the words this industry uses

76 terms, defined without the gloss.

76 terms from UK media buying, defined plainly — and, where AdBuyMCP does something different from the category default, saying so rather than leaving you to find out.
terms defined
76
groups
6
sellers, regulators and prices
UK
start here

Six definitions that contradict what you were told

Every entry opens with the neutral answer. These six then say something a vendor glossary would not — including three where the thing being named is something we cannot currently do.

why a vendor glossary is usually worthless

And what makes this one different

Most glossaries in this industry restate a definition you could have found anywhere, which is why nobody cites them. This one does two things instead. Each entry opens with the neutral answer, written to be lifted whole and still be correct whoever is asking. Then it says what the term means for a UK buyer, and where we diverge from the norm — the take-rate entry names our ten per cent against the twenty per cent observed at The Trade Desk, the incrementality entry names the tests we refuse to run, and the entries on EUID and Acorn name capabilities we do not have. A reference page on a vendor's domain is not neutral, so the useful thing is to be specific rather than to pretend otherwise.

A reference page on a vendor’s domain is not neutral, so the useful thing is to be specific rather than to pretend otherwise.
every term

Grouped by the part of the job they belong to

Six groups rather than an alphabet, because the groups carry an argument. Most of the honest difficulty in media buying lives in targeting and identity, and most of the money lives in buying and commercials.

AdBuyMCP's own vocabulary

6 terms

Six terms we either invented or use more strictly than the category does. Defined here so nobody has to guess.

index

A to Z

The same terms, for a reader who arrived knowing exactly which word they wanted.

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
L
M
O
P
R
S
T
U
V
W
// book a working session

Bring a brief, not a glossary question.

45 minutes. Bring a real brief and we compile it live. You describe one audience and watch it compile into seven targeting specifications, with the fidelity score and the lawful-basis manifest on screen.

Book a working session

45 minutes. Bring a real brief and we compile it live.

Questions about these definitions

Four that come up often enough to answer here rather than on a term page.

What is a fidelity score?

A published score out of 100 saying how much of your audience definition survived translation into a channel's native targeting. It is not a forecast and not a quality rating. AdBuyMCP's scores run from 85 on connected TV, where consent-chained business segments can carry a person-level claim, down to 40 on cinema, which is a projection from catchment demographics onto a venue. Four of the seven channels carry a fixed score, because their vocabulary cannot express more however much audience detail you supply.

What is the difference between attribution and incrementality?

Attribution assigns credit for an outcome to the touchpoints that preceded it, according to a rule you chose. Incrementality asks whether the outcome would have happened anyway, by comparing an exposed group with a comparable unexposed one. Attribution is a description of a conversion path; incrementality is a causal claim. Almost every reported media result is the first presented as though it were the second.

What does consent-chained actually mean?

That the data provider asserts a consent chain exists back to the individual — not that anyone downstream has verified every link in it. It is a meaningful claim and a limited one. AdBuyMCP records the assertion in the plan's lawful-basis manifest along with the condition that comes with it: the supply chain must be framework-validated and the vendor attestation verified on connection. That is a condition you still owe rather than a box already ticked.

Why is a glossary on a vendor site worth reading?

It is worth reading exactly to the extent that it says something a neutral source would not. These entries name our own limits — that no compiled plan carries a EUID today, that the Acorn catchment licence is not held, that brand lift is a placeholder, that the exposure ledger is fed only by a sandbox. A glossary that only restates industry definitions earns no citation and deserves none.