In a clear indication of the lay of land in today’s TV industry, research from advertising technology platform provider FreeWheel has found that after a decade of change, and as people’s consumption of media has fragmented across devices over the past ten years, many have returned to the living room to watch connected TV (CTV).

In the tenth anniversary edition of its US Video Marketplace Report, the Comcast subsidiary drew a timeline of events that have shaped TV’s last decade of growth, drawing on data and observations from past issues to highlight the transformative moments of the last 10 years and contrasting the history with data from the second half of 2020.

The report reveals just how much consumers have embraced their connected devices to view premium content and how the device of choice has evolved over time as distribution has changed. It showed that in the fourth quarter of 2012, 12% of video views were on devices other than laptops but in comparison, in the second half of 2020, non-desktop devices made up 84% of ad views. This represents a 7x increase in share.

FreeWheel noted that CTV has played prominently into this shift, as consumers have moved back to the living room to consume TV. CTV now makes up 62% of all measured ad views, with Roku and Fire TV contributing 72% of ad views, 43% and 29% respectively.

Looking back ten years to the growth in adoption of TV everywhere in 2011, the report showed how content – and, therefore ad views – have spread across devices. In the second half of 2020, TV everywhere (TVE) made up 40% of ad views, while streaming was not far behind at 38% of ad views measured. Meanwhile, ad views continue to soar: the report found that in H2 2020, overall ad views increased by 57% when compared to H2 2019.

The report looked at the journey of programmatic advertising, as marketers have sought to streamline their tech stacks and find greater efficiencies in media buying. In 2015, programmatic was just starting to gain traction in the video space. Programmatic transactions have since exploded, currently accounting for 24% of premium video ad views in H2 2020. The use of audience targeting has also accelerated, comprising 91% of ad views, split evenly between demo and behavioural segments.

“We’ve observed enormous changes in the TV industry over the past decade, making it critical that marketers stay on top of trends in distribution, monetisation, audience behaviour and ad experience,” said FreeWheel general manager Dave Clark commenting on the US Video Marketplace Report. “For the past 10 years, the Video Marketplace Report has become a trusted source for data, context and commentary into these changes. In observing this time frame, the big story has been fragmentation, but ironically, fragmentation of video viewing has brought viewers back to their living rooms as connected TV continues to lead the pack.”



Streaming is changing the world of TV viewing. But, unfortunately for the advertising world, the vast majority of this viewing is ad-free, since most of the largest and most dominant streaming services carry no ads — Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, HBO Max (though that is changing), Apple TV+ — and the two larger services that do carry ads — YouTube and Hulu —  carry very light ad loads.

According to Nielsen data (crossed with second-by-second connected TV viewing data), almost 25% of TV viewing is now on streamed content. But only 4% of ad-viewing time is on streamed ads. Linear TV still represents more than 95% of total TV ad-viewing time.

This is why premium video streaming ad campaigns today are so expensive, and tend to deliver a lot of frequency and not very much reach. It’s also why ad fraud in streaming video is a real and growing problem. Ad demand exceeds supply, which is to practitioners of digital ad fraud what honey is to ants at a summer picnic.

Many folks in the media and ad industry want to change this situation. Advertisers, big tech platforms, large media and digital ad-tech companies all would love to see super-fast growth of ad-supported video on demand (AVOD).

This shift would move digital platforms into the center of the entire ad ecosystem. It would break down the separate silo that is the $65 billion U.S. TV ad industry. It would — theoretically — mean more yield from each ad for everyone.

However, the folks who really control whether ad-supported streaming services will take off — viewers — have yet to put their time and attention behind ad-supported streaming in a substantial way. And viewers are in charge of this shift, not the media industry.

The linear TV viewing shift to streaming will take many years. Older and lower-income viewers are a big part of TV viewership, are not early adopters of new technology, and face economic and structural barriers to shifting to streaming.

