Which of the following best describes invalid traffic for Amazon DSP campaigns?
- Fraudulent, involuntary, non-human, duplicate, or otherwise illegitimate as defined in the Media Rating Council’s (MRC) IVT guidelines
- The context within which the ad appears
- The practice of filtering out egregious content that does not meet the content adjacency policy
Explanation:
The selected answer **Fraudulent, involuntary, non-human, duplicate, or otherwise illegitimate as defined in the Media Rating Council’s (MRC) IVT guidelines** is correct because invalid traffic (IVT) refers to any traffic that is deemed to be fraudulent, involuntary, non-human, duplicate, or otherwise illegitimate. According to the Media Rating Council’s (MRC) IVT guidelines, invalid traffic includes activities such as bot-generated traffic, clicks from non-human sources, or duplicate impressions that do not result from legitimate user engagement. This type of traffic distorts campaign performance and wastefully consumes the advertising budget, so it’s important for DSP campaigns to identify and filter out such traffic to ensure accurate reporting and effective spend allocation. The other options mentioned, such as the context of the ad or content adjacency, are not related to the definition of invalid traffic.