Just as not all scales use the same methodology to calculate the weight of objects, not all forms of attribution management use the same methodology for calculating how credit for conversions should be attributed. We can easily discover if a weighing scale is faulty, or the level of error that can be expected from it by using a particular methodology to validate its accuracy. But can we validate the accuracy of a given attribution management methodology? Before we answer these questions, we need to understand how the different attribution methodologies being used in the marketplace today assign credit to the …
If you want to understand the limits of TV ratings points, then consider this classic tidbit from TV lore. In the late 1940s, the water levels in Detroit reservoirs would plummet on Tuesday nights, from 9 to 9:05. Upon investigation, the Detroit authorities figured out why: Milton Berle's Texaco Star Theaterended at 9, and "it turned out that everyone waited until the end of 'Texaco Star Theater' before going to the bathroom." (That's a quote from Berle's autobiography.)
Measuring web sites and online marketing campaigns has kept marketers, agencies, and others busy for years. Web analytics report visits, page views, visits and other counts of site activity. Ad server analytics report impressions served, clickthroughs and other silo-specific measures. Once upon a time, each delivered the "hot metric." But, as soon as we begin to understand what each "hot metric" tells us, we begin to understand where it falls short, and we begin again to search for the "Golden Metric" that we can confidently use.
GRPs are a funny thing. Despite near-universal agreement on their lack of precision (both online & offline), they remain the de facto standard currency in television and, presently, for digital video. Yet despite the current advantages of GRPs, marketers should tread carefully when using basic GRP calculations for evaluating digital video campaigns. Though in theory it seems straightforward to simply port :15- or :30-second spots from broadcast TV into digital environments, marketers risk losing significant detail and precision if relying solely on GRPs for calculating potential audience reach.
Monday and Tuesday I was at the ARF's Audience Measurement 6.0, which used to be a symposium but is now a hash tag (#arfam6). I know at least 50 of you were there too, because I saw you. This is one of my very favorite conferences of the year, because at core, I consider myself to be an audience measurement professional (although, like the ARF's David Marans, I might opt for the larger umbrella term "media research," since the discipline -- as well as the scope of the conference -- is really broader than strictly measuring audiences.)
During the past few years I've had conversations with many analytics practitioners, consultants, and vendors about "real-time" data. I tell people that real-time data for human analysis is not useful unless automation is involved; then, I explain that I prefer timely data. I can understand the value of information and insights in real time, but I still do not see much, if any, utility of real-time data for human analysis.
There is no denying that Facebook has changed the very nature of engagement on the web. So, it is no surprise brands are looking to Facebook as a new, potentially fruitful channel for reaching consumers- as they should. So why haven't marketers put more significant resources into Facebook advertising and fan pages? The answer is in the numbers.
To read more articles use the ARCHIVE function on this page.