The latest Pew Research report tells us that 34% of U.S. households lack fixed broadband at home (that’s more than 100 million Americans), and many tens of millions of homes lack “smart” TVs. Plus, when it comes to watching live sports and news, TV’s “tent-pole” programming, broadcast and cable deliver high-definition viewing with no lag or latency.

Streamed ad experience needs massive improvement. Why does Hulu keeps giving you the same ad over and over in the same hour on the same show? How come YouTube TV leaves some ad spots blank, with dead time? How come only two major ad-supported streaming services do a human review of each and every ad they show their viewers?

Digital ad technologies may have the capacity to deliver better, more relevant ad experiences, but as we know with banners and the open web, the gap between potential and practice leaves a lot to be desired. If the industry mirrors the web ad experience on streamed TV, viewers will abandon bad-ad services in droves.

Streaming ad reporting and measurement is a mess. One of the reasons the streamed ad experience is so bad is that the streamed world is a fragmented mess. Most TV and dongle manufacturers have different operating systems. Apps on this services are different. And the ads within those services may have several owners and many paths to delivery, including: device manufacturer, operating system licenser, content owner, distributor, sell-side platforms, demand-side platforms, ad servers, creative servers, and data management platforms.

This means dozens of companies may touch each ad impression delivery, and collecting, collating and harmonizing reporting and measurement from that mess is a mess.

It’s certain that any company claiming to give advertisers an accurate, consolidated ad campaign report based on deterministic data is not telling the truth. That doesn’t exist. Broad, approximate and probabilistic is the best anyone can hope for today (and for some time).

All about time, iteration and long-term commitment. I do believe that AVOD will be a big part of the video ad ecosystem over time, but it will take years to change viewer behaviors, build a new TV-like digital ad supply and deliver on the promise of a better ad experience for advertisers, not better profits for digital ad exchange platforms that want to trade human viewers’ eyeballs like pork bellies (thank you, mentor and media legend Wenda Millard, for warning all of us about this more than a decade ago).

The winners will put viewers first, will stay committed to building ad-supported services over years and years, not quarter over quarter, and will test, learn and optimize their way to a better TV experience for all.

What do you think? Do AVOD services have to be instant successes now to be long-term winners?



It’s unclear what the future of TV ad buys will look like in connected TV. Since much of TV inventory — including much of CTV — is reserved in the upfronts each year, will programmatic auction-based buying eventually be used in CTV as it is for online digital?

Major content owners like Disney and NBCUniversal are making big investments in automated platforms. Disney recently unveiled its Disney Real-Time Ad Exchange, or DRAX, a premium video header bidding solution, and NBCU launched its One Platform last year and continues to build and test new tools and capabilities.

And so, we asked the experts: “Is the future of CTV biddable? Why or why not?” Most seem to agree that it will be, although to what extent seems to be up for debate.

Ben Hovaness, SVP of marketplace intelligence, OMG North America

Since the early 2000s, ad auctions have been used to transact increasing volumes of media across a widening variety of channels. Auctions have a great number of virtues — yield maximization for sellers, better targeting for users, improved outcomes for advertisers, and an all around more dynamic marketplace. If one is looking for proof that auctions can be the core of an ad sales business, we think the commercial success of Google and Facebook should lay any doubt to rest.

In 2021, we see the same future for CTV. The marketplace is more complex than those of the walled gardens due to the intermediated nature of programmatic buying, with a wide variety of deal types — fixed-price, dynamic-with-floors, no-floors, post-auction price reductions (PAPR).

And a lot of inventory is still transacted on an [Insertion Order] basis. But we see the fundamental strength of the auction model eventually coming to dominate transactions in this space, as it has in the worlds of search, social, and various other digital ad formats. We also see it as something to look forward to, because it is not written anywhere that auctions must undermine buying clout.

Jen Soch, executive director, specialty channels, GroupM

I believe CTV will continue to be purchased via biddable and non-biddable methods. I see a side where CTV will be about being addressable with advanced targeting. Likely purchased by biddable methods, brands will look for heavy optimizations and flexibility. I see another side where CTV will be used as a strong brand first platform. Purchased by Insertion Orders, programmatic guaranteed or preferred deals, brands will search out high impact units, contextual alignment and the increasingly important tentpole events and sponsorships.

