| |||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSSToday a similar debate rages on surrounding the pre-roll. Advertisers love the idea of a pre-roll because it offers a captive audience that has self-selected to interact with content. The unit is similar in fashion to advertisers' beloved TV commercials, though typically shorter in length and accompanied many times by a display unit. However, the pre-roll can be just as invasive and just as annoying when taken to the extreme of being placed in advance of any and all video content. This time around, advertisers are much more wary of a full-scale implementation of this type of unit, and rightfully so. This unit represents a significant shift forward for online advertising, and to overuse it now would be detrimental to the business moving forward. If there's a consumer backlash over advertising's integration into the online video experiences, the business could suffer dramatically.
There are a number of alternatives to the pre-roll, and there are a number of ways to limit how it is utilized. The first is timing and frequency. If you are going to use pre-roll on your site, limit the length to 15 seconds or less, and put in place a frequency for exposure; maybe every third or fourth video view, the user can be shown a pre-roll. I've even heard whispers of companies trying a 3-second tag in advance of the video, with a full-length unit later on. It's a sort of "brought to you by" message and certainly has merit.
The second option is not to use the pre-roll, but focus on the mid-roll, which runs during the content, or post-roll, which runs after the content. Obviously the mid-roll would be better for exposures than a post-roll, but when looking to implement a mid-roll unit you should also consider frequency and you should also consider the length of the video itself. If the video is less than 2 minutes long, you should not run a 30-second spot. Fifteen seconds might be acceptable, but you still need to anticipate the user reaction. I heard rumors that Joost was using mid-rolls, which are most similar to standard commercials, but that they would vary when the units run rather than be run in pre-determined ad pods. It's an interesting thought, especially given that these units cannot be fast-forwarded.
The accompanying display unit is also very important, as this lends a longer-term opportunity to the exposure and a chance for a click-through that might not otherwise be available. Many sites use many sizes, and there are many ways to manage rotation, etc., but this unit seems to be a strongly accepted option from the consumer perspective.
You've likely heard a lot about "hot-spotting" -- where an element of the video is programmed to be clickable. This is very cool technology, but not yet highly understood by the consumer. There will likely be more usage of this as the technology progresses, but it remains to be seen how effective it will be.
The other unit I have heard about is a stop-unit. Whenever the video is paused or stopped, a fixed unit comes in over the video rather than the paused thumbnail of the video. When the video is played again, the unit goes away and the video continues. I find this unit very interesting, and it could be easily accepted by the market.
All these formats have been tested in different combinations over the last few months, and each has its own plusses and minuses. You should expect that while performance on the various formats will be strong, still some users will always complain. But if industry members are patient and test and share the data on performance with one another, then I feel confident that we will come to a positive place where online video will remain a strong advertising opportunity for brands and services.
Please, though, be patient. Do not inundate consumers with bad experiences, or they will stop watching your videos -- and you'll ruin it for everyone!
RSS FEEDS
My first reaction to the pre-roll (as a site user) was the fear that it may be the new "fee" for viewing some site's video content... just like ATM's charged no fees for many years -- then after you were used to using them, you didn't mind paying the fee once it was introduced, because it's what you had to do for the convenience of using an ATM (which you can't live without now).
Creating a pleasing consumer/prospect experience starts with the marketing process. If the pre-roll trend persists, and intends to be effective, it will need to adapt -- by shortening the unit lengths and customizing the creative approach, not simply plugging in existing creatives already being used in TV.
This has just been pretty much ripped off by You Tube, judging from some screenshots I saw of the model they will be deploying for ads there.
If the text ads are (a) relevant/contextual and (b) the ad content that is delivered once a user clicks the text as is interesting (or better yet, interactive), there is loads of potential for this to work.
As far as media is concerned, however - 15 seconds is tolerable. You tolerate it if you want to see something, don't you? Who says you have to pay attention to the content? Oh... because you probably DO.
Perhaps pull a Google and automatch video pre-roll content to videos with similar content. I watched some kids nearly get hit by lightning on CNN, and it would have been a good spot for a rubber boot company in the pre-roll.
A great follow-up column for you would be to explore why and how so many marketers still deploy pop-ups! The major offender and enabler, who somehow get past my multiple layers of Firefox and other ad-blockers, are Netflix and Tribal Fusion, respectively. Speaking purely as a consumer, Netflix has a great, consumer-friendly service, so it's surprising it remains so determined to take my valuable PC processing power and leave behind so many unwanted ads. Unless Netflix is unaware of what's going on, and that often is the case with pop-up platform enablers (or any advertising platform enabler, for that matter). -Max
Cory, in the past you have been a big advocate of consumer control and choice, I'm curious, how does this tactic fit into that philosophy?
I'm not trying to demean your viewpoint, I am just wondering if I am not seeing something here.
I hated telling people that I worked in interactive advertising because the next sentence was “ So, you create those Pop-Up windows “
The Pre-Roll should be accepted buy the public with less hostility because television has already put us in the mindset that with video comes a commercial. And chances are someone who is watching a video, wanted to watch that video. People didn’t choose Pop-Ups.
I do agree and make it a practice of keeping Pre-Rolls to 10 seconds or less. That’s enough to ask of a viewer’s time. But let me ask you, with more and more video spreading throughout the Interne, will the 10 second become the new 30 second for traditional TV?
www.inthemotherhood.com - Suave, MSN, People & Sprint Partner with Leah Remini (King of Queens) to help Mom’s create their own online shows. www.caressfairytales.com - A new Web series we created, wrote and produced for Caress. This stars Kate Walsh (Grey’s Anatomy) www.CTURookie.com – We created, wrote and produced The Rookie webisodes as a “24� spin-off for FOX and the Degree brand
This goes way beyond brand integration... For further examples give me a call.
Brad Curtis Brad@Scienceandfiction.com 415-306-2110
Our click thru rates are evidence that consumers are not dissatisfied with pre rolls, but are willing to first look at a 10 or 15 second pre roll as the entry fee to being able to view licensed, high quality, and up to the minute content.
As a company, our team at Voxant (www.thenewsroom.com) has gone to great lengths to make sure that the content that consumers see in our player is not only licensed, but. high quality, up to the minute and cimpletely relevant to what they want see.
I agree that as a whole our industry is still in the early phases of trying to define the "perfect video pre roll, post roll, mid roll, video in general experience" and trying to make sure that we are putting something in front of consumers that they want to see.
Unlike the PoP Up which was obtrusive from the 1st day it started "popping up", video is here to stay and we're committed to adding and changing the ingredients as we go to ensure that we have the best possible product available in the market.
Bad marketers view consumers as sheep who deserve to be fleeced. Good marketers understand consumers as humans who need to be served.
Marketing cliches about "forced exposure" to "captive audiences" so that we can "ram messages down people's throats" are violent and show zero respect for consumers.
Is it any wonder consumers resent and ignore so much advertising?
Google has proven that a LOT of money can be made by actually *helping* people find what they are looking for. Service: what a concept!
Making consumers happy is the path to profit. Making consumers miserable is the path to them clicking away from your brand.
Bad marketers view consumers as sheep who deserve to be fleeced. Good marketers understand consumers as humans who need to be served.
Marketing cliches about "forced exposure" to "captive audiences" so that we can "ram messages down people's throats" are violent and show zero respect for the customers.
Is it any wonder why consumers resent and ignore so much advertising?
Google has proven that a LOT of money can be made by actually *helping* people find what they are looking for. Service: what a concept!
Making consumers happy is the path to profit. Making consumers miserable is the path to them clicking away from your brand.