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

  • Video Measurement 'JIC' Invites Google/YouTube To Join by Karlene Lukovitz (Digital News Daily on 03/20/2023)

    As previously stated and based on extensive global experience in many roles with various real JICs, this US entity is NOT a JIC.  Not even close! 

  • Comcast Advertising's Claudio Marcus On Cross-Media Measurement, CIMM's Roles by Karlene Lukovitz (Advanced TV Insider on 03/17/2023)

    To the editorial staff of Media Post:  When are you going to stop echoing the lie that the current alt-currency consortium is a JIC or at least add a warning/correction when the term is abused?  It is NOT a JIC, nor even close.   Jon Watts knows better and Claudio Marcus should know better!   As Karlene astutely hinted, the current consortium reflects conflicts of interest and potential biases driven in part by the misguided Deloitte report.  Disney and other major players are currently not involved.  What does The Mouse know?  Perhaps that multiple currencies for TV/Video, or any medium, will significantly increase the metrics chaos and confusion thereby failing to serve advertisers and their media agencies and smack of, "What currency would you like, how much money have you got?"  JIC's produce a currency (singular) for the medium they serve based on the detailed specifications and requirements established by the JIC Technical Committee/Board and managed and overseen by the JIC's strictly independent full time staff.  

  • YouTube Issues Its Own Cross-Media Measurement Principles, Implies TV-Centric JIC Is A 'Silo' by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/08/2023)

    These latest comments from Claudio (and partly Josh) entirely focussed on "viewable impressions" aka "content rendered counts" underline, in my opinion, just how misguided TV/video measurement is in the US today as elucidated by Ed and myself as part of this commentary.  Its repeated emphasis ignores well established, more meaningful measurement dimensions provided by other major media, notaby print (MRI including MPX), OOH  (GeoPath including Eyes-On) and audio (Nielsen PPM - hearing).  Apparently, so much for cross media comparisons based on today's TV/video/social measurement farrago!  Josh: Surely our mentor Erwin Ephron is turning in his grave. Device based HH measurement takes us back 50 years even if there is independently verified Proof-of-Play of the creative message, the initial fundamental media delivery requirement.  Without a persons (in the HH) presence in the viewable/audio zone with Eyes-On/Ears-On at a minimum, or attention, there can be no campaign outcomes.  In addition, the inclusion by MRC of "duration weighting" to "viewable impressions", versus the significantly more meaningful "Attention seconds", made a farce out of an already deliberately misleading term "viewable impressions" - courtesy of IAB I understand.  When is MRC going to correct this regretable and abused misnomer and use, "Content Rendered Counts" rather than "Viewable impressions"?   Of note, Media Agencies address the relevance and consequent impact of duration/ad size and many other media attributes across all media vehicles considered in any brand campaign planning.  This includes, for example, weighting for double page spreads versus half pages for magazines, or weighting for 14' x 48' billboards versus street furniture; etc., etc., etc.  Which rasies another question for MRC.  When will MRC address other media and its outcomes measurement Standards (actually Guidelines) to ensure truely meaningful comparabliity and harmonization across all media? 

  • YouTube Issues Its Own Cross-Media Measurement Principles, Implies TV-Centric JIC Is A 'Silo' by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/08/2023)

    Josh:  You stated: ..."big data solutions (such as those offered by my employer) enable second by second reporting. We can see audience shifts for pods and within pods; with the caveat that these are device-level and not person level shifts."  As brilliant and respectd as you are - quite correctly in my opinion - I believe that statement makes Ed & my point. Device level data, aka "content rendered counts", or so called "viewable impressions", have neither persons based audience nor an Eyes-On/Ears-On or contact data as there is no persons measurement dimension.  And yet you claim "audience shifts"?   In addition and believe Ed would agree, measurement of a screen or panel for content rendered is NOT an OTS, aka a "gross impression", which has always been determined based on measures of persons in the presence of the media vehicle with an "opportunity-to-see (or hear)" actual content.  Remember your days at Simmons?  We do understand that for mobile ads and on-line PC ads content rendered counts are being used as an OTS proxy for these one to one media based on pirated device user consumer data.  However this data is specious for most other major media many of which have jumped on "device level data" which are generally heavily discounted by the media agencies, and indeed shouid be.  Sellers take note!  These agencies also understand that without Eyes-On/Ears-On or "contact" by the brand's target audience, preferably with "attention", there can be no campaign outcomes.  It is this "attention economy" approach to media planning, buying and selling that should be driving the measurement and therefore the currency (singular!) of every major medium.  (OOH has been there for the last 10+ years in most major countries around the world!!)Last and not least, if the creative message is not independently verified to meet all the Proof-of-Play specifications for the campaign as designated by the agency even device level data can be invalid.  So much for ACR and much of programmatic?  What am I missing?  

  • YouTube Issues Its Own Cross-Media Measurement Principles, Implies TV-Centric JIC Is A 'Silo' by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/08/2023)

    Do not disagree in principle that measurement of persons based contact and attention to media content needs to be distinguished from measurement of persons based contact and attention to the creative messages.   This would help to better understand your point regarding the distinct influence of the media vehicle carrying the creative message on the primary power of the brand message itself to drive an outcome.  Such influence could be normalized based on a meta analysis by target group, by brand category, by creative mode, by various media formats, environments, contexts, etc.  However, notably for linear TV and video streaming that raises the issue of pod position as my ad may not be adjacent to program content but to other ads and consequently their ability within the media vehicle to sustain contact and then generate attention for any subsequent ad.  Tricky!

