While all those new media measures and metrics are needed in a new digital media world, gross ratings points -- GRPs -- will be around for a while."Although deeper digital data sets can allow marketers to plan and buy smarter TV campaigns, the sheer scale of TV advertising spend and its ingrained processes and systems give GRPs the leverage they need to remain the core currency for TV and online video," says a report written by Michael Glantz by Forrester Research.This is not to say that new marketing and media executives will not be looking for new metrics. Also of special importance is how to mix in new metrics and measures. "Skill at weaving together meaningful data sets to see the big TV picture will separate the leaders from the laggards," says the study.Forrester says GRPs no longer provide complete coverage for marketers because they only measure age and gender in a world of digital detail, are a backward-looking metric, and face digital video platforms that can already target audiences beyond the basic.Right now the key word is "scale" -- something traditional TV has in droves -- which works in GRP's favor. Audiences still watch TV in near-record numbers, the report says, and TV attracts the lion’s share of most marketing budgets. Forrester's estimates are that TV advertising revenues were 76.6 billion in 2011, with digital video ad sales at $2.1 billion. Traditional TV will continue to rise -- to $82.6 million in 2012 and then $88.6 billion in 2013. Digital video advertising revenue will climb to $2.9 billion by the end of this year and then reach $3.9 million by the end of 2013.Consumers are watching video in new ways, with multitasking the norm -- and that will further push the new metrics.Glantz says 74% of U.S. consumers report that they multitask -- up from 58% in 2011 -- with social adding new layers of engagement. One key factor is that fractionalization of media creates a strong need for cross-media platform metrics.
The vast majority of mobile video viewing now takes place over Wi-Fi networks, according to the latest quarterly report from mobile video ad network Rhythm NewMedia. The firm said 70% of its videos were viewed across Wi-Fi connections in the second quarter, up from 51% a year ago. That could be a result of various factors including the proliferation of Wi-Fi networks, wider adoption of tablets (used mostly at home), and people shifting video-watching from wireless networks to Wi-Fi to avoid incurring heavy data charges. Whatever the case, the trend likely correlates with growing video consumption on devices. The Rhythm report pointed to a Cisco forecast projecting that video will account for 58% of all mobile traffic this year, up from 52% in 2011. Tablets are playing a role in that upward trajectory. In its first-quarter report, Rhythm noted that people prefer tablets to smartphones for video, watching 50% to 175% more videos on the former than the latter. In the new study, it referred to the tablet audience as “heavy video viewers,” more than half of who watch programs or clips on a tablet more than once a week. As prior research has noted, tablets are also more likely to be shared devices than smartphones. More than half (56%) of tablet users surveyed by Rhythm in the third quarter had 2 or more users. Multiple users within a family likely add up to more video viewing overall than a single user of a tablet or smartphone. When it comes to advertising, virtually all campaigns (92%) running with Rhythm include in-stream video ads, which it defines as a commercial break in full episodes or before video clips. In-stream ads are 80% more likely to be noticed than those served in other contexts such as the launch of an app or between screen changes. In-Stream ads on Rhythm’s network made up more than 200 apps and sites owned by publishers such as NBC Universal, ABC, IAC, and Warner Bros, had an average completion rate of 89% compared to 68% online. The majority of campaigns (58%) included some type of custom button, such as for getting more product information or social sharing, in the ad creative. Rhythm said an even larger share of campaigns (72%) now feature full-page ads on smartphones and or tablets, and that 90% include some type of display advertising. Combining video and display leads to higher engagement rates, according to the company’s research. On the media side, entertainment-related content continues to prove especially sticky. Of users visiting a mobile entertainment news destination today, 45%-60% would have visited yesterday. The Rhythm findings are based on ads served in the U.S. across iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, Android and other devices in the first quarter. More than 200 brands in 2012 so far have run campaigns with Rhythm including Unilever, McDonald’s, Disney, Paramount, General Motors, Ford, Verizon and Marriott.
