GDPR: No ads are shown without user consent

[Carlos]

Implementing google admob's GDPR, I noticed that if the user does not give consent (i.e. click on manage options), no ads are shown (No fill). As I understand it, if the user does not give consent non-personalized ads should be shown. 

What could be the problem? I mean, if the user does not consent, is it like using an ad blocker? Is there an alternative to google GDPR that fixes this problem?

By the way, if the app can be used by minors (over 13), do you have to ask the user if he/she is of age?

Thank you very much for the help, it is really being very confusing.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

With regard to your concern, if users choose to not consent at all, then the ads that will display will be non-personalized ads. However, as per this article (https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862?hl=en&sjid=2418371235660772237-AP), for non-personalized ads, consent for cookies or mobile identifiers is still required because non-personalized ads still use cookies or mobile identifiers to combat fraud and abuse, for frequency capping, and for aggregated ad reporting. If consent is missing for Google for Purpose 1 in the TC string, Google will drop the ad request and no ads will be served. For more information on this, kindly refer to the article provided. Kindly note that the default serving of ads is personalized ads.

For your concern for minors, you can try to use the "setTagForUnderAgeOfConsent" (https://developers.google.com/admob/android/privacy/api/reference/com/google/android/ump/ConsentRequestParameters.Builder.html#public-consentrequestparameters.builder-settagforunderageofconsent-boolean-tagforunderageofconsent) this set tag for under age of consent, and false means users are not under age.

This message is in relation to case "ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2mUh07:ref"

Thanks,
 

Mobile Ads SDK Team

[Filippo]

I have the same issue.
If the user clicks on "manage options", all the selectors are not selected by default and, if the user confirms the selections, then the ads will not be visualized ("No Fill" error from admob).

My Questions:

1. Is there a way to set a mandatory list of options, at least to show non personalized ads in order to know, at the confirmation, if the user deselected that list?
2. Is there a way to know, after the confirmation (ConsentForm.dismissed), if the minimum list of permissions are available to show at least non personalized ads?
3. Does exists an API do check that list of persmissions?

[yohoho...@gmail.com]

Same here! No ads when the user click on manage options. This would be end of the ads type monetization if the things stay that way. There's no non personalized ads option. Now the two outcomes are personalized ads or no ads which is horrible.

Regards!

[Andreas]

Hi all,

I assume you're all using Google UMP, which is a garbage product that basically doesn't offer any meaningful functionality when it comes to surfacing what type of ads, if any, an app installation might show to its users. If you need to keep using Google UMP, the only known workaround is to decipher the TCF strings that are stored locally. Here's a link to such workarounds implemented in Kotlin for use in Android apps. It should work the same under iOS.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi All,

Thank you for reaching out to us.

@Andreas- Thank you for providing your insight and workaround on this.

@Filippo - With regard to the following questions, can you provide more information on what you're referring to as the "mandatory list of options"? Then, for your second and third questions, as per the documentation (https://developers.google.com/admob/ios/privacy), there is no yet a way to confirm or API if a minimum list of permissions are available to show at least non personalized ads. However, you can check this article (https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862?hl=en&sjid=2418371235660772237-AP) for the following criteria that should be met for personalized ads and non-personalized ads display.

@Filippo and YohohoAsakura - Since you're also encountering no ads when a user clicks "manage options", can you provide us the following information below?

• Sample app project where the behavior is reproducible
• Steps to replicate
• Ad unit id
• App Id
• SDK version

If the file(s) you are looking to share are less than 25mb in total you can attach them to this case on your next reply. If you are having trouble attaching your file to this case or if your file(s) are larger than 25mb, you can share your files with me by performing the following steps:

1. Navigate to https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfkAiXMeYP-fw1W3Z-tT9uwmATEKO5X6S-th0gR2ezdKaaqfg/viewform?usp=pp_url&entry.400550049=Mobile+Ads+SDK&entry.460850823=5004Q00002mUh07QAC&entry.80707362=00184685

2. Fill out all fields, and attach your file(s).

3. Please reply back on this thread when you have uploaded your file(s). Please do not share this link. 

[yohoho...@gmail.com]

Hello! The project doesn't matter. And I guess you see in almost all of the latest conversations everyone is experiencing the same behaviour. It happens in all of my apps in which I implement the consent SDK. This is one example: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.radefffactory.bdz

I'm using the latest SDK for the ads and for the consent form. When I click on the Consent button I see ads in the app as usual. When I click on Manage options and then confirm selected there are not ads to show. And I guess this is because all of the cookies and toggles are turned off but we need basic storage access for cookies to show non-personalized ads. But this is very bad because every user will just decline the cookies and use freely the app without the ads - bad for developers and bad for Google.