CTV’s future will not be all biddable. We will need direct buying where pricing would be fixed and purchased outside of a biddable auction.

Joe Cady, SVP of strategy and development, NBCUniversal

The growth of premium content on CTV provides the best possible medium to deliver an advertiser’s message. A biddable environment enables more advertisers of different sizes to reach audiences through CTV, so we believe that bidding is going to become more prominent. CTV allows for publishers and brands alike to tap into an array of advanced advertising and targeting capabilities, making it even easier to get the right message to the right audience on the right platform at the right time. I envision this ecosystem becoming more and more attractive across the board.

Meredith Goldman, VP of publisher advertising solutions, Roku

We’ve always said that all TV advertising will be streamed. We also believe that TV advertising will be automated and biddable, but will have a trajectory that’s different and more expansive than digital. Streaming TV advertising has the unique ability to couple top-of-funnel needs of TV buyers with the performance needs of digital buyers. TV has always been about reach, and digital is about action. Streaming achieves both, and unlocks the first true full-funnel performance platform.

The immediate update required for biddable platforms to attract more TV streaming advertising is to leverage real-time data for incremental reach and frequency. As a premium supply source, there will be additional expectations that streaming TV publishers offer the same access to supply to programmatic demand as their direct ad sales teams. Biddable platforms that have identity at its core and leverage first-party consumer relationships across ad decisioning and attribution will have a clear advantage in attracting streaming TV advertising.

Matt Barnes, senior director of programmatic sales, Disney Advertising Sales

Over the last few years, we have seen tremendous growth in our programmatic business across programmatic guaranteed and biddable deals. As more viewers shift to CTV as their desired method of consuming content, we will continue to see the shift in our industry to programmatic buying. The benefits we see with automation, such as reach and frequency management and targeting, are some of the reasons why we expect programmatic sales to account for up to 50% of Disney’s addressable and linear revenue by 2024. Using a mix of programmatic transaction types is the future of CTV.

Aaron Letscher, VP of programmatic and audience products, WarnerMedia Ad Sales

Yes, the future of CTV will be biddable – to an extent. Although I predict we’ll always see high-touch moments and tentpoles direct sold, like all media channels, marketers want scale and efficiency, so I predict patterns we saw in media planning and buying in digital over the past 15 years to continue in CTV.

But CTV has very distinct characteristics and challenges on the road to true automation. The clearest challenge for CTV buyers centers around audiences, where you see a patchwork of approaches, from syndicated research to building device graphs from bid-stream data. There are also myriad hardware, operating systems, and distribution relationships today in the connected TV space, which can make it difficult to scale and manage frequency across different channels.

I predict media owners and distributors with direct-to-consumer relationships and rich audience insights will be differentiated in that they can make deterministic connections with consumers, helping marketers to better understand their consumer and to unify buys on the front and back end.

However, the ad tech ecosystem must evolve its collective approach in the meantime to account for the lack of persistent identifiers in CTV. This means tuning bid strategies, algorithms and standardizing creative capabilities to account for the uniqueness of CTV, and not simply retrofitting strategies designed for web and mobile app environments.

Leo O’Connor, SVP and head of programmatic advertising, ViacomCBS

The current state of CTV is biddable. As we look to the future, we will continue to see an enormous focus on direct programmatic transactions between marketers and publishers. There will, also, always be a place for reserved buying in premium CTV, especially in live tentpole events where sponsorships are sold on a slot basis.



This month: How advertisers can double their return on investment (ROI), some of the challenges and opportunities for B2B marketers and the future landscape of TV advertising and audiences.

Half of brands achieve an ROI of $1.06, but the most effective can double this

For every $1 spent on media, advertisers can expect an average sales return of $1.06, according to data from Nielsen. The most effective 25% of advertisers, however, can achieve a return on investment (ROI) of $2.09 – nearly double the average.

