tax”, said one publishing exec, speaking on the sidelines of the IAB event. “Some of those [specialist firms now pushing supply chain decarbonisation] have form when it comes to taxing publishers.”