Seems like addressable/advanced TV advertising has existed in a whirlpool of doubt, alongside the promise of better business opportunities. Now, however, the latter is getting a bigger profile.

The upside: addressable TV advertising has now achieved decent scale — around 65 million homes out of a total of 120 U.S TV households. The downside: cost, accessibility, and some consistent data metrics remain.

Research shows the results are there. First, addressable advertising does eliminate a lot of waste. And that begs the second question: Will advertisers now spend, say, four times more CPM (cost per thousand viewers) in order to deliver advertising specifically to that better, targeted audience?

Even if that isn’t a hurdle, there are other concerns. That includes a number of different multichannel video program distributors sellers — such as DirecTV, Dish Network, Comcast Corp. Charter Communications and Altice USA — which can have different functionality when serving those ads.

Here’s another: Different cable and satellite TV providers show that not all addressable homes are created equal, especially as it relates to specific consumer data preferences aligned in those homes.

In this regard, Open AP, a consortium of Viacom, Fox, Turner, NBCUniversal, and Univision, has intended to take a somewhat broader picture to easy entry. It wants to find new audience segments, maybe 100 or so, that can appeal to a wide range of TV marketers. It’s not a perfect targeting of audiences, but reasonable.

Against all this is a recent survey of some 500 media-marketing senior executives (who spend $1 million or more in TV and digital video ad spending) by AT&T’s Xandr, its advanced advertising unit, which shows trepidation.

While 76% of media agencies and marketers believe media sellers efforts offering advanced TV advertising platforms is a good idea, 48% say it is “very difficult to fully fund my media budget in order to achieve my media strategy goals.”

Also, 44% say “my current media buying-planning infrastructure is dated and not up to the task of effectively operating in the new media landscape.” Marketers and media agencies are leery about which direction to go.

But one area where there is little uncertainty: digital.

Digital media has always been the strong link when it comes to return on media investment and key sales outcome performance. But TV advertising — especially advanced advertising — still carries a comfortable ease of operation and large-scale promise for intended customers.

When will marketers give addressable a bigger chance? Or will they give more dollars to digital?

Source: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/329852/where-does-advanced-tv-advertising-fit-in-2019.html


It seems like a good time to relive some of the most-hyped technologies and trends predicted to change the world of advertising in 2018.

Here are some of my personal favorites:

Blockchain. There’s no question that blockchain technology will find many applications for the advertising industry at some point — some with real market impact. However, blockchain is not going to revolutionize our industry nearly as fast as the hype would have you believe.

AI. Yes, artificial intelligence is an important technology that has been with us for decades, but is finally showing the capacity to improve computing systems in a number of industries, advertising included. However, the hype of AI for advertising massively overstates its capacity for actual real-world impact in the business today.

Data science. I am a big fan of data science, and spend a lot of time personally working on increasing its application and impact on the advertising industry. However, anybody who’s realistic would realize that the vast majority of decisions made in advertising are not even very empirical, so we shouldn’t expect “big data” to change advertising — not until our industry becomes more comfortable making decisions on even “small data.”

What market dynamic might live up to its pre-season hype as we head into 2019? 

My bet is the D2C movement. Not since the emergence of the World Wide Web have I seen something emerge that could be as consequential on the advertising, media and marketing ecosystem as the revolution being staged today by these digitally based brands to undermine channel-dependent incumbents in industries as far-ranging as razors, contact lenses and mattresses. This trend will only accelerate in 2019.

What do you think? What technologies or trends didn’t live up to their 2018 hype?

Source: https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/329690/what-didnt-change-the-world-of-advertising-in-201.html


The year 2019 is almost upon us. ExchangeWire have invited hundreds of thought leaders to share their thoughts on what next year will hold, across a range of topics. Following what could be termed as one of the most interesting years in the connected TV space since its inception, thought leaders from across the industry share how they think 2019 will push the opportunities even further for brands to effectively target consumers across TV.

