Tony JarvisMember since April 2006Contact Tony
- Research Architect Olympic Media Consultancy
- LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-jarvis/12/b3a/a45/
- 638 Crane Prairie Way
- Osprey Florida
- 34229-7812 USA
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
- Expert Insights on The Future of U.S. Polling and Forecasting in
With polls in the spotlight again this election year an ARF event brought together a group of experts to consider the predictive accuracy of different methods of political and business forecasting.
- COVID-19 Triggers Innovations In Executing Attribution & Analytic Models in
The "real time" or close-to-real-time results provide the cornerstones to adjusting any marketing dimensions to more rapidly support optimizing ROI and/or brand equity.
- Attribution & Analytic Models - Incredible! But Only As Good As The Plethora Of Databases Involved in
Day 3 of ARF's attribution and analytics forum featured five presentations that touched on optimizing the creative mix, media selection beyond digital and television, and even beyond media to encompass the full marketing channel mix when based on a truly holistic approach.
- When Media 'Exposure' Is Not Audience 'Viewing' Or 'Hearing' There Can Be No Ad Outcomes! in
Day Two of this week's ARF event on attribution and analytics featured Cadillac, Regions Bank, CIMM, ANA/AIMM and Analytic Partners and how they are dealing with the complex issues bedeviling cross platform attribution and its assessment.
- Modeling The Full Value Of Marketing Investments: Doing Precise Things With Imprecise Data? in
Day One of ARF's "Attribution & Analytics Accelerator" gathering offered intriguing marketing modeling case studies from four major brands, Microsoft, Mazda, Trojan, and Cotton Inc.
- Industry to Establish Ad Metadata Standards in
Called AMSI, Advertising Metadata Standards Initiative, if achieved this would provide an Ad specifications database building block to the industry for analysis of cross-media measurement plus campaigns based on attribution and ROI.
- U.S. Election Pollsters: Keep An Eye On Florida in
Marketing Politics Weekly on
An ESOMAR webinar Monday illustrates how divided America is weeks before the 2020 Presidential election. Based on an Economist/YouGov poll of 1,363 likely voters conducted Oct. 4-6, 59% of Joe Biden voters will vote by mail, while 59% of Donald Trump voters will vote in-person on Election Day.
- Can The ANA Drive Equitable Cross-Media Measurement? in
The third day of the ARF's virtual AudienceXScience Conference Wednesday highlighted the Association of National Advertisers' (ANA) launch of a cross-media measurement initiative that will based on a common currency across all platforms, an assessment of attribution approaches that demonstrate extensive inconsistencies (and, consequently, produce different outcomes measures), solid research on the value of attention as an ad metric, the value of ad position in commercial pods, and the damaging effects of ad clutter and long commercial breaks. All this plus insights from a two industry CEOs.
- The Future Of The Entertainment Sector Revealed At ARF Conference in
Day Two of the ARF's virtual AudienceXScience Conference highlighted an investment banker's view of the future of the media and entertainment worlds post-COVID, stressed the value of high "gender equality measure" (GEM) in ads for incremental sales lift, provided insights on mobile advertising effectiveness, and, offered "attention" (noticed) as a possible common cross-media currency metric for consideration by the WFA in tits proposed technical measurement design draft just released.
- Census, Radio Take Center Stage At ARF Audience Science Conference in
Day 1 of the ARF's virtual AudienceXScience Conference underscored and polished several fundamentals of the research, media, and ad businesses, especially the progress of the 2020 Census -- arguably the most complex, complete and privacy-compliant survey executed in the U.S. Results are solid, Census COO, Ron Jarmin, said despite the pandemic and various catastrophes.