This can rise further still – the median ROI in WARC’s analysis of the most successful brands is $3.99.

Nielsen notes that there can be regional variation, though. Advertisers in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) see the smallest range of ROI between the 25th and 75th percentiles, suggesting some level of consistency in performance. In Latin America, however, the top 25% of advertisers achieve an ROI 450% larger than the bottom 25%.

The methods for achieving higher levels of return can also differ significantly between advertisers.

Among short-term factors, which advertisers have the greatest control over, reach and ad quality are the most important drivers of ROI.

For marketers in the food category, though, ad quality is of far lower significance while frequency proves to be of above-average importance. For those in the hygiene and health category, duration and daypart rank higher than ad quality.

Marketers also need to recognise the importance of long-term factors. Structural factors, like brand size and brand dollar, drive over half (57%) of advertising’s ROI. This is particularly true for automotive brands as this figure rises to 62%.

Again, the differences across categories are notable. Short-term creative is particularly influential for the tech, comms and retail categories, where it drives one-fifth (20%) of ROI.

While the specifics for each category may vary, research from WARC and Cannes Lions has uncovered some key recommendations for practitioners. A combination of informed budgets, insightful strategy and creative output can deliver greater levels of effectiveness.

The WARC Awards for Effectiveness is a new global competition showing how marketing delivers business results. Entries close on April 1st and all those shortlisted will receive feedback on how they have performed on the Creative Effectiveness Ladder.

Challenges with ROI but new opportunities emerge for B2B marketers

The effectiveness of video content is improving for B2B businesses, but accurate measurement is often found wanting and ROI remains a challenge. This is according to a survey of marketers and sales people in mostly B2B or B2B/B2C companies from Vidyard and Demand Metric.

Half of those surveyed said their video ROI is getting better (48%), a similar level to 2019. As well as this, the share of B2B companies saying their ROI is unknown has dropped from 48% in 2018 to under one-third (29%) in 2020.

However, the research also finds that measuring ROI remains the most common challenge for B2B businesses when trying to effectively use video.

Progress has so far been limited – just 7% of those surveyed say their measurement is ‘advanced’, considering metrics like viewer drop-off rates and sales attribution. Instead, ‘basic’ metrics like the number of views prove most common.

This lack of a clear ROI is a common concern – additional research shows three quarters of TV ads deliver no long-term growth for B2B brands. This can come from an over-reliance on short-term activation and a lack of clear brand building.

WARC’s research into B2B marketing, including a survey of more than 330 practitioners in the tech and telco sectors, reveals some interesting trends that may help boost effectiveness.

The disruption of the coronavirus outbreak means this is a time of learning and discovery for B2B marketers. For example, half of those surveyed said they are experimenting with channels they have never tried before. This has prompted brands to use a broader multimedia mix that includes newer channels like audio and streaming.

Although more channels may introduce more complexity, B2B marketers are pushing for a clear focus. Four fifths of those surveyed say they need to be more focused on building strong brands.

This aims to provide a secure base from which B2B content can work harder and more effectively. For tech and telco B2B brands, there is a new significance on storytelling and in finding relevant partners to help deliver those stories in compelling ways.

WARC surveyed more than 330 B2B marketers in 10 markets across the world who operate within the tech and telco sectors. Changing Channels in B2B includes a deep-dive into each of the four themes, CMO views, data analysis, and key takeaways. Download the full report here.

Next gen TV attracts audiences and advertisers

Linear TV advertising spend has fallen by $47bn over the last five years as online channels attract audiences and investment, according to WARC Data’s latest research.

Over the same period, online video investment has grown $38.7bn and more than doubled in size. This includes advertiser-funded video-on-demand (AVOD), broadcaster video-on-demand (BVOD) and short-form social formats.

While linear TV remains 2.5 times larger, this gap will narrow as advertisers follow audiences.

WARC Data estimates that two fifths of online consumers worldwide now have an internet-connected TV, a new high and a trend that is likely to continue.

