George Ivie

Articles by George All articles by George

• Keeping Cross-Platform Measurement Flexible for Users in MediaDailyNews on 05/22/2023
  

  Users of cross-media systems should be enabled to consider context parameters as they see fit, rather than have these decisions be pre-ordained for them.

• The Fight Against Invalid Traffic Is A Never-Ending Arms Race in MediaDailyNews on 09/21/2020
  

  The problem continues to grow, as the ways in which fraudulent or invalid traffic is generated become more sophisticated.

• A Framework For Measuring Ad Outcome in MediaDailyNews on 06/16/2020
  

  The industry needs an agreed upon, well-vetted and researched set of standards as a framework for optimal approaches to outcome-based measurement and to enable marketers to have a way to measure whether providers satisfy standards that the industry as a whole has agreed to as best practices.

• The Viewable Impression: The First Step To An Audience-Based Digital Currency in MediaDailyNews on 03/23/2015
  

  The development of a Viewable Impression standard represents a key interim step on the road to the goal of establishing an audience-based digital measurement currency that can facilitate an era of effective cross-platform measurement.

• Reduce Unmeasurable Inventory Now: Viewable-Impression Standard Coming in Metrics Insider on 08/12/2013
  

  If you rely on ad impressions, measure ad impressions or otherwise buy or sell digital advertising, be aware that we are reaching the end of a lengthy process. Likely by the end of December 2013, the Media Rating Council (MRC) will lift its advisory on transacting on viewable impressions -- hence, thereafter endorsing this new counting method as a currency. When this happens, we expect the floodgates will open, and a currency shift will begin in practice.

Comments by George All comments by George

• Why The New Viewability Standards Are Flawed by Jay Gould (MAD on 08/13/2014)
  

  Thanks for addressing the critical issue of viewability standards, Jay. I wanted to clarify that as an independent industry body, the Media Rating Council (MRC) is responsible for setting and implementing the Viewable Impression Guidelines. The Guidelines were created in consultation with Making Measurement Make Sense (3MS, a cross-industry initiative that includes representatives from the IAB, 4A’s and the ANA) and other cross-industry representatives. In the Making Measurement Make Sense initiative, industry leaders are working together to drive an enormous change. Its achievements are based on wide-reaching consensus and marketplace demand from marketers. It has required publishers and vendors to adopt new technologies and incorporated the insights of more than 300 industry participants. Its progress represents the pace of industry change when transparency, accountability, and consensus are championed. The thresholds are supported by a substantial amount of research, some of which existed prior to the development of the concept of a viewable impression, and other research that was developed specifically in conjunction with the viewable impression initiative. With the implementation of the Viewability standard, we strongly encourage parties to work with MRC-accredited vendors and ensure that their technologies are reporting against all three critical viewability metrics: viewable, not viewable, and not measureable. It’s crucial to understand that vendors voluntarily seek MRC accreditation of their products. For those vendors that we do not audit, we have no insight into the measurement methods being used, or the source of the discrepancies in measurement. A seller or buyer interested in working with a vendor to measure viewable impressions should pursue a thorough understanding of the vendor’s processes, especially if this measurement is to be the basis of a transaction. Readers can learn more about the Guidelines and how they were created at MeasurementNow.net.

• Viewability Standards Aren't Standardized by Tyler Loechner (Show Daily on 07/24/2014)
  

  Hi Tyler, thanks for continuing the dialogue on the incredibly important issue of viewability. I wanted to make a couple of things clear. First, here at the Media Rating Council, we’ve issued guidance on certain measurement processes that were contributing to measurement discrepancies and are working with vendors, publishers and technology providers to encourage adoption, eliminate confusion and increase clarity. This is helping to effectively standardize measurement practices. We’ve already seen significant progress on this front, and we’re confident that we’ll continue to see differences among counts narrow even more. Second, our role is to oversee the implementation and adoption of the viewability standards, but it’s crucial to understand that vendors voluntarily seek MRC accreditation of their products. For those vendors that we do not audit, we have no insight into the measurement methods being used, or the source of the discrepancies in measurement. A seller or buyer interested in working with a vendor to measure viewable impressions should pursue a thorough understanding of the vendor’s processes, especially if this measurement is to be the basis of a transaction. With the implementation of the Viewability standard, we strongly encourage parties to work with MRC-accredited vendors and ensure that their technologies are reporting against all three critical viewability metrics: viewable, not viewable, and not measureable. The most current information on accredited vendors is available on our site, www.mediaratingcouncil.org.

About Edit

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