Is there something we can do to keep the ads showing? It doesn't matter if they are personalized or non-personlized?

Regards!

[Filippo]

@Advisor: with "mandatory list of options" I mean the minimum list of checkbox to be checked to permit at least the non perosnalized ads...

In any case the problem is perfectly explained by YohohoAsakura. 

A lot of messages/theads in the forum are about the same problem with ads and the list of options.

About the example app, the app from YohohoAsakura is enough, we all have the same problem.
I think we have, at the moment, only one solution: a workaround as explained by @Andreas or something explained in this thread  https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69307205/mandatory-consent-for-admob-user-messaging-platform
At the end we have to read and check the list of bits saved in the sharedprefs.
Something from the Google UMP SDK would be really appreciated 

[HanashiMashou]

@Andreas‏ If we implement this, will it be enough for replacing UMP SDK and not asking by Google about GDPR requirements? 

[Andreas]

@HanashiMashou No, my code or the similar one on the StackOverflow page only allows developers to detect what level of consent an app user has given. It is not sufficient on its own and can not replace any Consent Management Platform (CMP).

[Filippo]

@Andreas
Is this part correct in your "detect_insufficient_consent.kt" code ?
val sufficientInterest = (
            (tcConsentString[1] == '1' || tcInterestString[1] == '1') &&
                    (tcConsentString[1] == '6' || tcInterestString[1] == '6') &&
                    (tcConsentString[1] == '8' || tcInterestString[1] == '8') &&
                    (tcConsentString[1] == '9' || tcInterestString[1] == '9')



I think the correct code should be something like this:
val sufficientInterest = (
            (tcConsentString[1] == '1' || tcInterestString[1] == '1') &&
                    (tcConsentString[6] == '1' || tcInterestString[6] == '1') &&
                    (tcConsentString[8] == '1' || tcInterestString[8] == '1') &&
                    (tcConsentString[9] == '1' || tcInterestString[9] == '1')

[Andreas]

@Filippo Definitely, that was a typo. Fixed now, thanks! :)

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hello everyone,

We do understand the concern that you're currently experiencing. With that, allow me to share this (including the reports and findings thus far) to a wider team to get their insight, and to deliver a decisive resolution to the said reported behavior. I'll update this thread the soonest I hear back from them.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hello all,

Thank you for your inquiries. The UMP SDK writes the TC String, which is comprised of many bits that can no longer be translated into a single boolean for "personalization". However, you may read the TC String per the spec and use that to determine app behavior. 

Thanks,
Justin

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2mUh07:ref

[Tihomir Radeff]

So basically "we don't care, fix it yourself".

I think a library like this should have an official way to determine the user choice but apparently you don't care for the users.

I'm wondering if noone sees ads because of this consent stuff what will happen to Google's business.

I'm sorry for my words but I really don't like Google's lack of attention to the developers who keep their ad businesses running.

Regards! 

[Filippo]

I think we have to use the IAB Consent String SDK to decode and understand something:
https://github.com/InteractiveAdvertisingBureau/GDPR-Transparency-and-Consent-Framework/tree/master/Consent%20String%20SDK

[Kevin]

Hi, for all.

I escalated this case, and i hope have some real solutions for this.
i update here when i get some new from the google

https://support.google.com/admob/thread/223482060?hl=en&sjid=7093351746829692427-EU

[SDev]

Hello everyone

I see that after years everything remains the same.

Worst of all, they want to force us to use UMP (I don't know of other alternatives) and it's useless if it doesn't show ads when you click on do not consent.

I wonder what is the deadline until we can continue using the old (but reliable) Google Mobile Ads Consent SDK...