There are clear regional differences for streaming, though. Mobile devices prove more popular in Asia, while over half of audiences in India (57%) and China (45%) say they watch live TV content on their mobile, tablet or PC.

However, many advertisers say they are struggling to leverage connected TV advertising effectively. Less than a quarter of digital video decision makers believe they are optimal in core areas such as reaching the right audience, delivering effective creative and selecting appropriate media types.

Success may instead be found in integrating the management of all forms of TV media, allowing advertisers to achieve better measurement and greater effectiveness across their investments.

WARC Data’s latest report analyses how video viewing has evolved and how brands are reacting to the next generation of TV. It also includes an analysis of TV spots during the coronavirus outbreak, drawing from over 15m measured ads.

WARC Data subscribers can access the full report here. A free sample report is available to non-subscribers here.



When we talk about the potential demise of traditional linear TV, we’re talking about the potential demise of cable and broadcast delivery of linear TV, not linear TV itself.

That’s an important distinction as, like the difference between “OTT” and “CTV”, it clouds up discussions about the future of TV.

So far starters, linear TV is not going anywhere.

That’s one of the few developments around the future of TV I’m willing to make a firm bet on and it’s based on the fact that most people don’t like being their own personal programmer.

In my book, Over The Top, How The Internet Is (Slowly But Surely) Changing The Television Industry, I referred to it as the “Spotifyization of Television” and it’s a description that still holds up today.

On Spotify, users can listen to whatever song they want from a library of over 50 million songs. They can listen to a playlist they’ve created or one someone else has created. Or they can listen to one of the tens of thousands of radio station-like playlists that Spotify has created, including playlists that are personalized to their unique tastes.

Spotify’s own playlists have proved to be very popular with users as people quickly grow tired of their own music and want to listen to something new, only not too new.

That’s the basic premise behind the boom in linear-like channels on the FASTs, many of whom have hundreds of options ranging from genres like Crime and Horror to channels devoted to a single series.

The channels make it easy to use TV as background entertainment, to be able to click around, find something that is interesting enough for the moment, lean back and bliss out. (Or attend to emails, dinner preparation and similarly banal tasks.)

At some point soon I suspect we’ll have personalized linear channels too, either entire pre-populated channels (“Alan’s Crime Channel”) waiting for you, a personalized YouTube-like autoplay channel once the show you’ve just watched is over, or both.

Until then, there are certainly enough options on the FASTs where viewers have the ability to click from channel to channel the way they do on old school set top box cable.

Having these lean back options is important given how much of the current Second Golden Age of TV consists of “lean forward” options–shows you’ll want to pay careful attention to and watch with no distractions. They’re the yin and yang of streaming TV.

There’s another area where linear will find a home on streaming and that is live programming, be it news, sports or a special event.

There’s no reason why these three genres would not work on streaming, particularly if that’s where the bulk of their potential audience is.

Streaming is just a delivery system that uses the internet rather than broadcast signals or cable wire. If anything, it’s a superior delivery system as it allows for additional features like Amazon’s X-Ray, which shows the names of the actors in any particular scene. Easy enough to imagine a corollary feature that shows the athletes on any particular play.

The biggest advantage to moving linear to streaming is that it consolidates the number of inputs and allows viewers to take advantage of the ability to switch between linear and VOD at will, so that if a linear streaming channel plays a random episode of “Seinfeld” a viewer can quickly search for “Festivus” and watch that episode next.

It also allows for localization, so that streaming channels can be adjusted to reflect local tastes and news can be localized as well, right down to zip code-based weather reports.

Finally, it allows for better targeted addressable advertising, of the sort found on digital, that allows for better measurement and less wasteful ad spends.

One big caveat to all this: I wrote the aforementioned book in 2015 and much of what I wrote is still relevant today. Not because I’m any sort of genius, but because not much has changed over the past six years.

While there is the old saying “things change slowly and then all at once,” I’m not sure that applies to the television industry where things seem to change slowly… and then slightly less slowly.

