The Times is running a major investigative story suggesting that major brands are “unwittingly funding Islamic extremists, white supremacists and pornographers by advertising on their websites”. This is not the first time that the issue of online media budget spend processes resulting in brands being advertised alongside inappropriate media has come up. Historically the issue has come out because of lack of controls between the “media buyer”, which is typically the agency and the sources (exchanges/SSP/media owners). In the considerable Times article the main issue is advertising on Youtube (Google owned) allowing inappropriate “hate” videos and the advertising next to them. There are also some generic accusations against the large agencies who dominate media buying, which are not new. The dominance of Google and Facebook in Online Media, which frequently takes over 50% of online spend in some markets, is also a major issue given the way they produce viewing data (that has been incorrect by their own admission) and not independently verified in line with industry norms. Quality independent intermediaries who specialise in buying/selling of media are likely to be a preferable source to Google/Facebook who have their own media to sell. With agencies seeking to prove they are not ripping off clients and that they are buying quality media we expect the independent sector to benefit. Our key pick here is RhythmOne (Buy) which has worked very hard over several years to differentiate itself on quality grounds from its peers and now receives very high quality rankings. We also see positives for Ebiquity (NR), which analyses agency performance and can oversee contracting terms to help an advertiser get some control of its agency relationships.