From true fanatics to casual viewers, TV remains the dominant channel through which consumers get their sports fix. One-half -- 49.8% -- of all sports fans say the television is still their primary source for sports information, according to a recent survey of 950 U.S. online adults by Burst Media. Still, more than a quarter -- 26.5% -- now cite content Web sites as their main connection to sports. Interestingly, among all sports fans, the divide between television and content sites is reduced significantly -- by 17.4% -- when it comes to which medium respondents say is the best for sports news and information, versus what they indicated was their primary medium. In fact, two-fifths -- 41.3% -- say TV is the best medium, while 35.4% say content sites are the best. What’s more, one third -- 35.1% -- of all sports fans report going online at least once per day for sports-related reasons, with far more devoted fans -- 66.8% -- making their daily pilgrimage to the Web. In the social media realm, one-third -- 34.7% -- of 18- to-34-year-olds frequently or very frequently use social media to comment on, tweet/retweet, share or link to online sports content and video. Only 15.2% of 35- to-54-year-olds -- and 2.5% of those age 55 or older -- say they engage in the same social activity. Tablets and smartphones are emerging as sports content consumption platforms, as 31.6% of all sports fans now report using tablets, and 45.7% report using smartphones to access online sports content and video. Sports fans are also tablet and smartphone multitaskers, as one-third -- 35.7% -- say they use tablets and/or smartphones to access online sports content while watching sports on television. Devoted sports fans are overwhelmingly -- 79.0% -- male, while the gender breakdown among casual fans is evenly split. Spanning socioeconomic categories, one half -- 50.6% -- of all devoted fans have at least a college degree, while 43.7 reside in high-income households.
With billions of ad dollars at stake, online video networks are fighting hard for a bigger piece of the pie. To that end, Adap.tv on Tuesday debuted a new tool, which it believes is the best way yet for advertisers to plan their online video buys. “In minutes, an optimal digital video media plan can be created, leveraging the best data sources available, such as Nielsen,” said Toby Gabriner, President of Adap.tv. “Planners can then easily buy the recommended inventory, automatically optimize the campaign once it launches, and measure its effectiveness using both TV- and online-based metrics.” Pulling out all the stops, Gabriner made the announcement at the first annual “Adapt Conference” in New York.The so-called “Unified Planner" comes fully integrated into the Adap.tv Platform, which is an automated system to plan, buy and measure video ads.At the company's conference on Tuesday, Gabriner touted the suite’s ability to specify target audiences and campaign goals, including parameters such as reach, frequency and TRPs. The solution will also recommend specific sites, which Adapt.tv says will more effectively deliver advertisers’ target audiences. Planners have long complained that planning, buying and managing video ads is a less-than-elegant experience. Whether Adapt.tv’s new service can change this perception only time will tell. Earlier this year, Forrester estimated that domestic digital video ad spending will explode by over 250% by 2016 -- from $2 billion in 2011 to $5.4 billion. The estimate was largely attributed to a renaissance in quality, brand-safe video content, a proliferation in video-friendly devices and the maturing of younger online adept consumers.
Havas Sports & Entertainment (HSE Group), the brand engagement operation of Havas, has opened an office in Moscow in preparation for key upcoming sports events in Russia, the agency confirmed Monday. The shop said its Moscow office would focus on providing clients with services including sponsorship consulting, branded content, social media, PR, experiential and research. Both the 2014 Winter Olympics and the 2018 FIFA World Cup Soccer Tournament will be hosted by Russian cities. The Winter Games will be played in and around Sochi. A number of cities will host the World Cup competition, with final selections set for later this year. HSE said it was pulling core members of its Russian team from sibling agencies MPG and Arena Magic Box, which have been operating in the region for some time, servicing clients such as LVMH, Heineken and Reckitt Benckiser. Sibling creative agency Euro RSCG also has offices in the region. The new office is being run by Maria Gavrilova, who has been named managing director of Havas Sports & Entertainment Russia. Earlier she was head of special projects, Havas Media. HSE worked with 10 Olympic sponsors during the recent London Summer Olympics, as well with a number of past FIFA sponsors, stated Lucien Boyer, president and global CEO of HSE. The shop has a track record, he said, of advising “clients looking to connect with consumers around these big events.”