  • YouTube Issues Its Own Cross-Media Measurement Principles, Implies TV-Centric JIC Is A 'Silo' by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/08/2023)

    Amen John & Ed.  The US TV/Video measurement farrago inside the imbroglio continues along with incredible ignorance of what actually constitutes a JIC.  The current "alt-currency" group being managed by OpenAP & VAB is NOT a JIC nor even close.  Ask the Europeans or the Aussies!  And what should a meaningful media currency - singular! - be based on?   As John, Ed and myself have frequently stated here, NOT "viewable impressions" aka "content rendered counts"(purely a device measure with no persons measurement) which represent a pathetic attempt by many media sellers to juice the numbers and reduce CPMs that have little relationship to achieving a brand campaign outcome.  Per Dentsu and Havas Media Group among others, Media and media research now live in "The Attention Economy" which has meaningful relevance for advertisers.  As a reminder it is the creative that is the primary driver of brand effects albeit with media in a synergistic supporting role. 

  • 'JIC' Releases Criteria For Certifying Ad Currencies, Issuing RFPs Soon by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 03/06/2023)

    As stated before: This entity is NOT a JIC in any way, Joe Mandese's revelation regarding the ownership of OpenAP, its role as a "supplier" and that is "managing" this "JIC" not withstanding.  It appears the farrago inside an imbroglio continues.  There can by defintion be only one trading currency, baseline or "truth set" for any major media which should ideally be comparable to and harmonize with the each of the single currencies established for each of the major media.  As Ed, John Grono and myself have consistently recommended, that baseline audience currency measure should prefereably be based on Eyes-On or Ears-On, a fundmantal pre-attentive measure.  Planners, Buyers and Sellers can, shouid and do have all sorts of marvellous insightful ancilliary data with which to refine and enhance their recommendations well beyond the currency and target audience CPM's (Completely Positively Mad!) So are Disney, Havas Media Group and other key players well out of this?  Stay tuned. 

  • VAB: Sell-Side JIC Is A 'Council,' Not Committee: Sheds More Light On Operational Structure by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 02/20/2023)

    Ed:  Spot on!  A sellers led "Council" certifying currency measures to their established standards?  MRC does that!  It appears that this is a continuing farrago of misinformation, confusion and avoidance of addressing the underlying issues.  And per Joe's comment, we thought that MRI vs. Simmons and Nielsen versus Arbitron, neither of which lasted, was tough!  I believe we agree that there needs to be a single currency for each media platform which should be equivalent, as close as possible, to the single currency of each of the other major platforms - based on persons, not devices, measured Eyes/Ears-on which is considered the threshold of attention. OOH via real JICs has offered such a currency, aka "visibilty adjusted contacts" VAC's, worldwide for the last 10+ years to avoid the discounting of those currencies not providing person's measured actual exposure to the programming or the ads by media agencies.  Consequently OOH provides highly relevant learning opportunities for the US in the current imbroglio in so many ways.  Thoughts?  

  • ANA: Cross Media Measurement Enters 'Build Phase,' Operational Next Year by Joe Mandese (MediaDailyNews on 02/17/2023)

    The original Northstar concept was driven by understanding ad campaign outcomes and yet it's execution is still described as "Cross-Media Measurement" which is surely a non-sequitor.  This disconnect has been consitently raised in Europe.  To Ed's point, without measures of "attention" or "Eyes/Ears-On" by the brand target group there can be no outcomes per The Attention  Council.  I suggest Ed was being polite regarding "grossly distorted"!  In addition, it is the creative message that is the primary driver of attention/outcomes - generally ~50% versus ~35% for media's contibution and ~15% for the brand's equity.  And yet in all the discussions creative impact is rarely mentioned.  Added to this are the disagreements on the validity of VIDs in estimating behaviours versus the fundamental importance of real persons panels versus using device only based measures as some kind of audience/persons exposure surrogate measure which produce merely content rendered counts).  On top of this we have the TV/Video multiple currencies farrago which will potentially upend planning and trading.  As espoused by Jon Waite, Havas Media Group, one basic truth set currency for each media platform!So ANA (and ISBA in the UK with its equivalent project Origin - "not a media currency") are to be applauded for taking on this Gordian Knot albeit in Rome!  However, can the techno-data geeks really provide the valid answers we need campaign by campaign in today's environment?

  • Multicurrency Debate Takes Main Stage At The 'Nerdy Upfront To The Upfronts' by Dave Morgan (Media Insider on 02/09/2023)

    Dave: There are so many red flags around this matter it is hard to know where to start.  You are the lawyer so several earlier Media Post articles, including fundamental comments  regarding this intitiative which is not a JIC or even close yet, may help.  OpenAP is a probable research provider to any consortium developing an alternative TV/Video currency.  Research providers are selected via an RFP issued by the management of the JIC on behalf of the JIC's Techncial Committee and Board.  Per Joe Mandese's piece, "Where's Disney?", OpenAP is owned by some of the Networks involved.  Consequently it is unequivocally inappropriate for them to manage this effort as announced based on both these "conflict of interest" counts if a real JIC is desired. (Do you agree?) In addition JIC's deliver a single currency by media platform.  Such single currencies are used as a "basic persons-based viewed (Eyes-On/Ears-On?) truth set".  These are then enhanced or adjusted using other research suppliers data by planners, buyers and sellers to optimally reflect the brand objectives and the creative message.  As important as media is, it is the creative message  that primarily drives the impact of the ad and any outcomes. 

About Edit

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