Comments by Tony All comments by Tony
- CTV 'Viewability' Beats All Other Digital Video, Lags Linear TV
Yes, MRC has now moved to "duration weighted viewable impressions" which compounds this anachronism; and which some of my peers find completely untenable. They believe, as do I, that it deepens the extensive media metrics confusions regarding what is a meaningful media currency (deliberate in some cases like IAS and social media platforms!). "Duration weighted viewable impressions" also conveniently ignores the myriad of other critical attributes of any media vehaicle beyond duration which can significantly effect exposure by the target audience to the content. And yet unbelievably they were all ignored. Its a long list depending on the medium. Ignoring any of those 'other' media platform attributes that due to their nature could especially benefit a brand's creative message was unacceptable when I was at Mediacom and to our clients. Viewable Impressions, whether duration weighted or not, are only a benchmark regarding delivery of content to a platform and NOT a media currency! Clearly important as an initial media qualifier (content properly rendered) but no more. As Erwin Ephron used to say: Delivery is not necessarily receipt; reciept is not necessarily an opportunity-to-see (or hear) the media vehicle's content by a target audience; and oportunity-to-see or hear content is not necessarilty actual exposure to the content or to the ads carried. Per the ARF Media Model Level 3, which Erwin helped author, no audience exposure or Eyes-On, no brand effects however briliant and impactful the creative and even if the content/ads are perfectly rendered to the full MRC Standard! May I suggest that its the ANA and 4A's that should be kvetching to IAS about their deliberately misleading and inflationary report? Hopefully this dialogue will also assist their attempts to develop a meaningful cross-media measurement, XMM, approach in collaboration with ISBA, UK, based on the WFA XMM framework. To unscore. That initiative is described as a "Cross-MEDIA-Measurement" approach. Campaign Measurement, the ultimate goal identified by the WFA, encompasses an entirely different set of measurement specifications and requirements. Consequently that should not be considered a "Cross-MEDIA measurement" as it would lean heavily on factors for which media are not, nor should be, accountable. (Hint: Just as a start, the creative!)
- CTV 'Viewability' Beats All Other Digital Video, Lags Linear TV
How many times must Ed, John Grono or myself remind readers and even the doyen of media journalism, Joe Mandese, that the so called "viewable impression" as coined by MRC should NOT be used as an audience or media currency metric which requires ad exposure by a target audience to be meaningful. Once again, "viewable impressions", a complete misnoma in my opinion, have nothing to do with an audience's exposure to ad content. Content even if fully rendered on a device, a panel, a screen or a page does NOT guarantee exposure to a brand's target group. No ad exposure - no brand effects!!! In short Joe, this IAS report is of little relevance. Sorry. Even if "viewable impressions" are based on 100% of pixels rendered for the entire length of the commercial message (per Ed as generally used by linear TV versus the IAS's unacceptable defintion) this measure is merely and only proof of ad delivery to a device. Advertisers and their media agencies should be demanding measures of Eyes-On, Ears-On or contact/exposure to the brand's ad by their target audience from any media platform in order to be considered. Based on the latest international dialogue on cross-media measurement, the target audience ad exposure "requirement" could be extended to the next level of effect, "attention". However that represents primarily a creative measure rather than a media measure and is therfore inappropriate as a "media measurement". Lastly, before throwing around CPM's, ensure that the basis of any CPM are clearly stated. In today's media environment, using CPM's based on "viewable impressions" must be considered beyond misguided and surely should be treated with the contempt they deserve in media planning and buying.
- The VAB And Nielsen: War Of Words Continues
(Television News Daily on
John & Ed:As one of MRC's greatest supporters but also perhaps one it's sternest critics, your question is on-point. MRC staff and their Board make every effort to ensure that MRC, a tri-partite, non-profit, industry organization, (that has no pure research vendors or consultants as members!) operates as an independent, Standards setting, management group. It contracts with various non-aligned, third party audit companies, e.g. E&Y Media Audit Team, to execute the complex and detailed accreditation audits to the on-going rigorous research Standards established across media platforms and their resulting databases by MRC. This is a requirement of the Justice Department under whose purview MRC operates. The MRC collects no part of any actual audit fee to maintain complete neutality and must therfore survive on membership dues which are too low in my opinion. It is my understanding that in addition, any possible conflict of interest by any member completely removes them from any part of the audit process and its ratification or otherwise by any select member Audit committee. e.g., this would apply to some of the social media business chameleons that are MRC members as media platforms but also also operate as 'research companies' as part of their business. The bottom line for Nielsen clients in this regretable circumstance is surely and simply to exert whatever influence they believe is necessary on the MRC for additional in depth assessments in every area of concern as quickly as possible. Hopefully this commentary will encourage a meaningful dialogue that can sensibly resolve this matter for all involved.