Quality. Scale. Pick one. Bet you can’t pick both. Can you? If you can find a way to deliver those two things to advertisers, investors will reward you amply. As a producer of content, I know the quality vs. scale conundrum all too well. Producer vs publisher Every producer is a storyteller. For some, their weapon of choice is the pen, for others it’s the microphone. For fewer still, it’s a camera. Either way, producers start off by dreaming of creating content they are passionate about, building an audience of dedicated viewers, growing their brand -- and for those who work online, landing advertisers, because as we know, content is now meant to be “ad-supported.” That’s the “dream,” even though for purists the concept of blending church and state is blasphemous. The reality, however, for most is they forego all that and take on production mandates for others. Fortunately, apart from a couple of mandates early on, my company’s never needed to shoot weddings and bar mitzvahs, and by and large, 99% of what we’ve produced has been “our content.” The “artists” among producers prefer to create their own content, while the “business oriented” producers know that there are no M&A multiples in production: acquirers and investors pay a premium to technology and distribution plays, less so for publishers, and practically nothing for pure-play producers. Of course, once you realize that investors don’t finance content producers anyway, then you can let go of that dream and embrace production deals (for others). Most producers need to take on such production deals not because they want to, but because they need to keep the lights on. Content production is a very tough segment of online video. Just because content is made available for free to viewers, doesn’t mean it’s cheap to make, let alone free to produce. But whereas production scales very differently (read: slower) than distribution, it’s not a zero-sum game. As such, if you can hang around long enough for last call, you’ll end up walking away with the spoils. But so many content producers have faded or run on empty because they mistimed or miscalculated the market. Mistiming the Market I’ve long referred to how my company is among the third wave of video-content producers. The first ones like Pop.com or Pseudo were too early (no one had broadband). The second wave like Mania, Ripe and Heavy had to build their own infrastructure and invest in marketing. The third wave wave also included players like Revision3 and Next New Networks, which have exited. We’re now seeing more and more of these third wavers who are practically only on YouTube, which may or may not work, if they don’t… Miscalculate or Misread the Market Once you don’t have to absorb marketing and infrastructure costs, you can build a solid video content business provided you don’t bite off more than you can chew. What the Revision3 sale to Discovery showed was that online video may never be “commercial” (that is, it won’t generate enough revenue to really matter) to old media, but it is certainly “promotional” (it can create promotional value to linear, traditional programming, where the big ad budgets remain). The One Advantage of Online Video is Its Biggest Disadvantage, Too You are also now seeing a new wave of content creators bet perhaps too heavily on YouTube, forgetting that what made cable (and broadcast) successful was the power of linear programming. As we’re seeing everywhere, the democratization process comes with its share of headaches, too. Simply launching YouTube channels -- regardless of whether YouTube is funding them or not -- isn’t a bona fide successful strategy in of itself. Ultimately, you’re a YouTube back-end producer -- and we know how poorly investors reward producers. But to get there, you need to cut through the clutter. With 4 billion daily video streams and 72 hours of new content uploaded each minute, in all likelihood, no matter how “cool” and “awesome” your content is, no one will watch it; or rather, not enough people will watch it to make it matter to advertisers. And users will by and large be drowned with too much content – be it ultra-premium, super-premium, premium, prosumer, or user-generated – for you to build your brand. Which means, ironically, that for many content creators who aspire to build their own content catalog and brand, their only shot at survival is turning to production for hire work, be it for YouTube or someone else. As such, if you don’t misjudge the market, you can create the kind of content you want, while building your brand and the company you want.
There’s a fast-emerging trend we are seeing as a producer of videos for both major brands and agencies: the emergence of “stories” as the next big vehicle for brand communication. At least a dozen of our clients have undertaken projects to start producing human-interest stories via video to promote their brands, so it bears a closer look for anyone in the video and broader marketing industries: In a world that proclaims “Content is king,” it is these stories that are showing up as the next big thing. Whether it’s an auto manufacturing company asking folks to look back into their past with their very first (insert brand here) car, or a mom reflecting on the first cake she baked from a box and how it made her feel, brands are encouraging consumers to be a part of the story by recalling their own experiences. The resulting human interest stories, with a specific brand as a centerpiece, are being utilized in a number of creative ways. For example, the videos are showing up on a brand’s Web site as personal brand commentary to humanize and personalize their corporate website. Equally or even more common, the video stories are used as a part of content on Facebook and other social-sharing sites. These videos are perfect complements to commercials that are uploaded on brand pages on YouTube, too. There are a few unique benefits from these video stories for brands: 1. The videos come across as authentic (if shot correctly). They are not stylized, or stuffy, or corporate. They are real people sharing real memories that reflect positively on a brand. 2. Then, there’s the endorsement by a satisfied customer expressed in warm, friendly, non-salesy manner. These testimonials, even when referring to the brand in memories from 10-15 years ago, open the door for future product trial and adoption by consumers. 3. And finally, these stories personalize the brand. They bring the brand down to the consumer level, which is appreciated by the consumer, and proves to be very motivational. It is this personalization of the brand that results in shareability. Practically no one is going to share a video that’s nothing more than a typical commercial featuring a new Mustang or other new car, but they might share a touching story of how someone felt about their first Mustang 10, 20 or even 30 years ago, and how they felt that first day cruising down the highway with the top down. Stories, especially those in video form, will live on with the Internet as long as we all make an effort to ensure that they are “findable”. As we all know, video already indexes well with search engines. Proper tagging and placing in various media will only help in sharing a brand’s stories. This trend will be worth watching in the coming months, as video stories have the promise to personalize brands in an authentic way.