Brands afforded greater control

TV predictions

“The revolution in consumer freedom to watch wherever and whenever has been grasped with open hands – and the quality of TV content will continue to reach new heights in 2019. The continued data-enablement of TV across platforms makes this evolving viewing model a massive opportunity for advertisers. It will deliver brands greater control, greater flexibility and, ultimately, greater advertising impact. Data-driven addressability enables TV as both a brand-building and performance-marketing tool, delivering in both the long and short-term. TV brings fame and scale, it offers mass reach and amazing targeting and, of course, it’s brand-safe – this isn’t about to change in 2019.”

Jamie West, Group Director of Advanced Advertising, Sky

Focus will shift from infrastructure to the viewer

TV predictions

“The competitive pressures by direct-to-consumer services, like Netflix and Amazon, will force ad-supported networks to drastically lower ad load, both to build their own direct-to-consumer services and to slow the decline of the linear audience. As consumers expectations around ads are changing, brands will need to find new ways to integrate their messages within the content in natural ways beyond the traditional ad-break model. This all demonstrates a larger 2019 trend of increased focus on the viewer. The industry works like a pendulum; and while the last several years were focused on data, addressability, and infrastructure, the coming year will be about putting the viewer first, creativity, and the creative itself.”

Ari Lewine, CSO & Co-founder TripleLift

T-commerce will open up additional revenue streams

TV predictions

“Not only will linear TV get smarter in 2019, but the scale and connectivity of devices will also continue to rise as consumers increasingly interact with ads across various mediums like TV, voice, and mobile. T-commerce will also play a big role in the coming year. With brands and media entities looking to tap into additional revenue streams, we will see more widespread adoption of enabling commerce-based experiences through connected TV.”

Tripp Boyle, SVP, Sales Strategy & Business Development, Connekt

Consumption flexibility will drive personalisation

TV predictions

“Personalisation will be central in the future of TV and OTT, as viewers come to expect more and more targeted suggestions and flexibility. Consumers today are able to choose between more options than ever in terms of what, when, where, and how to consume content and media. This surplus of options means the ability to pick the location, platform, and device is becoming more personalised. According to Nielsen’s Total Audience Report, adults in the U.S. spend more than 11 hours a day, on average, engaged with media – and that figure will be even higher in 2019. In the UK, people spend roughly nine hours per day consuming media. This number will also grow as new ways are found to personalise TV and video viewing experiences.”

Barney Farmer, UK Commercial Director, Nielsen

Addressability going mainstream

TV predictions

“This year saw some significant changes to the connected TV landscape, including big industry plays like AT&T’s merger with Time Warner, Disney’s acquisition of 21st Century Fox, and Comcast’s bid for Sky. With a notable increase in the volume of addressable TV inventory and investment in related technology, addressable TV advertising has the potential to finally go mainstream in 2019. However, this requires commitment from across the industry to create a common currency to evaluate and trade connected TV and measure it in line with all devices and digital channels, if it is to achieve its full potential.”

Martyn Bentley, Commercial Director, AudienceProject

2019 won’t be ‘the year of OTT’

TV predictions

“The rise of connected TVs has been steadily increasing this year, with 40 million people in the UK regularly using catch-up platforms and 35% of those doing so weekly. But the OTT landscape is a complex one, with challenges for both the broadcasters and the advertisers. It’s unlikely that 2019 will be the year of OTT. It will take significant, industry-wide efforts to truly bring linear and digital video advertising together into the programmatic supply chain. However, this won’t stop OTT from being the advertising platform to watch in 2019. The market is evolving rapidly; advertisers and agencies are beginning to demand OTT inventory be measured for verification. This is in order to have consistent measurement across entire media plans. The industry needs to align on consistent OTT measurement and promote education around connected TV platforms and how they are different from other digital platforms and how they can lead to different buying strategies.”

Nick Morley, EMEA MD, Integral Ad Science

UK OTT consumption is maturing

TV predictions

“Traditional forms of TV ad buying, that once dominated the space, are now challenged by additional ways content can be viewed via OTT, SVOD, and VOD. We know the number of consumers accessing content through OTT is increasing, with 36.5% of internet users in the UK streaming OTT services, making it the most mature subscription OTT market out of the EU-5. Understanding the consumer’s journey, considering an audience’s limited attention span, and ensuring ad placements are aligned is key to maximising campaigns. As we move towards 2019, the ‘bigger picture’ for both linear and digital TV is to consider how to outshine rivals while improving the viewer experience.”

