How should advertisers judge science websites before buying?
Part of Lookalike websites
The short answer
A science website is worth advertising on when it is an independent publisher with named writers, links each claim to the study behind it, says when a finding is a preprint or has been corrected, and sells its own ad space. Buyers check sourcing on recent articles, set university and journal sites aside, and seed lookalikes by field.
Key takeaways
- Science publishing on the open web mixes news desks, explainer sites, hobby blogs, journals and university pages, and only some of them sell ad space as publishers.
- A good science article links to the study, names its type and says whether it has been peer reviewed; bioRxiv says its preprints are not peer reviewed before posting.
- Crossref's Crossmark shows corrections and retractions for participating publishers, and Crossref says its presence is not a guarantee.
- University sites are institutions, not ad inventory, and Google says a placement is visible to advertisers when the site is part of the AdSense network.
- Lookalike searches stay closer to the brief when seeded by field, such as weather or astronomy, because IAB Tech Lab splits Science into separate branches.
What makes a science website worth advertising on?
Readers of science sites want to understand how something works or what a new finding means. That context suits education, scientific instruments, consumer technology, home weather instruments, travel to observatories and museums, and brands with a technical story. The weak spots are sites that rewrite press releases with bigger claims than the study made, and science themed pages built to carry ads around thin trivia.
| Kind of site | What it publishes | Fit for a display plan | First check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Science news desk | Reporting on new studies, missions and discoveries by staff writers | Strong candidate | Links to the study and named reporters |
| Explainer publication | Long reads on how things work, with diagrams and sources | Strong candidate | Sources listed and dated, updates noted |
| Hobby science blog | One writer's notes on weather, astronomy, fossils or chemistry | Candidate for niche lines | Original observations or photos, not copied facts |
| Trivia or facts site | Short lists of amazing facts with stock images | Weak unless facts are sourced | Whether any fact links to a source |
| Journal or preprint server | Research papers for researchers | Not a display placement | It publishes research, not ad supported articles |
| University or lab site | News releases, lab pages, course material | Leave out as an institution | Whether it sells ad space at all |
Transparency comes first. Google News policies (opens in a new tab) ask news sources for "Clear dates and bylines" and "Information about the company or network behind the content". For a science desk the extra test is whether the writer can be found: a reporter's other articles, a stated beat, a way to send a correction.
How do you check sourcing on science content?
The fastest check is to follow three links from three recent articles to the research they describe. A careful science site links to the paper or its DOI, names the journal or preprint server, says whether the study was in animals, cells or people, and does not stretch a small sample into a general finding. A site that links only to other news coverage, or to nothing, has made the reader take the claim on trust.
Sourcing checks on three recent science articles
- Each article links to the study itself or its DOI, not only to another news story.
- The article names the study type, such as a preprint, a peer reviewed paper, a review or a model.
- Preprints are labeled as not yet peer reviewed, in words a general reader understands.
- Quotes come from named researchers, including at least one who did not work on the study.
- The headline claims no more than the study's own abstract.
- Corrected or retracted studies are noted on the article, with the date of the update.
- Citation counts or journal names are not offered as proof that a finding is true.
Definition
- Preprint
- A research paper posted before peer review. The preprint server bioRxiv (opens in a new tab) says "Articles are not peer-reviewed, edited, or typeset before being posted online", and that posting does not imply endorsement of an article's methods or conclusions.
Two more tools help. Crossref's Crossmark (opens in a new tab) gives readers "quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content", including corrections and retractions, for publishers that take part, and Crossref adds that "the presence of Crossmark itself is not a guarantee." A science site that cites a retracted paper without saying so has missed a check its readers rely on it for. On citation counts, a 2023 study by Thelwall and colleagues (opens in a new tab) of 87,739 journal articles found citations and quality correlated in all fields, from very weak to strong, yet no field had a citation level above which every article was excellent.
Why are university sites not publisher inventory?
A university's news office writes strong science stories, and those pages can match a brief closely by meaning. They are still not media inventory. The site belongs to an institution whose purpose is teaching and research, its news releases promote the institution's own work, and it does not run an ad business that a buyer can reach. schema.org describes CollegeOrUniversity (opens in a new tab) as "A college, university, or other third-level educational institution", a type of EducationalOrganization, and that kind of site identity is the signal to read.
- Use university news pages as seeds for meaning when they capture the subject the client wants, then search for publishers that cover it.
- Treat student newspapers and university presses as separate cases: some run their own advertising, so check their sites and ads.txt files directly.
- Leave out lab pages, course material and repositories, and note the reason so the client sees why a familiar name is missing.
Which brands fit beside science content?
