Ad budgets for made-for-advertising sites increased in early 2026. AI-generated low-quality content is complicating efforts to reduce waste. New data shows performance gaps and ongoing risks for advertisers.
Digital publishers and advertisers are facing renewed pressure as ad spend on made-for-advertising (MFA) sites increased in the first quarter of 2026, reversing a downward trend that began after the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) launched its anti-MFA initiative in 2023. According to the ANA’s latest programmatic benchmark report, the share of ad budgets allocated to MFA properties among its members rose from 0.6% in Q4 2025 to 1.1% in Q1 2026. While MFA still represents a small portion of total spend, the doubling signals persistent challenges in cleaning up programmatic supply chains.
Julie Weitzner, ANA’s SVP of media practice, noted that MFA spending is not evenly distributed. Advertisers with lower-performing campaigns allocated 2.1% of their budgets to MFA, compared to just 0.9% among the highest performers. The report also points to the rise of “AI slop”-a term for low-value, AI-generated content-as a factor requiring ongoing vigilance, especially as new sub-types emerge.
Industry experts are increasingly concerned about the impact of generative AI on media quality. Research from Ahrefs found that 74% of new websites created in April 2025 contained AI-generated content, while a study by Graphite reported that half of all online articles were AI-produced by October 2025. This rapid influx of AI content has made it easier for MFA publishers to generate and monetize low-effort material across formats, from text to video.
Scott Pierce of The Trade Desk observed that while AI slop and MFA share similarities-such as high ad density and poor content quality-they are not identical. MFA sites typically combine a high ad-to-content ratio, low-quality material, and heavy reliance on paid traffic. AI slop sites may not meet all these criteria but often deliver cluttered ads and subpar content. Still, anti-MFA measures, such as stricter supply-side platform (SSP) controls, are making it harder for both MFA and AI slop sites to access programmatic ad dollars.
Rocky Moss, CEO of DeepSee.io, explained that SSPs now delay adding new sites to their bidstreams, preventing MFA publishers from quickly launching replacement domains. However, AI-driven low-quality sites tend to be short-lived, often disappearing within 30 to 60 days-too brief to enter most SSP auctions. Moss expressed greater concern about established publishers being acquired and converted into content farms, as well as the difficulty of distinguishing between valuable AI-assisted content and pure AI slop, especially as reputable brands experiment with generative tools.
Chris Kane of Jounce Media argued that not all AI-generated content should be dismissed, emphasizing the difference between using AI to enhance editorial workflows and operating automated content mills. From the SSP perspective, Jade Grodesky of Index Exchange and Ilana Wollin of Nexxen said their platforms enforce quality standards against both MFA and AI slop, regardless of the distinction. Index Exchange claims to have been MFA-free since 2024, while Nexxen relies on approved publisher lists and third-party data from firms like Jounce and DeepSee to maintain quality.
Maintaining ad quality remains a constant challenge as bad actors exploit new opportunities enabled by AI. Weitzner noted that even a small share of advertisers willing to buy low-cost impressions can incentivize the creation of disposable domains. Ultimately, the ANA report suggests that advertisers focused on performance are less likely to waste budgets on MFA impressions, reinforcing the need for ongoing scrutiny of both MFA and AI-generated content.
For additional perspective on how major companies are responding to AI-related risks and costs, see this report on new restrictions and monitoring measures: how leading firms are clamping down on employee AI usage.