Greetings

[Anh Le]

Hi all,

Please help me answer these questions:

1) Are these the steps if the user wants to use the app with non-personalized ads (in case I just use Google Advertising)?

    - Select "Manage options". (step1.png)

    - In Data preferences screen, the user must at least consent to "Store and/or access information on a device". (step2.png)

    - Scroll to the bottom of the Data preferences screen and select "Vendor preferences". (step3.png)

    - Find "Google Advertising Products" and consent to it. (step4.png)

    - Confirm choices

    If the user doesn't consent to "Store and/or access information on a device" or doesn't consent to vendor "Google Advertising Products", the ads will never load (Ad failed to load : 3)

2) Is there a way to change the order of the vendor list in "Vendor preferences" screen?

    I have tried "Edit and format messages" on Admob but can't find any option to change the order of the vendor list. At least, please sort them alphabetically to make it easier for users to find a vendor. Now, it's very hard to find a vendor

3) If I change the option "Choose the type of ads you want to show" on Admob setting to "Non-personalized ads" and don't publish any GDPR messages, will my app serve ads to users in the EEA & UK? If not, am I required to create a GDPR message even though I have chosen "Non-Personalized Ads" on the setting?

     I found that it's very hard for users in the EEA & UK if they want to use the app with non-personalized ads (in case I choose "Personalized Ads" on Admob setting and create a GDPR message, user must done steps in question 1). So I intent to change the Admob setting to "Non-personalized ads", but I wonder if in this case Google would need consent?

Thank you so much!

[ABQ App Source]

In our prior years-long thread about this (https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/UcveWmtBm4Q/m/ozd595HtAAAJ) the takeaway from Google was "not going to fix it, working as-intended, just show limited ads" (despite there being no clear legal reason for excluding a "Non-Personalized Ads" button, or remembering prior user consent choices when the dialog is re-displayed by the user).  They won't even make the vendor list alphabetical, there is no thought to end user experience or overall usability here.

The option to show non-personalized ads is effectively dead - no user is going to bother to figure out the secret combination of settings in the CMP. 

Has anyone gone all-in on this approach and have actual ad revenue data from the EU before and after the change? Surely this poorly implement CMP hurts not only app developer revenue but also Google revenue.

-TV

[Test Dvd]

Hello,
Is it necessary to use the ump sdk that they say or is there another that does the same and allows non-personalized ads to be displayed?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hello Anh,

Thank you for your question.

1.) You are correct that a user has to opt in to Purpose 1 (store and/or access information on a device) (where legally required), from this article, 

Although non-personalized ads don’t use cookies or mobile ad identifiers for ad targeting, 
they do still use cookies or mobile ad identifiers 
for frequency capping, aggregated ad reporting, and to combat fraud and abuse. 
Therefore, you must obtain consent to use cookies or mobile ad identifiers for 
those purposes where legally required, per the ePrivacy Directive in certain EEA countries.

See also the documentation on consent for cookies for more information on non-personalized ads vs. limited ads. 


2.) I have filed a feature request on your behalf and escalated it to the greater engineering team for ordering of vendor preferences. 


3.) You need to ask your users in the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK for consent when showing personalized or non-personalized ads.

Thanks,
Justin

 

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2mUh07:ref

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hello,

Thank you for your question. See this recent update that says, "Later this year, we will require all partners using our publisher products — Google AdSense, Ad Manager, or AdMob — to use a Google certified CMP that integrates with the TCF when serving ads to users in the European Economic Area or the UK."

As for your choice of CMP, it is not a requirement to use the UMP SDK as a means to gather consent. You are free to use another Google certified consent management platform. However, you will be required to use a CMP starting later this year. 

[Test Dvd]

Hello,

1) Are you saying that if the user does not activate the option to store and/or access information from a device, they can get limited ads instead of non-personalized ones?

2) Would it be the way to continue showing ads in the application even if the user does not give their consent?

Thank you

[AoC]

Hi all,

Premise:
It's confirmed that the users will be able to have an Ads-free app just don't giving the consent to Purpose 1 (store and/or access information on a device).

My questions:

1) Is this intended?

2) Are you working to fix this or to have a workaround to keep showing non-personalized ads to these users?

It will be a disaster for all the apps that are ads based with a big audience in Europe.

