Forrester issues recommendations to advertisers on how to deal with X in light of recent actions

• Lean into non-binding advertising commitments with X
• Explore principal media solutions for X upfront deals
• Require X to meet media performance thresholds

Pattisall said the post is meant to help with efforts advertisers have already put to work. “My understanding is that many advertisers and agencies have been quietly working in this direction,” he told Digiday. “So anything that we’re recommending is not to contradict that, but rather to support that.”

Pattisall pointed to X’s recent announcement to integrate AI tools into its advertising functions as a “perfect example” of the platform’s “engineering prowess and capability.” “It illustrates that they’re perfectly capable of making improvements,” Pattisall said.

Forrester’s recommendations come amid advertiser inquiry about how they should handle a situation with X in case X made noises about possible legal actions. Pattisall said, adding that he and Chickering wanted to spell out a clear and business-friendly way forward for the industry. 

Still, Forrester didn’t pull punches in saying why recent events have made a post like this necessary.

“Reports of X CEO Linda Yaccarino tying appeals for increased advertising commitments to X lawsuits and Congressional oversight reads as extortion and requires advertisers and agencies to take steps to maintain their fiduciary imperative to direct media investments,” read the opening statement.

“Whether intentional or not, X’s actions threaten the solvency of the advertising industry because they contradict common-sense media practices … [and] compromise advertisers’ and agencies’ fiduciary responsibility .… But just as agencies and advertisers have a right to media choice, so does X have a right to pursue legal action. And the U.S. House Judiciary Committee has the right (and constitutional obligation) to conduct oversight. The courts will adjudicate, and Congress’s lawful oversight will continue.”

Here’s a deeper look at each of the recommendations: 

Lean into non-binding advertising commitments with X

“This might sound counter-intuitive but hear us out: Proactively make an ‘endeavor’ deal with X that gradually increases advertising spend to a specified goal or target — identifying tiered spending thresholds that you must meet based upon the publisher (in this case X) also meeting specific requirements.”

The post then recommends structuring deals so they’re contingent on improved audience targetability so advertisers can pinpoint audiences. It also calls for better filtering to allow advertisers greater precision in selecting contextual environments, including language, violence, pornography, news, and political issues. Finally, it suggests “APIs that align with how agencies purchase digital media enabling for more efficient activation and optimization.” It then points out that X is making efforts to do all the above. 

Explore principal media solutions for X upfront deals 

“Consider using agencies’ principal media capabilities to meet commitments to increase X inventory,” reads the post. ”Most principal media programs involve client opt-ins, audit rights, clear benefits (like cost or performance), separate contracts, and labeling on plans.”

The point being that principal media solutions are highly scrutinized and “often bring financial benefits to the advertiser and agency.” It calls for X “to provide increased inventory levels at a substantial discount in order to fit within the principal media pool the agencies manage,” which would be a universal win, it claims, for advertisers, agencies and platforms like X.

Require X to meet media performance thresholds 

“Structure your partnership with X to include performance requirements that unlock continued or increased investment. Leverage incrementality testing to prove whether X can deliver equivalent or more value than other media platforms,” the blog spelled out. “When placements don’t perform, they optimize—meaning they move the investment to new tactics, audiences, or channels.”

Essentially, Forrester’s argument goes that X should be held to the same standards as other platforms on which advertisers spend, and shouldn’t be exempt from that level of scrutiny. Still, “[h]istorically, X (including when it was “Twitter”) hasn’t been of material significance on most media plans for several reasons: the reach isn’t notable, their ad products lack performance, and targeting capabilities are nascent. If X wants more ad dollars now, it needs to prove the platform’s efficacy. Make them earn their spot on your media plan, just like any other publisher.”

Statista put X’s 2024 ad revenue at around $2 billion, a drop from $4.5 billion in 2022, while a Kantar report in January said 26% of advertisers plan to reduce their spend there.

The post ends on a somewhat diplomatic note, calling on industry organizations like the ANA, 4As and WARC to advocate for the above issues. “In our capacity as a neutral adviser to our clients, Forrester offers this guidance solely as a means to help advertisers, agencies, and publishers navigate the changing marketplace and confront its business significance. Forrester believes that “media choice” is a fundamental underpinning of the advertising industry.”

Requests for comment from X, the ANA and 4As were not returned by press time.

Krystal Scanlon contributed to this report.