Commentary

Will DoubleClick's Partnership with Macromedia Help or Hinder Rich Media Creativity?

One of the best questions I heard addressed to an Ad:Tech panel last week concerned the role played by agencies in the evolution of online creative. To the point, are there times that agencies do not assist in the creative process, but instead get in the way?

Now, before you agency types start writing me hate mail, the context for the question revolved around the intermediary role played by agencies between advertiser and media. For the purposes of this column, I want to take a look at this role as it pertains to rich media advertising specifically, and the partnership between industry giants DoubleClick and MacroMedia. In the interest of full disclosure, I should say up front that I have worked with companies on both sides of this, including United Virtualities and PointRoll, Sharpe Partners, Real Media and then 24/7 Real Media.

As I'm sure you're aware, DoubleClick and Macromedia announced on June 9 that they are beta-testing a product, which on its face would seem to be a harbinger of bad news to some rich media vendors. According to their press release, "DoubleClick's DART technology has been integrated with Macromedia Flash MX software, which will provide advertisers with a dramatically simplified, cost-effective process to create, traffic, and report on rich media ads."

That DoubleClick and Macromedia announced this by listing 30 agencies and Web publishers who are in support should come as no surprise. Anyone in the online advertising business knows that third-party rich media providers aren't always regarded so favorably by either group, if for no other reason than because these vendors become a third hand, extracting dollars from every rich media campaign.

But, if such is the case, and the usual market forces are what dictate where the money goes in online campaigns, why do so many of these vendors exist in the first place? And, more to the point, why are they doing so well? If there is truly a diminishing need for third-party rich media vendors, why do the bulk of all rich media campaigns online come from these companies? If the new DoubleClick/Macromedia product can do all it's claiming it can, will agencies other than the few interactive shops who already do this, suddenly improve their ability to develop compelling creative, craft and traffic effective campaigns, and deliver timely reports to their clients, the way that they have been depending on third parties to do this for the past few years?

I doubt it.

What is more likely to happen is something that I think is somewhat counter-evolutionary. So many Web publishers signed with DoubleClick in the late 1990's to handle their ad management and serving, not knowing that they were, at the same time, giving up their user data to be on the DART Network. Until DoubleClick got out of the profiling business last year, any site on its network was beholden to the company in terms of giving up their most valuable media asset, their users. Complaints about DoubleClick's poor customer service were legend, despite their great technology. Agencies using Dart for Advertisers have been catching up to this for the past year, which is one reason why so many are beginning to use their own tools or buying others made by Atlas DMT or Bluestreak, ValueClick, or 24/7 Real Media.

Agencies predominantly want their online campaigns to be made simpler, and they want to be able to depend on their vendors getting it right. That's one reason why these vendors have done so well the past few years - because they are specialists who can craft, traffic, and report on every campaign. Why would Yahoo! and MSN enter into an agreement such as the one they just signed with PointRoll if this were not the case? Any qualifying advertiser on either of these two major portals can now upgrade their simple banner campaign to a PointRoll FatBoy™ expanding banner at no additional charge. The juice behind this deal is that Yahoo! and MSN value the PointRoll technology and service so much that they are essentially selling it for them. Why would these huge portals do this instead of just doing like the New York Times Digital, who took most of their rich media in-house?

I'll tell you why - because it's not easy to do, that's why. That's why agencies and most major sites have built strong relationships with one or two of the major rich media providers. These companies, PointRoll, United Virtualities, Viewpoint, EyeBlaster, Unicast, CheckM8, Enliven, Ad4ever, and others have all integrated their offerings with the major ad serving software already. It's the people that matter - the service that will lack. And it's the people who have driven the expansion of rich media and the pushing back of the frontier of improved creativity online. I'm hoping that this will continue. But, I doubt it would continue with fewer creative minds in the mix.

Of course, there have to be exceptions to this supposition. A handful of the best interactive agencies will knowingly shake their heads at my thinking as uninformed. I don't dispute that some of the best rich media creative and some of the best managed campaigns come out of these top-tier agencies. But, more often than not, the best campaigns are coming from the companies I listed above. I'd hate to see their business harmed just when good rich media was becoming more of an accepted norm online.

Next story loading loading..