Yeah. It feels like the New York Times is lying with statistics and fearmongering about "toxic sites" to encourage companies to only advertise with big sites - something that, as basically the biggest name in news in the US, they're positioned to benefit from financially.
If 98% of the sites generate what is rounding error on your sales, then you measure that benefit against the risk that your brand gets associated with a hate speech site (maybe in the nytimes no less). It's math alright, but it means that the brokers are not adding a whole lot of value.