Marlene Grimm, Head of Analytics, TVSquared

DTC embracing CTV

TV predictions

“In the year ahead, we’ll see connected TV become the go-to advertising channel for direct-to-consumer brands. We’ve already started to see DTC brands experiment with connected TV advertising on our platform. These data-driven brands understand 1-to-1 targeting; and they value the premium, brand-safe content connected TV brings to them. As they mature, these young brands know they must diversify their advertising budgets, because there’s only so much value they can find on the Facebook newsfeed. Connected TV is appealing both from a brand-building strategy and a direct-marketing play that can drive measurable ROI. In fact, across the board, advertisers are investing in connected TV; and a recent survey we conducted of 140 buyers found that 70% are planning to spend more on connected TV in 2019. Demand will continue to rise as more advertisers see the effectiveness of advertising on connected TV.”

Mark Zagorski, CEO, Telaria

Advanced TV will shine in light of brand safety needs

TV predictions

“After a challenging year for the media industry, advertisers are keen to move their content to brand-safe environments. This can be the chance for Advanced TV to shine: the format combines the brand-safe, high-quality environment of traditional TV with the measurement and targeting capabilities of programmatic advertising. We know that many brands have already taken the plunge: in a recent survey, we found that 38% of brands told us that they are already buying Connected TV programmatically. We are expecting this trend to accelerate in 2019 and Advanced TV to become a key part of most ad campaigns.”

Mike Shaw, VP, EMEA, dataxu

Budget shift from linear to connected

TV predictions

“As more and more advertisers experience the improved targetability, analytics and attribution rooted in OTT/CTV, the upcoming year will see a massive acceleration of budget shifting. Local and spot TV buyers will rearrange their linear budgets to test the reach and frequency OTT/CTV brings with its pinpoint inventory of household demographics and behaviour. In the next two years, the percentage of budgets spent on OTT/CTV will exceed the percentage of minutes viewed on addressable devices. We’ll see the benefits of OTT/CTV come to life in 2019.”

Frost Prioleau, CEO, Simpli.fi

Creative video intelligence will fuel personalisation

TV predictions

“While TV is still a major component of the marketing mix, advertisers must continue to adapt their strategies based on where their audience consumes video. Not only does CTV reach the rapidly growing cord-cutter population, the evolution of data-targeting capabilities now allows advertisers to personalise their videos for audiences on the big screen. This creative video intelligence – a combination of unique data and advanced creative – means consumers will begin seeing more and more CTV ads catered specifically to their interests at moments that make the most sense.”

Jay Baum, Head of Global Partnerships, Tremor Video DSP

From repetitive to sequential messaging

TV predictions

“As video moves to connected TV and OTT, where there is a digital identity layer, we will begin to finally see message sequencing and episodic ads delivered to a household or person. As a result, video ads can finally be more like content and an ongoing story told over several episodes, rather than cramming everything into 30 seconds and repeating that same message over and over. Programmatic creative can begin to reach its potential from this superior storytelling.”

Victor Wong, CEO, Thunder Experience Cloud

Source: https://www.exchangewire.com/blog/2018/12/11/experts-predict-tv-evolve-advertisers-2019/


What plays together, stays together

As advertisers and media buyers have flocked to digital advertising, something unfortunate happened: Television advertising, the medium that has always delivered a loyal, attentive audience—and has always been a master brand storyteller—began to get pushed aside for younger, “hipper” alternatives.

But now, marketers are realizing what researchers have known all along: Digital marketing alone lacks key ingredients that make up the most effective campaigns—ingredients that only television can provide.

The truth is that digital always needed TV to succeed. If you’re still engaging in the TV-vs.-digital debate, you’re setting yourself up to lose—no matter which side you’re on.

The thrill of digital, the agony of deceit

Make no mistake: Digital is an absolute must-have to target (and re-target) consumers at any point in their lifecycle across the demographic spectrum. But it is by no means perfect, and its shortcomings have become all too noticeable.

To start, online media’s lack of transparency creates a myriad of challenges, chief among them fraudulent data (bots, ghost sites, purchased traffic, ad stacking, to name a few)l According to a study by the IAB and Ernst & Young, this fraud costs the U.S. digital marketing, advertising and media industry $8.2 billion each year.