IAB Tech Lab's Content Taxonomy 3.1 (opens in a new tab) gives Science its own top level category with children Biological Sciences, Chemistry, Environment, Genetics, Geography, Geology, Physics, Space and Astronomy, and Weather. Those branches map well to brands. Health and medicine coverage is a separate case with its own checks, covered in the health websites guide.
| Science branch | Brands that fit | Review point |
|---|---|---|
| Weather | Home weather stations, generators, insurance, travel | Disaster and storm damage coverage beside the ad |
| Space and Astronomy | Telescopes, cameras, science museums, travel | Launch failure and accident coverage |
| Environment | Energy efficiency, transit, home appliances | Claims in the brand's own ad that the article may contradict |
| Genetics | Education, books, documentaries | Ancestry testing and health claims near the ad |
| Chemistry and Physics | Lab supplies, education, consumer technology | Hazardous experiment content for younger readers |
In Canada the creative also matters. The Canadian Code of Advertising Standards (opens in a new tab), clause 8, says "Advertising claims must not imply that they have a scientific basis that they do not truly possess." A brand that buys space beside physics explainers is borrowing their credibility, so its own ad copy should not claim more than its evidence.
How do you find science sites similar to a trusted one?
Seed by field. A weather blog and a genetics news desk are both science and share few readers' interests, so one seed set for both pulls results toward broad portals. Use recent articles as example pages, and if the client's favorite is a section of a large newspaper, seed with that section. The seed site selection guide covers that choice, and the find websites by topic guide covers searching from a subject when no seed exists.
Before a candidate joins, read its ads.txt (opens in a new tab) file to see which companies may sell its space. Hobby science blogs with a small loyal readership are worth keeping on a niche line when their writing is original. The lookalike websites hub explains the full method.
How does PlacementGraph help build a science publisher list?
What does a science publisher review look like on a real brief?
Fictional example
A fictional home weather station maker in Michigan
An unnamed Grand Rapids maker of home weather stations wants display ads in Michigan, in English, for spring storm season. Its agency starts from two seeds: a weather explainer site the product team reads and a university atmospheric science department's news page. The planner keeps the university page as a meaning seed only, since it sells no ad space.
The search returns weather explainer sites, hobby weather blogs that publish their own station readings, a science news desk's weather section and two trivia sites. The trivia sites cite nothing and are set aside. One explainer covers a storm study but presents a preprint as settled, so the planner flags it for a closer look.
Storm damage articles on the news desk are excluded at page level under the brand's disaster coverage choice. A Great Lakes hobby blog with original readings and photos stays on a niche line. Each site is labeled weather, with two matching articles and its ads.txt sellers noted beside it.
Frequently asked questions
How should a plan treat science sites that publish AI written explainers?
Judge the pages, not the tool. An explainer that links to its studies, names an accountable editor and corrects errors can pass, however it was drafted. Mass produced pages with no sources, no named writer and the same structure across topics fail the sourcing checks, so set them aside with that reason recorded.
Should a brand avoid science sites that cover climate or evolution debates?
Not by default. Careful science coverage of contested public topics is responsible reporting. Decide by page, using the brand's tolerance for politics and debated social issues, and check whether the site reports evidence or runs opinion pieces presented as science. Record the choice so the client can see it.
Do science sites for children need extra checks?
The FTC states that COPPA applies to operators of sites or services directed to children under 13, and to operators with actual knowledge that they collect personal information from a child under 13. A science site written for young readers can fall in the first group, while sites for parents and teachers differ, so check the stated audience, the reading level and any games or activities before such a site joins a plan.
Is a science site with a sponsored content section still independent?
It can be, when sponsored pieces carry a label on the section page and the article, and the newsroom does not write them. Read a sponsored piece and an editorial piece side by side. If they share writers and look the same, treat the sponsored section as advertising and judge the site on its labeled editorial work.
Sources
- Google News policies (opens in a new tab)Google Publisher Center Help
- About bioRxiv (opens in a new tab)bioRxiv, openRxiv
- Crossmark (opens in a new tab)Crossref
- In which fields are citations indicators of research quality? (opens in a new tab)Thelwall et al., Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2023 (arXiv)
- CollegeOrUniversity (opens in a new tab)schema.org
- About placement targeting (opens in a new tab)Google AdSense Help
- Content Taxonomy 3.1 (opens in a new tab)IAB Tech Lab
- The Canadian Code of Advertising Standards (opens in a new tab)Ad Standards
- ads.txt (Authorized Digital Sellers) (opens in a new tab)IAB Tech Lab
Researched and written by PlacementGraph Research. Read how we research, source and update these pages. Corrections: diana@placementgraph.com.