Amid coverage of the Pahalgam terrorist attack, YouTube viewers encountered an unsettling reality: ads from brands like Blinkit, Swiggy Instamart, Goibibo, Niyo, Myntra, Urban Company, Farmley, and others were running alongside footage of grief and violence. Whether it was pizza chains, astrology services, or health food products, these ad placements were not deliberate; they were the consequence of automated programmatic systems failing to account for emotional context.
From travel aggregators to skincare and grocery delivery services, commercial messaging appeared moments before or below footage of national grief and violence, not as conscious placement, but as collateral damage of automation. Even platforms like Google and Meta which claim to offer brand safety controls appear to be falling short.
Niyo was the only brand among Blinkit, Swiggy, Myntra, Urban Company, Hoichoi, Goibibo, Nykaa, and Farmley to respond to Storyboard18’s queries, while Meta did not comment. A BookMyShow ad was even spotted beneath a user’s mourning status on Facebook.
However, BookMyShow later clarified that while the personalised nature of platforms like Meta may occasionally position their ads near sensitive content, they actively work with advertising partners to ensure suitable brand environments and closely monitor placements to maintain high safety standards.
Together, these examples reflect a growing concern in India’s digital ad ecosystem: the context collapse of programmatic advertising, where brand messaging risks becoming tone-deaf, intrusive, or outright offensive — not by intent, but by automation.
Read More:Context collapse: When programmatic automation turns brand messaging tone-deaf
Sandeep Goyal, Managing Director at Rediffusion, offers a reality check, “The machine is focused on bidding optimally for an ad aperture. It is impervious to the ad environment – which can change in real time. So safety guarantees will require dramatic re-engineering of the ecosystem. It is actually a contrarian requirement – advertisers want to be seen in hi-context environments but the same events could be violent and gory and therefore undesirable. So I am not sure whether advertisers can have both – high traffic targets and no gore.”
The Loss of Control
KV Sridhar, also known as Pops, Global Chief Creative Officer at Nihilent, echoes similar concerns about loss of contextual control in today’s algorithmic ad ecosystem.
“See, earlier there was control — when do you show the ad, in what context, and to which audience. Now, with all the algorithms, you have no control.” He explains that people are consuming content passively, and “whatever you’re watching… nobody really wants to put an ad in the context of editorial that is not aligned.”
In traditional campaigns, “we try paid advertising very hard to be known to the context. You see cricketers used in cricketing ads, film stars used in Filmfare or movie-related associations… there is a relevance of either communal harmony, peace, or any nationalistic theme.”
But with digital platforms, that relevance often vanishes. “Because of technology, we are unable to control most of the ads that pop up… It’s difficult to control, and it is irritating.” Even during breaking news, he says, “you’ll have sponsored ads that take the entire mood off.”
“Here there is absolutely no correlation between what you are watching and what ads appear. If you’ve visited a website or an e-commerce platform and searched for skincare, and then come back to watch something else, skincare advertising will still appear.”
Context Collapse in the Performance Era
What we’re witnessing is the erasure of emotional nuance in favor of automated performance.
“It does not matter what content you’re watching, because that was a different course and a different algorithm.” Pops believes that to get true empathy from consumers, “you need to understand their sentiments. That’s what emotional advertising is about.”
The fragmentation has led to dissonance. “In the past, we knew what commercials we were watching… the context mattered to the audience. But now, the audience is taken for granted and served whatever — and that leads to dissonance.”
He adds, “It is very important that the context in which your ad is placed should be planned, and brands must have control over that — not let algorithms decide.” But in today’s performance-obsessed ecosystem, “algorithms are going wild… even if you look at an issue once, that ad will haunt you till you buy it.”
Big Tech’s Role in the Breakdown
Pops points to the mechanics of ad platforms themselves as part of the problem. “Google asks you to set your target audiences… Serving the ad is algorithmically controlled by the platforms.” This hands-off control means, “brands are subscribing to whatever those platforms dictate, because they want the reach.”
“That’s the problem with cookies — it’s all about targeting and retargeting. What is retargeting? Whether you’re retargeting a commercial message or editorial, it’s the same.”
Read More:EXCLUSIVE: Meta to allow Alcohol, Real Money Gambling ads on its platform in India
Prem Sharma, Vice President Marketing at Swanrose Inc., believes the lack of contextual intelligence stems from an industry chasing reach at all costs.
“It has to be a shared responsibility across the team. It can never rest on one shoulder… People are just running behind impressions and cost per impression—how to bring it down and get the right consumers to see the ad.”
He emphasizes that brands must define their own ethical boundaries. “For the brand I’m building, I don’t talk to any audience under 40 years of age… that’s a non-negotiable.”
“Similarly, brands need to make their social responsibilities part of the KPI for brand managers… Once agencies start asking for contextual safeguards from platforms like Meta and Google, those platforms will have to follow.”
On platform accountability, he adds, “Meta has been shrugging off all responsibility and putting it all on brands now… Meta is more sneaky about it. So, in a way, Meta is even more shrewd.”
“Google still tries to segregate… Somewhere in their DNA, they’ve retained that clarity, though it might have diluted over time.”
Automation and Systemic Gaps
Rahul Vengalil, CEO and co-founder of tgthr, notes that while the problem isn’t new, its scale and consequences have grown.
“This has been there for ages — the question of brand safety… but at the end of the day, the digital ecosystem is so vast, and it is so unpredictable.”
He adds that OTT and TV platforms have stronger editorial safeguards, but for “public platforms like Facebook and Meta… brand safety depends on the moderator’s thinking process.”
On automation, “the system is optimized to deliver on efficiency. It is not optimized to deliver on many other things.”
“Unless there is a precedent… Only when that brand figures out that this has happened, can the client and agency flag it in the system, and then the system learns for the future.”
“To actually do this will cost money… So if brands are really serious, then it’s an additional investment which they need to earmark for.”
Akshat Khetan, Founder of AU Corporate Advisory and Legal Services brings in the legal lens. “Brands are often linked to the content that they appear alongside… advertisements next to depressing, bigoted, or violent material may lead to boycotts, public outrage and a decline in brand trust.”
He adds, “Brands may be subject to fines or required compliance inspections… There is also an increasing discussion about the ‘duty of care’ in digital advertising contexts, which could grow into legal responsibilities for brands.”
The Way Forward
As Gopa Menon, Chief Growth Officer for APAC at Successive Digital, outlines, brands must evolve their approach by implementing inclusion-based strategies, adopting multi-layered protection, and establishing clear crisis protocols. They should also prioritise transparent supply paths, balance automation with human oversight, and align their measurement metrics with brand values.
“The persistent challenges in brand safety highlight why many brands are reconsidering their digital media approaches, sometimes shifting budget to more controlled environments despite potential reach limitations. As the cookie-less future remains a mystery, I guess quality placements over quantity may represent the best way ahead.”
Read More:Could Google’s cookie delay usher in a post-Google ad era?