- Could The Pandemic Or A Boycott Trip Up Another Olympics?
(TV Watch on
As an Olympian the athlete's predicament must be fully addressed. My plea in Media Post in March last year that honorary 2020 Olympic Teams be recognised across all sports in each country driven by the local Olympic Organsiations, Olympic advertisers, National Sports Federations and the major official media had little take up. https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/349165/why-this-olympian-is-urging-you-to-support-a-new-o.htmlThis initiative would have given proper recognition to those established top one or two athletes in each discipline for whom their official 2020 trials never took place as well as those "officially qualifiying" in a trial who, for unforessen circumstances, cannot compete in Tokyo in 2021. The latter could include athletes unable or unwilling to compete due to COVID related factors. Already we have the dillemma of athletes not managing to qualify in an offical 2020 trial having their nation's #1 performance this year. Remember that each country can only send a strictly imited number of athletes to compete in any individual event. So, does a current star get left behind? I have not even addressed the difficulty of team event selections over this unforeseen extended time! As outlined by Wayne the money involved is boggling and has been for every Olympics. My bottom line is that the Tokyo Olympics must go on even if event attendance is severely reduced and strictly medically controlled, whatever the loss in revenues are on any dimension. Surely after a year of lockdowns we all need to cheer our sporting heros more than ever and wildy celebrate their often incredible performances? If I am right, the World will be watching this high profile event more intensely than ever even if it is not from the stands. Consequently it could be an audience bonanza for Advertisers and media networks.My earnest plea is to still properly recognize those top top athletes unable to officialy qualify in 2020 due to the cancellation of their trials and who do not make the "2021 team" as well as those 2020 official qualifiers that, for whatever reason, do not make it to Tokyo. How can "we" make this happen???
- CIMM Day 1: Essence Media Chief Calls For 'Wholesale' Measurement Change
On point Ed, as always. Based on this comprehensive CIMM Summit yesterday and today and an array of excellent industry leader panels, a good place to start could be with CIMM, ARF and MRC establishing strict standard industry terms with precise definitions referenced to their derivation and to the ARF Media Model. Over 2 days I heard any number of clearly different interpretations of exactly the same basic media terms like audience, reach, viewing, impressions, etc. I am reminded of Alice in Wonderland. "Then you should say what you mean,” the March Hare went on. “I do,” Alice hastily replied; “at least—at least I mean what I say—that’s the same thing, you know.” “Not the same thing a bit!” said the Hatter. Per my article in Media Post October 13, 2019, "When is an Impression Not an Impression?"https://www.mediapost.com/publications/article/342147/counterpoint-when-is-an-impression-not-an-impress.html
- Viewable Ad Net Expands Into Platform, Offers Publishing Industry Its Own 'VaaS' Model
Per the MRC Cross-Media Measurement Standards released September 2019:"However, in instances where digital and linear video ad audience measurement will becombined into deduplicated cross-media measurement, it is required that a viewabilityqualification threshold of 100% of pixels on screen for at least two continuous seconds isutilized for both digital and linear components."First: So called "viewable impressions" are NOT an audience currency measurement as it has NO audience or eyes-on dimension! In today's media environment, using anything less than 100% of pixels rendered to complete ad specifications as a pre-requisite for any ad in a commercial pod is not recommended. Second: Viewable impressions of any duration for any ad in a pod, are merely a pre-required 'proof of performance' to the acceptability (or otherwise) of the media currency metrics based on target audience and optimally on eyes-on. As has been repeated and confirmed by the media research cognoscenti worldwide in Media Post, with no eyes-on or ears-on the ad or content by the target group there can be no outcomes even when the viewbable impressions meet every standard and requirement. Perhaps Duration Media should submit to an MRC accreditation?
