Commentary

Advertisers Rate Video - Including All Forms Of TV - Most Effective in Achieving Goals

1. Ed Papazian from Media Dynamics Inc, January 21, 2022 at 5:06 p.m.

   Karlene, it's always difficult to take such replies as serious evidence of the values of the various media as, in all probablilty, they reflect the respondent's bias in favor of media they use heavily as opposed to media they don't use or do so only sparingly. Take the case of magazines. There is overwhelming evidence that magazine readers are more ad -receptive than TV viewers---I did a study about this in 2003. Not only that, magazine ad readership----or noting---is as high or higher than TV commercial viewing and the typical magazine reader---despite the medium's current woes----is a better prospect for most advertisers than the average TV viewer. Last but not least, there are studies showing that magazine ads deliver the same or higher product purchase results as TV commercials. Yet "TV" clobbers "print" by more than ten to one in this study. I suspect that a similar bias applies against "audio", though here there is much less ad impact data available for audio.
   
   As for how "TV" time is bought, a respondent my say that he/she "bought TV programmatically" in the past year when this ---even if true---applies to only a  small amount of activity---mainly at the local market level. Moreover, it is unlikely that the computer system did much more that chomp data and handle paperwork while the buy was made by humans directly with the sellers---also humans---as this is how most of these TV systems are set up. That's a huge difference from "programmatic" as it exists in the digital world---where the computers make the buys. However, if we accept the findings shown in the table, we might think that "Programmatic" buying for TV is coming pretty  close to the level of such activity for social media, when , in reality, the volume as well as the mode of operations are not even close.

   Reply

Comment

Next story loading