Login
close
Login is restricted to DCN Publisher Members. If you are a DCN Member and don't have an account, register here.
Search

Digital Content Next

Menu

Category results for "Perspectives"

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: week of July 9, 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Perspectives | Revenue

Fact check series, part three: What really defines a next-generation DMP

DMP 1.0: Contextual-to-audience targeting for desktop web & DFP

Since the advent of newspapers in the 17th century, digital advertising has been premised on developing and promoting content to attract audiences, and then selling contextual ads against such content. Even the arrival of online services like AOL and the disruptive nature of the web didn’t materially change the contextual nature of advertising against publisher content.

Approximately 15 years ago, digital publishing experienced a seismic shift. The capabilities afforded by web browser technologies and advancements in server-side data processing introduced audience targeting. Ad networks and technology platforms could create rules to associate consumer web surfing activity on publisher sites with behavioral attributes. These could be attached to browser cookies. And they could target those cookies with advertising on websites other than the ones where the original behaviors were observed.

Data Management Platforms (DMPs) arrived to help publishers save and organize all the data created by digital traffic and to take advantage of audience targeting.

The role of the DMP was pretty straightforward: Transform contextual desktop web activity into audience segments and pass those audience segments into a website’s adserver, most likely DoubleClick for Publishers (DFP). Life was simple in DMP 1.0.

DMP 2.0: Mobile and social and programmatic

Five years later, smartphones, social networks, and programmatic media buying shuffled the deck. A new breed of DMP company arose that specialized in audience targeting for mobile app environments. Social networks introduced their own audience targeting. And programmatic advertising ushered in the need for data pipes connected to buy-side platforms.

An important challenge was how to use data to effectively plan, activate, and analyze media campaigns across channels and platforms. This led to a focus on the mechanics of syncing IDs between platforms using in-page pixel syncs. It also led to the emergence of technologies and venture-backed companies focused on “cross device” or “device graph” technologies. The primary challenge was how to associate activity on a desktop/laptop computer with a mobile device – literally “cross device.”

Under the hood, the reality was more nuanced. When it came to desktop/laptop computers, cross-device technologies were using 3rd-party cookies in web browsers as profile identifiers. So, if a person was using two different web browsers on the same computer, it could conceivably be considered two devices. If a person deleted their 3rd-party cookies, and a new profile identifier was generated, then it would also be considered a new device.

On mobile, there were other important nuances regarding what was considered a device. Mobile web browsing was similar to desktop web browsing in terms of its reliance on cookie-based identifiers. In the mobile app environment, both Apple and Google moved towards providing OS-based solutions for provisioning consistent ad identifiers to all licensed apps on the device. Apple iOS called this IDFA. Google dubbed it GAID. It’s significant that the hardware guys, who in some cases have declared war on cookies for mobile web, have facilitated a static advertising ID for mobile.

So “cross-device” was — and is — more like “cross-ID” based on the underlying reality.

In addition, cross-device technologies introduced new vocabulary. Deterministic and probabilistic matching described how these IDs could be associated. These syncing and graphing technologies were nascent and not well integrated across the ecosystem. However, they did spotlight the need for publishers, marketers, and ecosystem participants to look beyond desktop web + DFP (DMP 1.0), and to either build, buy, or license technologies to connect data across devices and media buying platforms.

DMP 2.0 was defined by data management solutions that began to address the emergence of additional device types and media buying platforms. It was also characterized by the technologies required to connect and extend audience segments across those environments. Even back then, publishers knew that consumer data needed to be fluid and connected across platforms and partners in order to drive business forward.

DMP 3.0: The DMP is dead. long live the DMP!

Media and technology have continued to change rapidly.

On the data input side, publishers are seeing consumer 1st-party data flow into their systems from web, mobile app, email, CTV/OTT, CRM, and an assortment of smart/IoT devices. They also have the ability to access consumer behavioral and attribute data from 2nd-party and 3rd-party sources. On the output/activation side, publishers feed data into adservers, SSPs, programmatic header wrappers, analytics platforms, content optimization platforms, content management systems, data lakes/streams/rivers, and marketer platforms.

an exploding array of consumer devices and applications, are powering these data flows. Unfortunately, most were not designed to be interoperable from a data perspective. To add further complexity, browser developers such as Apple and Mozilla block (or shorten the lifespans of) different flavors of browser cookies to better safeguard consumer privacy. As a result, they make it more challenging to connect data in web environments. Hanging over these operational data challenges are regional data regulations that provide consumers with protections/controls over how their data is tracked and used.

