Search by name, company, title, location, etc.

Tony Jarvis

Member since April 2006Contact Tony

As proprietor and Research Architect for the Olympic Media Consultancy we serve global clients in 3 key areas: Provide expert leadership, analysis, planning and strategic thinking to optimize the value and usage of available media/marketing and data/systems information. Generate increased marketing ROI (revenue, profitability and brand equity) by providing relevant insights through designing, executing and interpreting superior advertising research. Evaluate and improve advertising and media effectiveness for agencies and their clients by understanding, developing and managing meticulous consumer research and applying "leading edge" models and concepts. Tony was Chairman of CARF, Canada and is a former Board member of The ARF and MRC . An Olympian he was formerly the British Olympic Swim Team Captain. He writes Op Eds exclusively for Media Post and also offers regular pithy comments on Media Post articles. He refuses to use "Fakebook"!

Articles by Tony All articles by Tony

Comments by Tony All comments by Tony

  • ANA Cross-Measurement Platform Aquila Taps Samba For Streaming Data by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 10/22/2025)

    Josh & Ed: HH data "personified" then used to "assign" viewer presence (e.g. button pushed versus actual viewing)?  Set usage (device ) data assigned/ascribed to persons and viewing?  Three different sources - Kantar, Conscore and SAMBA - each with various and different bases and basis, video behaviour measurements as well as an array of assignments/imputations, etc., etc.  So, without truly independent validation of an extremely complex data manipulation and integration, it appears that Ed's "distorted picture" may unfortunately be the case.  It appears that at best Aquila/HALO would only deliver a ballpark planning R&F estimate based on the very broadest video input specs at the least dependable simulated persons OTS possible. If this is correct (?), to use such a broadly scoped campaign R&F estimate for outcomes projections is particulary puzzlling beyond the fact that it is the creative that is the primary driver of campaign outcomes albeit with the support of optimal synergisitc media vehicles that "encourage or enhance" real attention for the brand message.  

  • ANA Cross-Measurement Platform Aquila Taps Samba For Streaming Data by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 10/22/2025)

    As a memberof the WFA's HALO Industry Tehnical Advisory Group, HITAG, I have expressed serious concerns with device-based and consequently "content-rendered-count" data for Cross Media Measurement, CMM, versus persons-based attention (Eyes/Ears-On at a minimum) metrics program by program or ad by ad, due to the former's associated media biases and relatively poor relationship to campaign outcomes. No attention, there can be no outcomes!  HALO, a highly complex multi-faceted construct and base model for CMM initiatives in various countries, has been developed (with the primary support of the technoplolies) to form the basis for the ANA's Aquila and ISBA's ORIGIN currently.  However, answers to key questions raised with Aquila are still awaiting response.  They include whether there is a consistent and acceptable definition of "impressions", and/or "viewing", and/or "audience", used throughout all and every data source used and integrated within the HALO/CMM model along with their independently verified validity (walled gardens data?!)?  And, if not, how are they harmonized and made comparable to what final CMM model definition and derivation of sources used or imputed? These questions address the industry's fundamental on-going media metrics disconnect.  Are there conflicting defintions of metrics across the various data sources and inputs used to produce a final campaign Reach & Frequency estimate, i.e., What will the final Aquila resulting reach and frequency estimate acually represent?In the interests of full disclosure, accountability and transparency, it appears that SAMBA TV relies on ACR data which is solely device-based data together with detailed household profile data from a panel but without persons-based, independently verified, actual measured viewing. If correct (?), SAMBA data would merely reflect content-rendered-counts, aka the oft misrepresented "viewable impressions" (No REAL OTS), on a screen that are likely associated with a projected HH profile of the device owner.  What we used to call circulation/distribution data years ago.  If this is the case, Ed's concerns are are on point and advertisers and their media agencies should ensure that these basic concerns are resolved by HALO and Aquila.  As a reminder, high quality samples when independently validated are first representative of a given universe.  Sample size while not unimporant is somewhat secondary and depends on the level of detail being sought, e.g., dayparts (planning) versus show by show or program by program (buyng).  The latter would require a much larger sample than the former.  A non-representative sample however large will always produce specious results.   

  • It's Tough To Consume Conscientiously by Gord Hotchkiss (Media Insider on 09/22/2025)

    Gord: Insightful piece.  As to what effect one family's decision could really make, I remind readers that ultimately it takes just one grain of sand to tip a scale.  There were ~90 million (35%) eligible voters in the US that did not vote in the last election. That is a lot of grains of sand to restore democracy in the US.  

  • Calling Nielsen Viewing Audible? NFL Says Its Audience Is Bigger by Wayne Friedman (TV Watch on 09/04/2025)

    Josh, Ed,  Jack & John:  A brilliant review and assessment which hopefully Paul Ballew will accept and many will.study? You should each send the NFL an invoice!  Of course, we never hear from the media when "the numbers" are clearly overstated or misrepresented per "viewable impressions" aka content-rendered-counts.    And yes Josh, even persons-based "proximity" is neither "viewing" nor Eyes/Ears-On.  As you would expect I watch REAL football and not a gladiator sport that tried to deny CET.  