[Test Dvd]

Hello AoC,

What a catastrophe they are going to create with this story. I don't know if Google will stop making money with this measure, but developers have it raw.

Is it intentional? Well, I suppose so, because it is a problem that has been going on for three years and has not had a solution.
When you ask in the forum, they tell you that this is the case, that if the user does not activate access to store information on the device, no personalized or non-personalized ads will be served.
The problem ? That it comes deactivated by default and if you enter options and save them, not even an ad is shown.

It's hard for them to put it activated by default but no, they don't feel like it.

They are not working on anything, you can already be clear about it, they are not going to change it.
I don't know if there is a workaround or another skd to show consent and not override non-personalized ads.

From what I see, income from Europe, minimal as of now.

And when people find out that they can disable advertising with a couple of clicks... certain death.

It is as a developer said, it is as if you go to a cafeteria, have breakfast and leave without paying.

:-(

[AoC]

Hello Dvd,

I see, it sounds really bad.

Could the following be a solution then?

-If the user do not give consent, when the Consent popup is closed, the app checks the TCF string and show the Consent popup again until the user accept it.

Maybe there could even be an in-app popup explaining that the game needs adv revenues to be free, otherwise it propose an IAP/subscription to proceed without consent.

[Test Dvd]

Hello AoC,

What you say is not allowed, in another thread a user has asked it and they have told him no.

That of the message to the users so that they accept to put publicity, I see it impossible. If what users want is the least publicity possible!

This is going to be a very hard blow for the developers and the worst thing is that Google does not want to modify it. With how easy it would be to put 3 buttons, 1) Personalized Ads 2) Non-Personalized Ads 3) Pay to remove ads.

[Carlos]

Hello Test Dvd,

Wouldn't it be possible to make it so that if the user does not consent, the option to pay premium or consent appears?
Do you have at hand the thread where you discussed the issue?

Best regards

[James N]

I just posted on a separate thread about this issue, and I think this GitHub page could help, but I haven't tried it yet. (It's for "detecting insufficient consent" and "detecting outdated consent"). Does the Google team plan on adding support for that to UPM SDK? Or will we have to manually get the TC strings like that example?

[Test Dvd]

Hi Carlos,

I don't know if you speak Spanish, hehe, reading the name...

I don't have the thread at hand, there are so many ...
I think it was some GPDR looping thing or something...

[Filippo]

There are other SDKs like iubenda (https://www.iubenda.com/it/pricing) that offer this type of paid service (with a not very low fee).
Their popup itself has the "required flag" (containing cookies etc) already pre-selected and impossible to be disabled.
I hope Google will implement a popup like this otherwise we will have to use useless workarounds or pay monthly fees for third party services like this

ly 

[Test Dvd]

Hello Filippo,

Do you mean that this one from iubenda is another sdk, but paid, to show the Consent message to the users?

And that if we use this, both personalized ads and non-personalized ads will always be displayed?

[Hezi medina]

@Carlos

This the discussed  https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/yUh4v8v9yn4

and I update here the new Insights  https://support.google.com/admob/thread/223482060

Hope together we can found solutions to be good for us and for google

And there is a matter of law and trials, so apparently the situation is a bit more complicated 

"Google: "We have crafted UMP based on our legal team's guidance of how to read and interpret the law and regulations around privacy"

https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/UcveWmtBm4Q/m/T4avskCzCwAJ

[Filippo]

@Test dvd

Yes iubenda is specialized on privacy policies, gdpr etc.
They are also a certified CMP and are listed in the google table here https://support.google.com/admob/answer/13554116?hl=en&sjid=10352274830181956209-EU#zippy=%2Ccmp-certificate-da-google%2Cgoogle-certified-cmps:~:text=Web%20and%20app-,Iubenda%20CMP,-123

They give the possibility to try their services for free for 14 days

[Carlos]

Hi Hezi medina,

Thank you very much for attaching the thread. The alternative I am raising is different from the one described in your question.
For example, if the user does not consent, display a panel indicating that the app is funded by ads and offer two possibilities:
1. subscribe to premium to remove the ads.
2. Consent to GDPR

I don't know if it will be possible.
Best regards

[Test Dvd]

Hello Filippo,

I understand the iubendia thing.