Furthermore, as advertising opportunities increase, the ability to track, manage and optimize ad spend becomes more difficult. And let’s not forget about the digital waste created from ineffective campaigns that suffer from insufficient data.

Filling in the gaps…one set at a time

Television, meanwhile, delivers what digital can’t provide: trust (between the viewer and the marketer), reliability (for delivering the kind of stickiness and awareness every brand craves) and greater recall (more so than any other device).

One recent study from Neustar, Turner and Horizon Media found that TV outperformed digital heavyweights like paid search (up to 7 times better) and display advertising (5 times better), proving that it can still offer the highest return on ad spend.

Realizing that digital ads can’t quite pack the same punch as TV, advertisers have slowly but surely begun to reallocate some of their budgets back to TV. According to a UBS survey, half of the media buyers said their clients are expected to shift ad dollars toward TV in the next 24 months.

The best of both worlds

Here at the NY Interconnect (NYI), we understood early on the synergistic effect between TV and digital. We expanded our audience base across new providers to offer clients more comprehensive ad solutions. And thanks to the joint venture between Altice USA, Comcast and Charter—and because we now represent DirectTV, Dish and Fios—NYI has the largest TV reach across the New York market, about 6.4 million households.

Through an audience-buying platform known as Audience One, NYI leverages the power of linear and addressable TV, VOD, OTT and digital technologies to allow advertisers to capture more impressions among targeted audiences in the number-one market. Best of all: It can all be done in one integrated ad buy.

Moving back to the future

Marketers who will thrive in this new era will be those who treat TV and digital as two sides of the same coin. According to a 2016 study from Analytic Partners, we now see a 60 percent increase in ROI when TV ad spends is combined with digital.

The real issue is understanding and appreciating the strengths that each side brings to the table. Television creates an emotional connection with audiences, the kind that influences purchase decisions the way only TV can. Digital helps amplify the message through the online touchpoints that consumers spend their days on.

Consider this: In 2017, the IAB found that when used simultaneously, digital and TV generated the biggest impact on brand familiarity, opinion, intent and awareness

The verdict? TV and digital are the ultimate power couple, one that will always deliver the most efficient and lucrative bang for your buck. Why would you want to break that up?

Source: https://www.adweek.com/sponsored/why-tv-and-digital-are-the-perfect-couple/


Once confined to brand and awareness metrics, the world of TV attribution has evolved to measure responses and effectiveness in the same way digital media has for years. Critically, the concept of quantifying offline media’s contribution to a business outcome, no matter where the consumer is in their purchase journey, has realigned the industry’s approach to assigning value across all channels.

For television, the availability of smarter data from devices such as set-top boxes and smart TVs, as well as the advanced application of that data by specialist companies, has shone a light on TV’s efficacy in pushing the consumer through the purchase funnel. Whether measuring brand metrics or transactional behavior, marketers can now employ reach and precision tactics through advanced TV to drive mass and personalized messaging and attribute value to those media investments.

This has led to more robust techniques to not only ensure that TV is getting its fair share of credit for a conversion, but also validate what we have known instinctively for years: TV drives results.

There is no question that TV is the king of building brands. Television has been the platform that marketers have turned to for decades due its mass reach, ability to drive awareness, cultural influence and social (in the macro sense) engagement. Advanced TV now expands those capabilities beyond awareness, down through the funnel, enabling solutions and measurement at the consideration, intent and sales stages.

Credit: The FreeWheel Council

Analyzing TV’s impact on a consumer’s path to purchase is critical to future investment strategies in a cross-screen world. To better understand TV’s ability to touch—and now measure—the full funnel, the FreeWheel Council for Premium Video (FWC) and the Video Advertising Bureau (VAB) partnered together to showcase examples of case studies across the industry.

What was fundamentally clear from these case studies, regardless of industry sector, was this: TV has a dynamic ability to engage consumers and drive purchase behavior through smart targeting and cross-channel coordination.

