#TrendAlert
#TrendAlert - Meta's Ad Automation Is A Monopoly In Disguise
Share
Behind the Curtain of Convenience
In Silicon Valley, the word “innovation” has long been used as a euphemism for unchecked power. And Meta, the empire formerly known as Facebook, is doubling down on that strategy with its latest push into ad automation. While the company sells its AI-driven advertising ecosystem as a tool for empowering marketers and simplifying campaign management, the truth is more cunning: Meta’s AI ad utopia is a smokescreen. It’s not about helping businesses. It’s about total control.
From creative to targeting to measurement, Meta wants it all. And if we don’t scrutinise this grab for dominance, we may find ourselves locked into an ad ecosystem where Meta dictates every step, and no one is left to question the numbers, the impact, or the ethics.
The Illusion of Empowerment
Let’s break down what Meta’s “advancements” in AI ad automation really mean. Through tools like Advantage+ and Performance Max-style campaigns, Meta now encourages advertisers to hand over creative development, audience targeting, delivery optimisation, and even performance analysis to its machine learning models. At first glance, this seems convenient – a way for time-strapped marketers to get better results with less effort.
But convenience has a cost. When Meta decides what your ad looks like, who sees it, and how it’s measured, it removes checks and balances from the system. The traditional advertising process relied on collaboration: creative agencies, performance marketers, data analysts, and third-party verification platforms all played a role in shaping a campaign. Meta’s model centralises all of that power within its own black box.
And let’s not forget the financial incentives. In 2023, Meta earned $131.9 billion in advertising revenue, accounting for 98% of its total earnings [Statista, 2024]. Every additional lever Meta controls translates into more ad dollars flowing into its ecosystem, and fewer options for businesses to seek independent guidance or alternatives.
Metrics Without Accountability
Perhaps the most troubling element of Meta’s ad automation push is the erosion of third-party validation. Advertisers are expected to trust Meta’s internal reporting on reach, engagement, conversions, and ROI without external verification. That’s like letting a student grade their own test.
This lack of transparency has real consequences. In 2020, Meta agreed to pay $40 million to settle a lawsuit alleging it had knowingly inflated video view metrics by up to 900% between 2015 and 2016 [Wall Street Journal, 2019]. This misrepresentation led advertisers to shift millions in budgets toward video, under false pretences.
So why should we trust Meta to mark its own homework now? The company’s history is riddled with similar controversies; it has consistently demonstrated a willingness to prioritise profits over accountability. Meta’s strategy to take over the wheel of advertising is the true definition of conflict of interest. Imagine if DSTV also made the TV shows it rated. Or if Google controlled not just the search engine but also every website it ranked.
The End of Competition?
By encouraging brands to “trust the machine,” Meta discourages experimentation, limits differentiation, and suppresses innovation in advertising. And this isn’t just about internal politics within the ad world. It’s a threat to market competition itself. When a single platform becomes the architect, broadcaster, and judge of advertising, it kills the incentive for alternatives to emerge. This has broader implications for startups, publishers, and creators whose financial survival depends on a diverse and competitive ad market.
We’ve Seen This Movie Before
This isn’t Meta’s first rodeo. Remember when Facebook pivoted to video, promising a golden age of branded storytelling; only to have publishers pivot and perish? Or when it changed the algorithm to prioritise “meaningful social interactions,” devastating reach for businesses overnight?
Between 2015 and 2018, Facebook urged publishers to prioritise video, claiming it was the future of content. Many media companies redirected resources to video based on inflated viewing metrics, later revealed to be overstated by up to 900% – leading to layoffs and business failures when promised returns didn’t materialize. In 2018, Facebook shifted its News Feed algorithm to favour posts from friends and family over brands, aiming to promote “meaningful social interactions.” This sudden change drastically cut organic reach for publishers and businesses, forcing many to increase ad spend to stay visible. Both pivots highlight the volatility of relying on Facebook’s ecosystem.
Each time, the justification was strategic. Each time, the results disproportionately benefited Meta. And each time, marketers had no real choice but to comply…or risk losing access to one of the world’s largest audiences.
With AI ad automation, we are being told a familiar story: “This is for your benefit. This will simplify your work. This is the future.” But in reality, it is a calculated move to consolidate control. So, the question remains – if Meta controls your creative, targeting, and performance metrics, what part of your advertising strategy is actually yours?
Think Meta has your back? Think again. Let’s build an ad strategy that doesn’t play by their rules.
Subscribe now
To discover the bold ideas and major shifts defining the future