Some doubts:
1) Paying the most expensive fee, can you put your sdk in all the apps you want?

2) How is the sdk put? Do they give you the code?

[Hezi medina]

Carlos,

Its good questions and idea, need ask the team "Google Mobile Ads SDK" in new case for to be more easy follow on them answer.

About: "subscribe to premium to remove the ads" its little problem what to do if you have app live in the google play, and in the store of the amazon too? 

[Test Dvd]

Hello, a message from another thread says this:

"As for your choice of CMP, it is not a requirement to use the UMP SDK as a means to gather consent. You are free to use another Google certified consent management platform. However, you will be required to use a CMP starting later this year."

1) What other sdk can we use to obtain consent and always show ads?

2) Can we make a list of consent management platforms?

3) Are these platforms legal for Google?

 4) Are these platforms free?

Thanks.

[Pieter Mulder]

I have been directed here via a bunch of places because I really need the ability to READ what consent my users have given.  This is a very common use case and I don't understand why Google wants to lock this down so that it is completely obscure to the developer.  Apps (and website) do not operate in a vacuum and do not only consume Google services. Any consent granted or denied by a user, will need to also be available to the developer.  For example, if a user denied storing cooking or identifiers locally, there are many other reasons to store this other than just serving ads - it seems completely ridiculous to me to expect a user to separately consent to what Google Ads can and cannot do and then have to ask for consent elsewhere also.  It is also very easy to have mismatches - for example, in the Google Consent form, there is a question about using precise geolocation data - if the user turns this off, I need the ability to also turn this off in other functionality in my app, otherwise I have to ask twice and I might get two different answers.

This major flaw can be seen all across the web and just how ridiculous this is (I make a point of consenting to nothing - I am in the EU - and then see what happens).

A great example of this is https://www.airlive.net - it implements Google's UMP, but it is so incredibly broken.  I consent to NOTHING on the Google consent pop up and I can see no Google ads appearing.  But other functionality on the website, like notifications and third-party advertisers still continue to work (even though I did not consent to basic ads), because there is no way for a developer to know what a user chose in the Google UMP solution.  In fact, I can see so many third-party calls being made and cookies being stored of all kinds, even though I didn't consent to it.  This is not the website's fault though, this is just a solution which cannot work properly in the real world as it stands.

In addition, I am not sure that the attitude of "just use something else" is appreciated here - we are your users, how about listening to feedback and working with us instead of just driving us away?

[MSMS]

There are so many posts across the net about this. Did anybody try this solution from Appodeal? I do not want to reduce functionality based upon the user accepting ads as it will just result in one star reviews:

https://appodeal.com/blog/sdk-2-7-consent-manager-gdpr-ccpa/

[MSMS]

Does anybody know of an Objective-C way to check if the user has given enough consent to show ads? If they haven't then I need to restrict functionality.

[Carlos]

Hey MSMS,

In this post they explain you how to know if a user has consented to personalized ads or not. I hope it helps.

https://itnext.io/android-admob-consent-with-ump-personalized-or-non-personalized-ads-in-eea-3592e192ec90

Best regards

[Test Dvd]

Carlos, do you mean that this link you send may be the solution?

Thanks.

[AoC]

Great!
Is there a solution for Unity that supports both Android and iOS?

[Carlos]

Hey Test Dvd,

It can be a way to know if the user has given consent and if not, show the option to subscribe to the premium or other creative solutions.

Best regards

[Test Dvd]

Hi Carlos,

Ok, but it's not a way to display personalized ads if the user doesn't accept consent, right?

It would be something like, if you accept the consent, you enter the app, if you do not accept it, you will get a message to subscribe to the premium option and otherwise, you cannot use the app.

Is it so?

[Carlos]

Indeed, Test Dvd.

But since google doesn't seem to care about the issue, we have to look for other solutions.

[Test Dvd]

Hi Carlos,

And if the user enters Manage Options and confirms, would a window appear to buy the premium version or exit the app?

[Carlos]

Test Dvd, the post teaches you how to detect if you can show personalized ads in Android Studio. In the negative case, you could show the option to pay premium or accept GDPR. It's up to you, but I think an alternative to just closing the app should be given.