  • MRC Releases Second Phase Of OOH Standards, Includes 'Comparability' With Other Media by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 07/28/2025)

    Ed:  As you are fully aware, our beloved advertisers have been "conned" into believing that "viewable impressions" (NO REAL OTS) and/or even basic OTS if real, with their typically low CPMs will deliver cost effective campaign outcomes assuming the creative meassage is meaningful and impactful for the target group. This position was uttertly demolished by Johnathan Waite of Havas Media at an ARF event based on a European Audi campaign using attention metics versus VIs.  (The CPMs were significantly higher of course but the outcomes were substantially better for the same media budget.)"Viewable impressions" for digital devices will generally generate larger numbers especially compared to persons-based attention metrics for the same device/content provider (per Lumens Research, TVision, etc.).  However, per Kym Frank, the MRC fails to understand that for a classic OOH panel the 'viewable impressions' number is simply - one!  And, as Kym also correctly reminded OOH vendors, whether using VI's (or even OTS) without a value/exposure consideration there is no differentiation between panels/boards notably on the same stretch of road that have the same traffic counts unless adjusted for visibility to produce "visiblity adjusted contacts", VACs, or Eyes-On metrics per GeoPath. So premium OOH boards/locations receive the same "numbers" as the poorer quality inventory.  Based on these flawed documents, the real question for advertisers and their media agencies as well as for Joe Mandese is: Why is MRC ignoring the international OOH research community (who are no longer welcome on the MRC OOH Working Group!) plus the recent WOO Guidelines, along with OOH JICs current best practices, and, ipso facto taking a run at GeoPath the sole and ONLY JIC/MOC in the US?   

  • MRC Releases Second Phase Of OOH Standards, Includes 'Comparability' With Other Media by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 07/28/2025)

    Joe: As you likely surmised from your "controversial" comment, this MRC Phase II OOH measurement document will surely continue the damage to the true value of OOH media from Phase I as eloquently revealed by Kym Frank, former GeoPath President, and my "In Dissent" Op Ed in Media Post - we were both members of the MRC Working Group.  It, delibertely I suggest, confuses and/or contradicts many of the key principles, definitions, methododologies, and best practices in OOH Measurement long embraced by the majority of OOH JICs globally via the WOO Global OOH Audience Measuerment Guidelines, May 2022.  Phase I was found to be almost farcical at a meeting of OOH JICs from around the world after it was released and subject to a more thorough assessment of this Phase II document, I would posit that any assessment of Phase II by the international OOH research cognoscente would not change.   

  • Need To Bone Up On Digital Out-of-Home Measurement? Try The IAB by Joe Mandese (Planning & Buying Insider on 07/14/2025)

    To expand on Ed,"s point, this latest IAB measurement document and the chart referenced contain basic media measurement flaws and contradict the evolution, principles, definitions and metrics derivations of OOH measurement well established by OOH JICs globally over the past 20+ years.  These are embraced by GeoPath in the US and were initially developed by ROUTE (formerly Poststar in the UK). I sat on the technical committees of both organisations.  It does however echo the fundamental flaws contained in the recently released IAB's Retail Media Measurement Guidelines notably regarding the section on OOH, including DOOH, measurement.  These flaws were formally brought to IABs attention by several industry experts but were summarily ignored despite offers to review and discuss the basic errors and consequently protect retail media from the IAB's missteps.So Joe, with respect. the proper headline should unequivocally be, "Digital OOH Measurement?  Ignore the IAB!" 

  • JIC Issues Updated Measurement Provider Analysis by Wayne Friedman (Television News Daily on 07/10/2025)

    Ed: Fair comment.  You are more polite than this British Bulldog!  It does appear overall that your assessment confirms the weak and I suggest often deliberately confusing state of TV/Video Audience Measurement and the resulting conflicting Metrics here in the US.  This is especially regarding planning versus trading databases, and their influence on the media agency and seller "partnership" including the whole area of Principal media buying!  Real media JICs driven and supported by the media agencies in collaboration with the sellers would substantially help aleviate many of the fundmental concerns that we have conisitently raised and whose resolution are so vital to more effective brand campaigns.  Wayne: Delighted for you to expand on these positions.  Truth matters.  

  • Yaccarino Fallout: 'Premium' TV-Content Wasn't An 'X' Thing by Wayne Friedman (TV Watch on 07/10/2025)

    Ed: Exactly!

  • JIC Issues Updated Measurement Provider Analysis by Wayne Friedman (Television News Daily on 07/10/2025)

    Wayne: This OpenAP "Multi-Currency Certification Committee, M-CCC" initiative, owned by the networks, is unequivocally NOT a JIC and as Joe Mandese suggested has serious conflicts of interest which JICs avoid due to their structure, procedures and processes.  Please read the White Paper I co-authored with John Grono on the "Ten Cornerstones of JICs/MOCs" published by Media Post with a subsequent updated version in ESOMAR's Research World. It was based on their evolution and cost effective success worldwide established over many many years, in many countries across all major media.  For you and Media Post to continue to formally "recognize" this shameful masquerade by OpenAP does not reflect the typical journalistic quality, honesty, anlaysis and truth your readers expect. That this US industry TV/Video measurement farrago is being supported by the global media agencies, who know so much better and fully participate in REAL media JICs around the world, does them no credit.  As such it points to Ed Papazian's position that the media agencies in the US market are beholden to the sellers. Advertisers, please take note!'The global media research industry has long understood that certifications and/or audits (as technically and thoroughly executed by MRC) need to be executed to "Guidelines" not so called "Standards" which usually completely fail to meet the very definition and strict requirements of "Standards". Media and Audience Measurement has come a very long way over the past many years notably in Europe. The US needs its leading trade media publication to encourage meanigful research quality, reliability and progress and call out the misguided shams! BTW: "Currency" for any entity is singular! It avoids the chaos and disruptions of the "alt-currency" measurement scenario, "what metrics do you want, how much money do you have?"  JICs provide each media in each country an industry agreed trading currency - singular!  Buyers and sellers do use anciliary "alt" data to enhance The JIC Currency metrics as deemed meanigful for the brand campaign to help optimize potential outcomes. 

About Edit

You haven't told us anything about yourself! Surely you've got something to say. Tell us a little something.