• by Wayne Friedman , November 3, 2010

Will more networks follow the CW's lead in cross-selling traditional TV shows with the Internet-airing of those same TV shows? One major media agency executive thinks so.

Donna Speciale, president of investment and activation and agency operations at MediaVest USA, believes Fox should be the next network to do it.

In speaking on a panel at the thinkLA conference -- the Los Angeles-based advertising/marketing group -- Speciale told Kevin Reilly, president of entertainment for Fox Broadcasting Company: "You are next. You have those [young] 18-34 viewers."

Mediavest made a major commitment to doing cross-platform TV/Internet deals during the last upfront with the CW, Speciale told Media Daily News. She said younger viewers are increasingly likely to go in this direction -- watching episodes for shows on traditional TV and online. This makes Fox, a longtime leader among 18-34 viewers, the ideal next choice.

Reilly agreed that young consumers are more active in pursuing video in a number of different areas.

CW made headlines last spring when it announced it would run the identical levels of ad inventory on TV shows like "Gossip Girl" on theCW.com site. The spots would be sold to advertisers in TV/Internet packages. After the upfront, the CW said "most" of its deals -- but not all -- involved cross-platform selling of its traditional TV and Internet commercial inventory.

CW marries viewers impressions provided by third-party Internet research/advertising company DoubleClick to that of Nielsen VideoCensus, which can identify the percentage of specific viewer groups, such as women 18-34. This Nielsen percentage data -- long used over the years -- is called VPVHs, the viewing per hundred viewers.

One a somewhat similar topic, Rick Rosen, head of television for William Morris Endeavor Entertainment, said one problem remains: People are watching TV/video through time-shifting and other devices -- but this doesn't always lead to more money.

"It's the greatest problem in that ratings don't reflect the way people are watching," he said. "We [actors, producers] are not being paid for who is viewing these shows."

Rosen added that some of the financial underpinning of producing expensive TV shows might change -- and that marketers could get heavily involved. For example, he says one of his clients -- American Express, along with Sony -- financed a pilot written by two writers. The payoff for the marketers, he says, was in the "values" that went into the initial show -- not blatant product placement.

"You won't see anyone paying for a meal with an American Express card," he said. Rosen did not reveal any specifics about the show.

Fox's Reilly said these efforts "sound great, but then when one [project] doesn't work" marketers can go sour on these types of deals. He adds it's very hard to get all parties -- marketers, networks and producers -- to agree: "It's like landing two 747s on the same tarmac."

Concerning the outlook for the national TV advertising market, Joe Abruzzese, president of advertising sales for Discovery Communications, said the marketplace is still very strong. But there are questions as to where the money is coming from.

"Why is TV [advertising] doing better than the national economy?" he asks. "Are marketers taking it from their growth [in revenue] or from cost-cutting [efforts]?" He said few know the exact answers.