We’ll know soon enough.



Advertising video-on-demand platforms (AVOD)– a subset of all connected TV — are expected to see skyrocketing growth over the next four years, rising to $17.8 billion, according to MoffettNathanson Research.

AVOD platforms were estimated to come in at $4.4 billion in 2020, with Hulu grabbing the bulk of that market — $2.5 billion.

In 2025, the analysis company projects that of the nearly $18 billion for AVOD, $5.3 billion will go for Hulu; $4.4 billion for Roku; $2.3 billion each for Peacock and Pluto; $1.9 billion for Tubi; and $500 million for HBO Max (an ad option yet to start.)

Looking at individual AVOD platforms, Hulu (its AVOD service) pulled in $653 million in advertising revenue in the fourth quarter. Pluto and Roku Channel, each had $173 million and Tubi hit $105 million.

In terms of total advertising minutes per hour of programming, Hulu was at 10 minutes; Pluto, 10 minutes; Roku Channel, 8 minutes; and Tubi, 5 minutes.

MoffettNathanson says the Roku Channel represented 65% or more of all Roku video ad revenues. The entire Roku platform’s advertising revenue for the fourth quarter was $265 million overall.

A smaller piece of its advertising revenue comes through ad revenue sharing agreements with premium video platforms carried on the Roku platform overall. For example, MoffettNathanson guesses Roku gets 15% share of ad inventory on Peacock.

For 2020, a connected TV projection from eMarketer says the total CTV ad market was at $8 billion in revenue. This accounts for all digital advertising that appears on home screens and in-screen video advertising, as well as YouTube’s video ad dollars.



Only through the holistic and integrated management of all forms of TV media can advertisers achieve better measurement and greater effectiveness, writes Paul Evans.

TV is not going anywhere, it’s going everywhere

TV has come a long way since the very first commercial was aired over 80 years ago. It has innovated dramatically to create some of the most attention-commanding audience viewing experiences available to advertisers – whether we consider the quality of programming content offered, the different screens, devices and platforms where that content is available for consumption, or the emerging forms of data-fuelled, technology enabled addressability.

TV – once considered by some as media in terminal decline – is in fact at a significant point of reinvention. Buoyed by a 2020 that we might refer to as ‘the year of TV’, viewing behaviour shifted to TV as a source of trusted content, with growth demonstrated across all forms of TV – whether linear or scheduled TV, or the various on-demand and user-initiated formats.

With market forces – both audience and distribution – aligning behind the wider definition of TV consumption, it has a chance to shape its own destiny of transformation.

Effectiveness is everything

TV is also one of the most evidentially supported advertising channels in terms of performance and value delivery, and is widely understood to be the most effective form of advertising on this basis – bar none.

It’s hard to ignore or dismiss the volume of high quality, exacting studies that have been undertaken by academic, industry and commercial parties to validate the efficacy of the $200bn TV advertising industry. For marketers, TV is known as the media channel that embodies the very rules and principles of how brands grow, whether measuring longer-term brand building or short-term brand activation and sales outcomes.

However, ‘digital’ expectations of planning, buying and measurement now set the operational benchmark for modern marketers and their agencies. Whether we refer to immediacy, accessibility, accuracy or transparency of measurement – and the data that underpins it – TV faces a significant delivery gap that manifests itself through a non-existent ‘user-experience’ of low-touch control, visibility and involvement.

When effectiveness is everything, TV’s problem isn’t its ability to provide value to advertisers. Its problem is its inability to measure and quantity the value of its effectiveness, and to democratise the understanding, optimisation and extension of that intelligence in real time.

The challenges from change

Amidst the positive ‘front end’ innovation that is changing the way audiences consume TV, an objective look at the operational layer underpinning this reveals significant challenges that – if left unchecked – will prevent the potential of TV’s future growth.