For example, display a panel stating "Your consent is required". Display a clear message that you have two choices, either consent or pay the premium.
This is not advice, do it at your own risk.

Best regards :)

[Test Dvd]

Hi Carlos,

Of course, I don't think Google will accept that because it seems that you are forcing the user to accept the consent.

[Luke Taylor]

The crux of the reason for serving no ads comes from https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862?hl=en&sjid=2418371235660772237-AP

-----------------------

Description

Lack of consent for Google to store and/or access information on a device (Purpose 1)

In line with our existing EU User Consent policy, consent for cookies or mobile identifiers is required for both personalized and non-personalized ads. For non-personalized ads, consent for cookies or mobile identifiers is still required because non-personalized ads still use cookies or mobile identifiers to combat fraud and abuse, for frequency capping, and for aggregated ad reporting.

Ad serving behavior

Publishers should not call Google’s ad tags.

If consent is missing for Google for Purpose 1 in the TC string, Google will drop the ad request and no ads will be served.

----------------------

So, what Google are saying is that to comply with EU requirements, users must be able to decline that any mobile identifiers are stored on the device. If that is the case, Google cannot then serve ads because it would be open to "...fraud and abuse...".

Is this the same on web? Does Google need to store a cookie to "...combat fraud and abuse..."?

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi all,

Thank you for your feedback. If you have any comments, questions or concerns please create a new thread and your query will be answered by someone from our support team. 

[riverboat...@gmail.com]

1:01 PM (now) 

to Google Mobile Ads SDK Developers

Wow! Yeah. I can confirm this is true! 

I added the GDPR support a couple of releases back when the requirement message popped up on my AdMob dashboard. I did the work on the Android version of my app first, because it's always easier to follow Google guidance there first and, after it's working, reverse engineer it back into IOS/Swift. 

Now, while trying to get it to work in IOS it became obvious to me that there were "issues" if I select "Do Not Consent". 

I've gone back into my Android app and verified that "No Consent" equals "No Ads". Assumably, that was a path I didn't verify very thoroughly - doh!

On the upside, I no longer feel the need to focus on trying to figure out why my ad revenue has been steadily declining. 

Is there going to be a real solution to this issue or just some "workarounds"? Is AdMob going to cease to be a valid mediation partner with mandate that goes into effect on 1/16/2024?

For the time-being, I'm turning off the GDPR checks until the mandate goes into effect and doing research to see if there are other mediation providers with a solution that works.

Same here! No ads when the user click on manage options. This would be end of the ads type monetization if the things stay that way. There's no non personalized ads option. Now the two outcomes are personalized ads or no ads which is horrible.

Regards!

[Danny]

The "recent update" link is a dead link. Does anyone know where that guidance is?

On Wednesday, July 5, 2023 at 11:23:00 AM UTC-4 Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor wrote:

Hello,

Thank you for your question. See this recent update that says, "Later this year, we will require all partners using our publisher products — Google AdSense, Ad Manager, or AdMob — to use a Google certified CMP that integrates with the TCF when serving ads to users in the European Economic Area or the UK."

As for your choice of CMP, it is not a requirement to use the UMP SDK as a means to gather consent. You are free to use another Google certified consent management platform. However, you will be required to use a CMP starting later this year. 

[P. S.]

Same here! It seems to be a bug. I've tried several ways. I've invested hours and hours in this. But if a user does not accept the consent or partitially accept the consent, no ads are shown at all.

[Danny]

Does anyone have recommendation for an ad source other than AdMob that may make supporting GDPR cleaner/easier? 

I've been looking at AppLovin. Their MAX offering seems to place more of the onus on the developer to collect the GDPR consent. It's a lot of work for me to make this change and I'd prefer to get it done quickly given the fact that the Google mandate goes into effect in 4 months. 

[Lore]

Hey support team,

would it be possible to have some clarification on the reason why you keep saying that to show "non personalised" ads, the only consent you need is to "Store and/or access information the device" when it's clearly not true? (or at least it's definitely not working as expected).