These case studies, along with other insights and best practices, are featured in “Assigning TV Credit: A Practical Guide to Attribution.”Some key highlights:

Awareness: Advanced TV creates incremental reach opportunities that expand the base of potential customers to drive through the purchase funnel. A case study from a regional car dealership from Comcast Spotlight illustrated TV’s cross-screen ability to drive additional reach through the combination of linear and premium digital TV, ultimately finding previously elusive audiences.

Consideration: Linear and digital TV have a unique ability to impact online search and discovery in the new living room, where advanced targeting and multiple devices drive action in response to advertising messages. The VAB itself tested the medium by running its first TV campaign featuring the founders of two digital-native disruptor companies, Wayfair and Gwynnie Bee. Results from attribution analysis showed that the campaign drove significant lifts in website traffic to the VAB site (39 times the normal rate) and the two brands’ sites, illustrating TV’s ability to drive interest and consideration.

Credit: The FreeWheel Council

Intent: Insights from viewership data across multiple devices can help identify target audiences that can drive KPIs like in-store visits as well as understand more about those audiences to inform future buys. Location data company Factual ran an attribution study with a luxury retail client, looking to optimize its TV investment and understand more about its stores’ visitors. Leveraging smart TV data from Samsung Ads, a connected TV (CTV) campaign delivered a 37 percent increase in store visitation (vs. other channels), which aligned with findings that the brand’s shoppers are more likely to be heavy streamers compared with the average population.

Sales: Advanced TV targeting can not only drive incremental reach of qualifying audiences, but also discover and influence non-loyalists to drive incremental sales. Discovery worked with a CPG client to convert non-brand buyers with a product launch by increasing qualifying audiences through advanced target groups (plus 43 percent in volume). This resulted in a 32 percent lift in sales and over $3 million in incremental revenue.

“Television drives positive business outcomes, and through attribution advancements, we are now able to prove that it does and show results,” says Keith Kazerman, Group SVP, Research, Data & Engage, Discovery.

These and many other case studies are featured in the new joint release from the FWC and the VAB: Assigning TV Credit: A Practical Guide to Attribution. The report provides a simple yet comprehensive guide to the world of attribution and the ways in which TV can now truly measure its value in the overall marketing mix.

TV, in all of its forms, can drive superior results for advertisers regardless of the campaign objective, and the proof is here. Marketers now have the tools to truly understand how their media investments drive results, regardless of channel, and have the missing—and arguably most powerful—piece of the puzzle at their disposal.

Download the full report here.

Source: https://adage.com/article/the-freewheel-council/tv-complete-attribution-puzzle/315793


Networks want to build audience segments to optimize tune-in campaigns, to reach the audience of a specific show or genre online, or to aid scheduling and show planning. These all lend themselves to different segment creation methodologies, as do the size and make-up of a network’s audience, and the number and types of shows they are segmenting.

How best to build segments is really both a data science question and a business question. In this post, we’re going to tackle why it might make sense, from a business perspective, to use one methodology over another – or at least to weight your algorithm more toward one of these parameters.

Give me reach

If you want to create large segments that aid reach in monetizing cookies or on-network retargeting targeting, then you should be using our total reach. This approach creates a segment of viewers that have watched a show for a given amount of time. Of all methodologies, this is the one with the lowest bar for a viewer to be included. I may only have had to watch half an episode of Real Housewives Of New Jersey to be in a segment of viewers who this show reached.

This creates large audiences, which lend themselves to any use case around monetizing audiences – such as matching your TVs and set-top box audience to online cookies – or where a network is rewarded based on the size of the segment it delivers. We’ve made the argument that segments can be problematic from a quality point of view – but for any advertiser looking for reach, this is the best way to do it.

This method is also great at targeting viewers on your network, but less so when modeling an audience on a 3rd party network. If you are building an audience using a lookalike model, you need attributes that you can use to find that audience elsewhere, but these qualities will be diluted if you use a reach-based method. Because the audience is so broad, you are likely to get common attributes that will make it difficult to identify this audience on other platforms.

Who watches the most?

As well as the quality issues associated with reach based segments, they also make it hard to compare different shows. It’s not valid to compare the reach of NCIS, which has multiple hour-long episodes of a given week, and a limited series like Baskets. NCIS is always going to have a higher reach because it airs more frequently. However, that doesn’t mean that people prefer it to Baskets.