Not that we measure the Internet the way we do athletes, but The Onion's 2012 is shaping up as something out of the Babe Ruth canon, minus the Rubenesque torso and frequent near-asphyxiation on husks of ballpark meat. It became the first media institution to reduce a sitting Vice President to a caricature for purposes of light entertainment (Dan Quayle doesn't count - he did it to himself). Its weekly editorial cartoon, sometimes presented with commentary by the artist himself, has tarred 95 percent of "real" editorial cartoonists by association. Then there are the digital assets - in particular, "Sex House," which started as a reality-show parody and spiraled into something darker and more disturbing (er, in an exceedingly funny way). It's operating on a higher satiric plane right now. Hence when The Onion says, "Chew gum, knave!," it is gum that I chew. Such was the emotional call to arms last Thursday, when The Onion assumed control of Stride's Twitter feed in a bloodless coup. The goal: Crack wise enough in 140-character bursts to prompt gum aficionado and curious prospective chewer alike to click over to Stride Gum's video introduction to Mintacular, a new… flavor? variety? model? I'm not up on the latest gum-related verbiage. Over the course of the day, Stride's feed teemed with a series of come-ons, eachsillier and more faux-marketing-speak-y than the next. My favorite: "#Mintacular won't change the way people chew, but it'll change what they taste when they do chew." Upon reading this, the Wrigley employee responsible for branding Juicy Fruit face-palmed with great and furious I-should've-thought-of-that-first vigor. The Mintacular clip continues in this same turbo-wry vein. It opens on the company's "vice executive senior president, sports gum ideation & development," dressed in the self-styled-tech-guru uniform of head-to-toe black. His mess of meticulously unstyled styled hair is tinged with silver and his hands entwine meaningfully after his every ruminative utterance. Everything about his appearance suggests that he is here to illuminate, to surprise, to delight. Against a white backdrop - I guess we're semi-mocking Apple here? - he speaks about how Mintacular's predecessor was "one of the most advanced celebrity-endorsed chewing products we've ever developed… it's gone on to define the sports-gum category." He's then joined by two other black-clad, self-serious, silly-titled white guys who similarly endeavor to explain the creative and chemical processes that birthed this transformative foodstuff. One talks design, taking us deep inside the thinking that led to Shaun White's beginner-goatee depiction on its packaging. In the clip's most dramatic moment, they focus on Mintacular's ease of use: "You immediately connect with the simplicity of the product. From the moment you pick it up, you instinctively know how to use it." Cue shot of supermodel lolling on her couch, smiling while examining her pack of Mintacular - and as she does so, the words "sequence shortened" are superimposed on the screen. The clip concludes with one of those grand promises you hope somebody will someday keep about something: "Mintacular will change everything you thought you knew - again. It's a devastatingly detailed little masterpiece of anti-marketing. Hell, even the names of the fake execs are perfect: "Jamie Gill-Sans," "Scot" with a single 't,' etc. You know these guys and you want to punch them in their affected-modernist throats. The Mintacular intro video isn't Onion-caliber, because so few clips of its kind are. But if you placed the video alongside material from the Onion News Network without identifying it as a piece of marketing content, it wouldn't come off as an obvious impostor. That's pretty much the highest compliment I can pay it.
In considering the future of media, attention must be paid to the much ballyhooed and often maligned concept of video convergence. Finally, it seems video convergence is becoming a reality. Surprisingly though, it is being driven as much by a growing cadre of Hollywood progressives as it is by anyone in Silicon Valley. “Hollywood?” you may ask skeptically. Truly, Tinsel Town is leading the revolution. One that allows for new forms of compelling content distributed in novel ways, which will surely mark the end of an era that has existed since the dawn of cinema, ushering in a new era with video convergence at its core. Not surprisingly, this revolution is being driven by artists -- directors, actors, writers -- as opposed to the studios and the distributors. Empowered by the past 25 years of technological advances, some of Hollywood’s top artists are finally breaking the shackles of the old content development, production and distribution models. Rather than navigate the slow, costly and prohibitive path of the traditional studio model to create content in bland and limited formats, these artists are using smaller budgets to create unique content in larger quantities, and taking it directly to consumers through the Internet. From there, viewers consume content on a variety of distribution platforms (YouTube, Vimeo, branded microsites, etc.) on myriad devices, and share/redistribute the content through social media. If that sounds a lot like video convergence, that’s because it is; it’s just not how we imagined we’d get there. Make no mistake -- we are there. Surprisingly, it’s not just struggling or young, innovative Hollywood artists embracing this model. It’s the enlightened old guard as well, from the likes of Ron Howard to Tom Hanks to Jerry Seinfeld. So what does this mean for the future of media in general? It’s tough to say definitively, but it does prove the truth behind one old cliché: content is king. And for those old media properties that have reinvented themselves over the past 10 to 15 years -- not just as distributors of content, but also as creators of compelling content (HBO, AMC, TNT etc.) -- the future looks bright indeed. Greg Smith, Chief Creative Officer, The VIA Agency