Innovation and M&A and corporate development activity have grown in the data management space as companies look to expand their solutions. Some pure DMPs joined forces with larger martech companies and integrated into their stacks. Others maintained independence and focused on developing advanced data-driven solutions to specific challenges.

Against this backdrop, it has been increasingly difficult to define what a DMP is. Today, client types, data types, and use cases are incredibly diverse. A single acronym isn’t sufficient to capture the full scope of capabilities.

But whether a company describes itself or its solutions as part of a DMP, CDP, martech stack or other, it’s clear that effective next-generation data management technologies must provide publishers with scaled and privacy-enabled connectivity between data sources and platforms.

Who wants to live on Gilligan’s Island?

It’s surprising to see that the recent crop of DMP start-ups have developed technologies and solution strategies that focus on publisher isolation instead of publisher-to-ecosystem connectivity. They have essentially stranded publishers on their own “data islands” in structures that might not survive the next privacy or browser storm.

They encourage publishers to turn the clock back to DMP 1.0, transform contextual desktop web activity into audience segments, and pass those audience segments into a website’s adserver. These contextual DMPs don’t have any magical technologies. And the functionality that they provide are features (or sub-features) of much more complete and robust data and marketing technology platforms.

These “disconnected DMPs” completely lack a focus on the capabilities required to help publishers and their marketing partners stitch data across websites, devices, platforms, and channels. It is imperative that any modern data technology platform provides scaled data connectivity solutions. DMP start-ups lack ID graphing technologies. To the extent that they have any inter-platform connectivity, they have to rely on 3rd-party pixel syncs powered by other companies. (Something they don’t talk about publicly since it runs counter to their cookieless fiction.)

To find your people, connections are key

The challenges publishers and marketers face in a fragmented data landscape are significant … but not insurmountable. Isolating your data from the broader marketing ecosystem is not the right path forward for publishers looking to grow their businesses.

Complete, consistent, and compliant data connections will deliver greater scale and precision for brands and publishers and better experiences for consumers. Publishers need next-generation DMP solutions made for today’s digital advertising challenges and future-proofed for tomorrow’s opportunities. They need trusted solutions grounded in partnership, privacy, and a panoramic view of the consumer.

About the author

As Chief Growth Officer, Adam leads Lotame’s global marketing, product, and client success teams to support growth across customer acquisition, retention, and revenue. He joined Lotame as the Chief Marketing Officer. His diverse experience balances art and science, and includes stints as an aerospace engineer and patent attorney, plus 21 years in consumer media and marketing technology in leadership roles at Viacom Media Networks, Time Inc., Hearst, and PebblePost. Adam is co-inventor on four issued U.S. patents related to interactive video advertising technology.

Fact check series, part two: contextual targeting, audience targeting, and match rates

Fact check series, part one: the truth about “cookieless” DMPs

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: week of July 2, 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: week of June 25, 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Featured Post | Perspectives

Transparency and trust in the media business

Like most Americans, I have been closely watching and reading coverage of the worldwide protests over racial injustice. And I am reminded that, during this time of unrest and dialogue, trusted news organizations and journalists are more important than ever.

Why? Because trusted news organizations give people credible reports of the protests and counter-protests; a framing of the national conversation through fair and accurate reporting and informed editorials; and a platform where elected officials are held accountable for their actions – or inaction. Imagine the state of our country if we only found our news on Facebook where everyone’s crazy uncle shares a conspiracy theory article link from Russia Today or outright falsehoods and where the fact-checking is mostly performative and the leadership can’t be held accountable.

Inside out

That said, even trusted news organizations are confronting their own issues right now. The New York Times published an editorial that fell short of the standards we have come to expect – and without following their own editorial protocols. Their actions, and reactions, triggered an important discussion about the role of news organizations in airing opposing points of view.