Indeed, the irony being exhibited right now is that with connected TV advertising, measurement actually seems to be getting harder and not better, leaving CTV as just another black box for brands. With doubts over the efficacy of CTV planning and buying, marketing investment will and should be slow to follow.

As an industry that is supercharging TVs capabilities through technology, we must now take ownership of the issues that are being natively built into the very fabric of its landscape, which we can summarise as:

The increasing and unnecessary complexity of infrastructure and language that is fuelling transformation, but holding back understanding for marketers. OTT, IPTV, ATV, MVPD, BVOD, AVOD, SVOD, TVOD, STB, HBBTV, ACR, DAI, SSAI. These are all probably familiar to us at a surface-level, but their proliferation is doing more harm than good through collective confusion.

An already congested TV ad tech ecosystem – ranging from demand and supply-side facilitators, content creators and distributors, and data aggregators – that has grown with incompatibility and interoperability. Compounded by the emergence of new ‘walled garden’ entities, we’re at risk of building siloes that create disharmony and limit effectiveness.

TV data – by any standard – is seemingly slow, dumb and disconnected. This is particularly true to the legacy systems and aggregation methods employed for linear TV, but a lack of transparency regarding provenance and quality of data is a reality across all of TV, fuelling bad measurement. And as the CTV industry relentlessly pursues a goal of audience addressability and personalisation, the perennial ‘digital’ issues of household vs individual targeting, online vs offline identity, and privacy/consent enablement are equally apparent.

Fuel the future of Total TV

At Adgile, we have always seen things differently. We were conceived and built to bring intelligent, real time visibility and control across linear and on demand TV. We create – not aggregate – unique TV data through our visual AI enabled technology, enabling users to understand, optimise and extend their TV planning and buying through our analytics, attribution and activation product capabilities.

We call this ‘Total TV Effectiveness’.

Total TV is not new language, but we want to bring new meaning to it. We believe it represents more than just the simplistic sum of TV’s linear, VOD and CTV parts.

Embracing Total TV as a category definition is much bigger. This instead looks towards the holistic and integrated management of all TV – uniting the different ways that TV can be consumed, with better ways of measuring and driving effectiveness. This is about improving the quality of data, planning and buying, talent capabilities, business and industry growth.

It reflects an ambition for the industry to come together and realise its true potential through safeguarding and promoting TV’s proven strengths (quality of content, viewing experience, effective advertising practice and business outcomes) whilst advancing into a data fuelled, technology powered future that strikes the right balance between mass targeting and addressability at scale.

We know that Total TV requires further change – change in behaviour, data and operations – and this manifesto aims to ignite that positive movement. As a means to provide direction to the debate and actions to the agenda, we wanted to highlight what we believe to be the necessary and actionable changes this industry can make right now.

Collaboration: Put simply, an industry working towards the common goal of Total TV Effectiveness. Working to avoid and dismantle ‘walled gardens’ that might prevent complete advertising outcome measurement, and instead building in interoperability and compatibility of data sharing across platforms. Linear and on-demand TV valued for their different strengths in addressing audiences need states, rather than a binary pursuit of CTV as a replacement for scheduled viewing.

Harmonisation: Achieving the necessary transparency and unification of data across all forms of TV to make it universally accountable. Elevating all forms of data to take a 3D view of identity – moving beyond the pursuit of an audience only definition, to one that includes advertising context and content data as the required constant to enable a single source of truth.

Simplification: Of definition, language and management. Simplicity drives understanding, adoption and advocacy. We reject what we don’t understand. We need to remove unnecessary complexity from the ecosystem and present Total TV as media that meets the needs of modern marketers and audiences – delivering value across the customer journey, building brands over the long term, demonstrating commercial accountability over the short term.

Total TV ultimately creates a better industry for everyone – audiences, brands, agencies and broadcasters – and it’s our obligation to collectively realise this opportunity. We have to move past the current focus on connected TV as the sole industry solution to effective TV advertising. It isn’t. The answer is about connecting TV. Collaboration, harmonisation, simplification. Let’s fuel the future of Total TV.