Looking at those who watched more than the average viewer allows for more meaningful comparisons between a much broader range of shows. The same goes for popularity; this method will enable you to compare a niche show and a hit show more fairly.

The issue with using watched more than average is that it will over-index on viewers who watch a lot of TV. Let’s imagine we are looking for people who index heavily on two big shows – say, This Is Us and The Big Bang Theory. People who watch a lot of TV are very likely to watch both shows, and you will end up with a segment that is large, but probably not very distinctive. They may have watched these shows a lot, but they probably watched lots of other shows a lot as well.

This methodology produces better results if you are creating a mass market segment, and one that you think watches a lot of TV. Think older demographics, homemakers, etc. It works less well with harder-to-reach audiences, or for less favorite shows.

Finding the biggest fans

If you want to feed your segments into a lookalike model, for example, to sell TV audiences online, then you need to create the most distinctive set of TV viewers you can get.

You can do this by mining viewing data for the biggest fans of each show. This methodology produces smaller audiences but is another excellent filter for finding a show’s most loyal audience. It is particularly useful for creating segments of shows that may not be highly rated, but that have exceptionally loyal audiences, or for shows or channels that tend to attract lighter TV viewers.

It also accounts for viewers who may be heavy viewers of a specific show, but who are light TV viewers overall, more than the other methodologies. Inclusion in this segment is based purely on a viewer’s preference – and doesn’t take into account their overall viewing.

This methodology also creates the most distinctive segments of the four methods, and you will get much less overlap between segments, making this segment the most effective for inclusion in a lookalike model, or for fusion modeling.

We’d also use this approach to identify shows and programs which have small but loyal audiences. Any show with a large segment of viewers for whom it is a favorite show, as a proportion of the total audience, will be a significant driver of loyalty.

Source: https://tvrev.com/tv-audience-segments-one-size-doesnt-fit/


Ahead of this week’s Future TV Advertising Forum, and with a hefty new GroupM report by his side, Dominic Mills outlines the most important issues now facing the television industry

I’ve been prepping for various sessions at this week’s Future TV Advertising Forum. There’s no shortage of stats and viewpoints, much of it useless concoctions of hysteria, misinformation and disinformation. You know the narrative: linear is dead, millennials (however they happened to be defined that week) a lost cohort, targeting is everything.

Thank goodness for the latest piece of thinking from GroupM, its State of Video Report 2018. And here’s the thing that stands out: it’s written by the grown-ups, in this case Rob Norman, former head of digital and now a consultant, and GroupM’s head of futures, Adam Smith.

I wouldn’t want to be ageist, but I’d guess they have 55+ years of experience between them. This matters because, above all, they have perspective, which in today’s febrile climate is a much under-rated value.

That, of course, does not make them apologists for the old order, or die-in-a-ditch flag wavers for TV. Yes, they say, even as its audience “shrinks, ages and atomises, [TV] remains outstandingly safe and effective”.

Nonetheless, they caveat, “current performance is only enough to sustain current levels of investment at best. It is hard to imagine how TV will ever grow its share of investment again.”

I can’t hope to do the entire report justice here, but I’m going to pick up on a few things that caught my eye. If you want the whole thing, including a really good overview of the shifting Facebook, Amazon, Google and Instagram propositions, download it here.

1. Comparing 2017 and 2018, life has changed in some ways – but not all. Linear audiences continue to decline, but a death spiral is a long way off. New ad formats have not emerged. But advertiser demand has been sustained, which means that broadcasters are buoyed by higher unit prices. The emergence of a new advertiser category – direct-to-consumer brands – will also fuel demand.

2. Despite the lack of the granular measurement tools everyone claims to crave, there is no perceived decline in linear TV effectiveness.

3. Addressable is still in the ‘promising’ category rather than the actual, despite the prevalence of set-top boxes and connected TVs. The biggest barriers, say Norman and Smith, aren’t technical but commercial. In the US, the issue is that the biggest sellers are the local cable operators, who only make two minutes of time available per hour.