Unfortunately, this speaks to a bigger problem. Across the spectrum of media outlets, less than 40% of people say they trust news most of the time. The top concerns for news consumers are around accuracy and bias. And, unfortunately, the difference between news and opinion is not always clear to many Americans. Historically, editorials were created as a way for newspapers to provide opposing points of view while maintaining objective news operations. Certainly, transparency will help. Because the better that audiences understand the processes by which news is produced, the more confidence they are likely to have in it.

And perhaps this particular situation with Cotton’s editorial signals a shift in what younger generations will come to expect from news organizations when it comes to the presentation of opposing opinions. Just because it’s always been this way doesn’t mean it always will be this way. We need to recognize that the consumption of news and opinion is different. Audience expectations have evolved. And we need to evolve accordingly.

Accurate reflections

Another critical issue for news consumers, however, is one of seeing themselves accurately reflected in news coverage and in newsrooms. Historically, newsrooms have not appropriately   incorporated minorities in the ranks of journalists and executives. This lack of different voices and perspectives has led to blind spots in coverage and, wholesale ignoring of issues important to these communities.

We’ve seen a slew of stories emerge around longstanding issues in media organizations in the wake of Black Lives Matter. Editors and executives have left (or been removed from) their positions and many organizations have pledged to do better. And this is a good thing, because the stakes are high.

Work to do

Some organizations are making a concerted effort to remedy these shortcomings. The aforementioned New York Times, for instance, publishes an annual Diversity and Inclusion Report, where they share “data on the composition of our staff, and provide updates on the steps we’re taking to continue to build on our progress.” The goal is to be fully transparent around the current state of their diversity staffing as well as the efforts they are making to improve. However, there is some debate about whether these kinds of efforts move the needle or just underscore the problem.

But at least we’re talking about the problem. For example, there was a great deal of public debate around the merits of The New York Times’ choice to publish an editorial by Senator Tom Cotton. And the Times’ own justification and internal review were widely shared.

From my perspective, transparency is paramount. Without transparency, we won’t ever have meaningful conversations or realize change. The conversation about racial injustice is profoundly important because Black Americans need to be heard. We all need to listen. And we need fundamental and systemic change. The media plays an essential role in this important issue. So, a frank open discussion of the issues at hand – globally, nationally, locally, and in our own newsrooms – is critical now, more than ever.

Perspectives

Consumers and advertisers are overwhelmed by the tyranny of choice

Maybe we already know this, but let’s all pause for a minute or two to consider some mindboggling numbers. Globally there are nearly 2 billion websites of which 400 million are active. More than 500,000 new websites come online every day. This adds another 200 million sites to this massive universe every year. More than half the world’s population uses the internet with nearly 4 billion users who are averaging almost seven hours per day online.

Remember when Springsteen was worried about “57 Channels and Nothin’ On”?

Are we too late?

It is no wonder that many of us in the industry (not to mention our family, friends, and customers) feel overwhelmed by this avalanche of news, information, gossip, click-bait, facts, “alternative” facts, opinion, and social media that is consuming roughly half of our waking hours. And let’s face it, the call to action for supply chain optimization, brand safety, fraud protection, and commitment to cleaning up the overall digital ecosystem is way past due.

The consequences of further foot dragging about this mess will be dire. This has been made clear by recent events including literal threats to our democratic traditions and commonly accepted norms for civilized behavior. The fact is that we need to take ownership of these issues and figure out a way to improve consumer experience online by better surfacing quality content (and thereby providing optimized ad experiences).

Too much of a good thing

“Logic suggests that having options allows people to select precisely what makes them happiest. But, as studies show, abundant choice often makes for misery.”

–Barry Schwartz, PhD  Professor of Social Theory and Social Action at Swarthmore College, in Scientific American

Consider for a second the stress, second guessing, uncertainly, mental fatigue, and overall feeling of dissatisfaction when you are confronted with the menus at Netflix, Amazon, and Hulu. Now consider the tyranny of choosing from 400 million websites. We can never turn back the clock. but we can make things easier on ourselves and fellow human beings by focusing on quality and accuracy and engaging in behavior that reduces stress and anxiety and increases engagement and satisfaction.