What works are the steps listed by Anh before, which are:

• Select "Manage options"
• In Data preferences screen, the user must at least consent to "Store and/or access information on a device"
• Scroll to the bottom of the Data preferences screen and select "Vendor preferences"
• Find "Google Advertising Products" and consent to it
• Confirm choice

Now, I don't mind asking the users to allow cookies since they are required to fight fraud and so on, but I want to understand if allowing  "Google Advertising Products" is a required step or not, because:

• If it's not required, there's definitely a bug in the SDK because ads are not showing when only "Store and/or access information on a device" is enabled.
• If it's required, you should say so, but I think the details shown when someone taps `view details`, should be updated, because they say that if consent is given, then personalised ads can be shown, which is not what I would expect,  legitimate interest should be enough for basic ads (check attachment)
  

We hope to get some clarification on this because it heavily impacts us.

Thank you

Lorenzo

[diablins...@gmail.com]

Hi,

Same problem here and seems there is a bug in the UMP lib or something related because if you select "No consent" it doesn't even fill ads in TEST mode. As soon as you set it to consent again, then TEST ads appears again. I'm pretty sure they have a bug.

[Test Dvd]

A mistake that lasts 3 years? I don't think so.

Rather, they don't want to put in a simple option for users to see non-personalized ads.

[diablins...@gmail.com]

Confirmed, it's not a bug. No consent = no ads and you can check it here:

https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862?hl=en&ref_topic=9756841#table

It says:

Lack of consent for Google to store and/or access information on a device (Purpose 1)

Publishers should not call Google’s ad tags.

If consent is missing for Google for Purpose 1 in the TC string, Google will drop the ad request and no ads will be served.

You need the user consent at least "Purpose 1" to show ads in a limited version

[Lore]

I think we all know by now that without consent to Purpose 1 the app will not show any ads. But have you actually tried to give consent only to Purpose 1? Will your app show ads then? If not, then I guess it's a bug.

[Danny]

I think it's naive to think that an end-user is going to go through all of the hoops that this framework requires in order for an app to display "non-personalized ads". When trying to get things to work, I tried a variety of different combinations and couldn't figure out what "magic set of settings" were required and finally gave up. 

[ABQ App Source]

It's not really a bug, just a terribly designed user interface. Google can only show non-personalized ads if you give Google consent for Purpose 1. That means you have to do two things: 1) select the storage consent (Purpose 1) on the second screen AND 2) go find Google in the long non-alphabetical list of vendors on the third screen and select them there. If you skip that second step, no ads are shown, since you haven't actually given the consent to any vendors. It's an absurdly designed UI - picking consent choices on the second screen and skipping the third screen is the same as just picking nothing.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/69307205/mandatory-consent-for-admob-user-messaging-platform/70324431#70324431

They created a feature request for a "Non-Personalized Consent" button (here) that lets the user easily opt-in to the right set of options, but we've been asking for this for year so I'm not optimistic anything will come of it.

You are absolutely correct, no end-user is ever going to take the time to do this, or even know that they need to. A well-intentioned user might go to the second screen and select "Basic Ads" if they are trying to consent to non-personalized ads, but it won't work. Expecting them to go read Google support docs to figure it out is ridiculous.

More background reading: https://groups.google.com/g/google-admob-ads-sdk/c/UcveWmtBm4Q/m/ozd595HtAAAJ

-TV

[Lore]

Can you link a post where someone from adMob says that we need consent from "Google advertising product" to show non-personalised ads? I know it works, but as I mentioned here , if you tap on "view details" they say that consent is required for personalised ads, while for basic ads legitimate interest (that is on by default) should be enough.

I don't mind forcing the users to just enable Purpose 1 if that's what is required to show non-personalised ads, but that just doesn't work (at least for me). And from what is written in "View details", consent to "Google advertising product" vendor should not be required for basic ads. 

So it's either a bug in the SDK functionality or in the details provided.

[ABQ App Source]

That's how the consent system works - you grant specific consent levels and select which vendors have that consent. Google is one of those vendors, and needs consent for Purpose 1 to show non-personalized ads.

Take a look here (note the important "for Google"):

    If consent is missing for Google for Purpose 1 in the TC string, Google will drop the ad request and no ads will be served.