Elsewhere (and this is my guess) it may also be down to trading dynamics and the market (buy and sell sides) obsession with share. But the good news is that, in the US, the AT&T acquisition of Time Warner, and in Europe Comcast’s of Sky, will add proper momentum to the market.

4. As things stand still in this particular zone, therefore, we are sort of in ‘nowheresville’. This is how Norman and Smith describe it: “In 2018, we are in limbo between the traditional and the modern. We have a choice: Force-fit digital video into linear mechanisms, systems and pricing structures, or modernize television to look more like digital – targeted, automated and optimized.” Quite so. The latter will no doubt come, but not soon and not without some painful adjustments.

And how does addressability combine with reach? As the report reminds us – and I think there is a tendency to forget this – TV’s big weapon is reach. Here’s what GroupM says: “Herein lies the paradox of modernising television advertising with addressability. Television’s core function is still reach. Data adornments are welcome only if they make that reach more intelligent and more intimate, expanding television’s relationship to sales and downstream financial and performance metrics, as any advertiser on earth would hope to achieve.”

6. One of the ways the modern media world has distorted a basic truth is in the idea of what constitutes a view, somehow by implying that sound-off, completion and viewability don’t really matter. Here’s a slap in the face/wake-up call for those who peddle this rubbish – all the stronger for being made with withering understatement: “A growing body of evidence shows that a fully viewed ad does a better job of improving brand recall, perception and purchase intent,” the report says. “This should be no revelation, but in today’s market it is, and that is staggering.”

7. But this doesn’t stop Norman and Smith turning their fire on their peers – but not GroupM, one assumes. “Investment patterns,” they say, “suggest this message [i.e. the efficacy of sound-on, brand safe, user-initiated video] isn’t always landing with clients and planners alike.” Bang on, to which two categories you might also add buyers chasing cheap CPMs.

8. There’s a fascinating section on Netflix’s impact on linear viewing (p18), with the report citing a Morgan Stanley study showing that the point at which Netflix’s US penetration hit 20% was the point at which linear viewing began to decline – in perfect correlation with further Netflix growth (now over 50% of US households).

How will that work in European markets like the UK and Germany, where that 20% penetration level has now been breached? The assumption, certainly in the UK, is that Netflix households are heavy TV users anyway and therefore impact on linear viewing is lower. Maybe not, cautions GroupM, citing figures which show that in Germany linear viewing in Netflix homes is 30% below the national average.

9. One potential driver of Netflix (and Amazon Prime) growth is viewer disenchantment with heavy ad loads, certainly in the unregulated US market. As more advertisers chase declining audiences, broadcasters may compensate with increasing ad spot volumes – which of course would only compound the problem. One way round the problem is to make ads shorter – in the UK the default seems to be 30” – and to this end the report cites a (albeit limited) Nielsen US study this summer which showed that in certain categories 15” spots outperformed 30” ones in action intent, emotional response, attention and effectiveness – but not memory. That’s a surprise to me. A move towards shorter ads on broadcast TV would certainly shake things up for viewers, as well as echoing the trend in many parts of the VoD world.

10. The value of the social media giants to brand advertisers – one of the big issues of the day – is put under the spotlight. But the authors sum up their attractions pithily. One, safe delivery of old-school reach-and-frequency curves – if you aren’t too fussy about details.

Two, convenience. Three, they are evidently too big, and their CPMs too superficially cheap, to fail. Four, they are ubiquitous and consistent. Five, they offer easy penetration, profile, and price, as well as copy standards, self-service and dazzling targetability (albeit landing light punches). Six, there are few, if any, alternatives. Hmm, damned with faint praise.

And finally – and why should we begrudge them, even if there will be those who disagree – the authors make a plea for the value media agencies add. If the ultimate goal of advertisers is to make more money by selling more stuff more efficiently, the report says, they need to to be able to look at everything they do, from planning to channel allocation to buying to optimisation and attribution in a holistic way. Which is where media agencies fit in.

Putting words in their mouths, I think this translates as: “don’t go in-house”. You’d certainly be hard put to find advertisers who can demonstrate this same knowledge, understanding and perspective of TV and video.

Source: https://mediatel.co.uk/newsline/2018/12/03/what-the-grown-ups-think-about-tv/