- iSpot.tv Acquires Ace Metrix To Combine Brand And Business Outcomes Measurement
(Digital News Daily on
Terrific additional points! Will John Grono remind us of the superiority of Marketing Mix Modelling to account for the entire marketing campaign elements in achieving outcomes?
- iSpot.tv Acquires Ace Metrix To Combine Brand And Business Outcomes Measurement
(Digital News Daily on
Without a full and detailed Technical Appendix or better a full MRC accreditation the claims iSpot makes need extremely careful assessment. To my knowledge, iSpot is not MRC "Accredited" nor has submitted to accreditation. In addition, any reference by any reporter for any media trade publication to "advertsising reach" shoud be explicitely defined. That phrase covers a multitiude of sins and can often mislead the witness! It could mean anything from "viewable impressions" reach to target audience exposed, or eyes-on, reach possibly with attention (a creative not a media measure). Only the latter has any chance of generating an outcome with a consumer as long as the measurement meets MRC Standards - at a minimum! The former is merely a proof of an ad rendered to a device; has no persons dimension; and should not be used as a media currency per Geroge Ive, MRC, even if the content is rendered to MRC Standards. Further media only contributes ~35% to any brand outcome effects from a campaign. (Generally agreed by both Bill Harvey and also Dr. Leslie Wood.) So references to TV's ROI in terms of brand outcomes is specious. And yes, the WFA in their Cross-Media Measurement Technical Guidelines made the same error. In the current era of rampant fake news and lies, surely the trade press shoud not knowingly be pawns of any vendors. So, can "we" increase "our" efforts to report more precisely and reliably in the ad and media space to protect and correctly inform our readers? To that end, if there is anything I have missed or that is incorrect in the above please advise. FYI: MRC is currently developing Standards for Outcome Measurement which will inevitably include references to the various attribution techniques and models available. Attribution models for TV/video were heavily criticized in a recent report by Sequent Partners developed for CIMM - Coalition for Innovative Media Measurement.
- TV Ad Impressions 2020: Streamers Up 93%, Insurance Dominates Most-Seen Brands
(Digital News Daily on
Karlene: My understanding is that iSpot measures "viewable impressions" (per the MRC defintion) and not target audience impressions as generally reported by the syndicated media measurement currency services and used in media planning and buying. Neither of these "impressions" come close to actual "viewing" by a target audience without which there can be no brand outcomes. (Are you "listening" or "hearing" Wayne Friedman?) In addition, my understanding is that MRC has stated that "viewable impressions," which are merely a measure whether an ad was rendered to specifications to a screen, is not a media currency. Based on the extensive misuse, deliberate abuse or inaccurate use of the media terms: impressions, audience, viewing, reach, etc. by the industry, including the trade press, I respectfully suggest that Media Post as the industry leader always uses the established correct terminology and/or advices the reader of the way a term is being by a company being reported relative to its generally accepted established defintion. It would be a great service to the accuracy and accountablility some of us strive for and would go a long way to eliminating what surely amounts to "fraud" in certain circumstancess.
- The Real Reason Facebook Is Exploiting Small Businesses It Claims It Wants To Protect
Per the British Parliamentary Report released February 18, 2019 Fakebook are simply, "Digital Gangsters" and per Charlie Warzel NY Times, Sept 3 2020, "Facebook is too big for Democracy". As advertsing and media professionals our question must be, "Why would any brand advertise in such a toxic environment that consistently abuses its subscriber's privacy?" There are so many better media platforms and media vehicle choices within those platforms. Push your media agencies!!