Or elsewhere on that page (again, note the "... grants Google consent to"):

    Google will serve non-personalized ads when all of the following criteria are met:

    * The end user grants Google consent to:
      * Store and/or access information on a device (Purpose 1)

Just clicking the button for Purpose 1, without selecting any vendors, does not grant Purpose 1 consent to any vendor. The end-user has to provide Google with consent for purpose 1 - and right now that means two steps (selecting the consent level AND selecting the vendor). Google automatically has legitimate interest for the other things needed for non-personalized ads, but requires explicit consent for purpose 1.

To an end user "Basic Ads" might sounds like consent to non-personalized ads, but Google needs consent or legitimate interest for Purposes 1 (storage), 2 (basic ads), 7 (measure ad performance), 9 (apply market research), and 10 (develop and improve products) to show non-personalized ads - not just "Basic Ads". Purposes 2, 7, 9, and 10 generally automatically have "Legitimate Interest", so the user just needs to supply consent for Google to use storage (Purpose 1). This is what is shown in that "show details" screenshot you shared as well.

[Danny]

Personally, I'm focusing on a branch using AppLovin MAX as the mediation provider. At least in the documentation, they appear to give the developer more room to maneuver. 

If successful in A/B testing, the plan will be to move there once the Google mandate goes into effect in January. Interestingly, AppLovin calls out Google's requirement for GDPR if you want to use Google as a mediation source. It's a link to the same guidance in this thread. I, for one,  don't have the time nor the luxury to manage multiple mediation sources and am not going to sacrifice ad revenue because Google fails/refuses to be a true partner. I can only assume that in-app ad revenue is not as important to Google as it is to me.

[Test Dvd]

Hello Danny,

Can I ask you some questions ?

1) AppLovin MAx is paid??

2) If they put the ads on, do they pay you then?

3) Admob would no longer be used?

4) Are you testing if users DO NOT accept consent, if non-personalized ads appear?

Thank you.

[Mobile Ads SDK Forum Advisor]

Hi all,

This thread is is starting to spawn side topics beyond the initial question so I will lock it after this response. For additional questions, please start a new thread. I'll try to address the relevant questions/concerns in recent posts.

https://support.google.com/admob/answer/9760862#consent-policies describes the requirements for the different types of serving modes for EU traffic:

- Personalized ads - Consent for purposes 1,3,4, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10
- Non personalized ads - Consent for purpose 1, Legitimate Interest for 2, 7, 9, 10
- Limited ads - No consent for purpose 1.

Limited ads is more restrictive than non-personalized ads. From https://support.google.com/admob/answer/10105530:

"The initial product offering will support mediation, app, and video in AdMob. Campaigns will not serve in AdMob in the event of a limited ad signal.

Programmatic demand is not eligible for limited ads. This includes Programmatic Guaranteed, Preferred Deals, Private Auction, Open Auction for Google demand and third-party demand, including Authorized Buyers and Open Bidding. Google demand as part of a mediation chain isn’t supported."

This pretty much means the SDK still runs waterfall mediation if you enable it, but you probably won't get an ad back from the "AdMob network" ad source. The above help center article should be considered the source of truth as the limited ads product offering could change over time.

The demo ad units run through AdMob Campaigns, so it's not surprising (and current expected behavior) that those ad units don't serve either if there's no consent for Purpose 1. We may change how the demo ad units return in the future so that it's easier to test ad fill from the EU. But test ad requests from your live ad unit I think should still no fill since it gives you a more accurate picture of what happens when you release your app.

Regarding the feedback about the UMP SDK's form UI, we'll take and reflect on the feedback. But please also keep in mind that the IAB has published (https://iabeurope.eu/iab-europe-transparency-consent-framework-policies/) requirements for CMPs that dictate how consent must be gathered. Here is an relevant requirement to some of the recent feedback about the secondary screen from Appendix B, section c.d:

"When a user accesses a layer, which will be a secondary layer when using a layered approach, allowing them to make granular and specific consent choices with respect to each Purpose, under Policy C(c)(III), and/or to make granular and specific opt-in choices with respect to each Special Feature under Policy C(c)(IV) the default choice must be “no consent”, “no opt-in” or “off”."

Thanks,
Eric, Mobile Ads SDK Team

ref:_00D1U1174p._5004Q2mUh07:ref