Less is more

Imagine if there was a way to reward publishers of premium content with increased advertising revenue based upon the duration of their users’ engagement. Let’s call this User Activated Engagement, or UAE. The greater the time spent reading content, the more impressions that individual users would see. Your audience would be served ad impressions only when they are engaged in the content on your site. And these ads would produce a higher return because they would become available for purchase only when they are in view, and adjacent to content that is relevant to the reader.

Moreover, since the primary beneficiaries of this newly found income will be premium publishers, an inevitable thinning of the herd will occur. We will all have fewer choices in the marketplace of ideas and those of lesser quality will fade. Advertisers will become more confident in the supply that is available. And audiences will benefit from time better spent, rewarding entertainment, and intellectual fulfillment.

Smart investments

The key pillars of effective advertising investment would be met: the right time and place for an ad message guaranteed to be viewable when purchased and served. And despite the imminent disappearance of the cookie, these ads will be contextually relevant. This is not necessarily because of the advertiser segment and editorial content, but because the context will have been determined as being relevant and engaging to the reader.

High quality, premium publishers would be main beneficiaries (along with advertisers who could expect that their ads will be viewable and therefore worth more). The long tail, 80% of the over 400 million active websites will become obsolete. The tyranny of choice will fade into distant memory. The supply chain will be rehabilitated. And quality will reign supreme in the kingdom of the internet.

About the author

Bruce Brandfon is Chief Media Officer of Duration Media. Prior to that he was Executive Vice President of WebSpectator. He was Vice President and Managing Director at Publicitas. Prior to joining Publicitas, Bruce was Vice President of Sales for the Philadelphia Media Network. He has also held leadership positions at Scientific American, Newsweek, and Time Inc. Brandfon is Director of the Board of Advisors at Planet Forward and an Adjunct Professor of Media Studies at Westchester Community College. He contributes frequently to industry publications.

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: Juneteenth 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: week of June 18, 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Featured Post | Perspectives

Objectivity vs. transparency: Let journalists be opinionated on social

As much as newspaper proprietors might wish otherwise, journalists are indivisible from the brand from which they write. Whether they’re a lifer at a particular title or flit between a number, each is both product and ambassador for that outlet. 

But just as social media has allowed the public at large access to audiences as large as those of publishers, it’s allowed journalists to do that same. That’s caused problems. There’s a list of journalists fired for behavior unbecoming to their employer as long as your arm. And some major media brands have effectively made public dissent a firing offense for their journalists. 

Recently both Channel 4 and Sky News in the UK have taken steps to prevent their journalists from sharing opinion on anything at all – especially if it’s not their specific beat.

Blurring the line

However, two giants of the newspaper world – Will Lewis, the former boss of Dow Jones and the Wall Street Journal, and ex-Financial Times editor Lionel Barber – have expressed a slightly different take on the issue. They, presumably having seen the horrific collapse in trust in journalism, have decided that the “blurring of fact and opinion” has contributed to the perception that newspapers are biased and therefore untrustworthy. 

Barber said: “I would make a more general point. We’ve seen this particularly at the BBC: we have to be very careful in the way journalists are using social media. They are essentially seeing [their social media pages as] their own platforms, and it’s definitely comment. Therefore this blurring that Will rightly identifies has been massively accentuated by social media.

“And it’s not good enough for journalists to say: Oh, by the way, on my Twitter handle, these views are [my own]. Because they do work for an organization.”

Trust issues

They have a point. Bias is consistently cited as a reason for lack of trust. And the Digital News Report makes it clear that a vast array of newspapers’ target audiences value objectivity. That’s especially true for publicly-funded news organizations, But even as media marketing becomes more tribal, it’s true that the public does see pH-neutral news content as something to be striven for. 

The issue is that we each have our own biases, whether we acknowledge them or not. Social media allows the public to see that journalists (being people too) do have biases and beliefs.

Warts and all

However Lewis, Barber and the rest are wrong about the solution. The answer is not telling journalists to “just stop it.” Instead, newspapers should lean harder into making their journalists the ambassadors for their brands, warts (and opinions) and all.

Firstly, despite cries of balanced reporting, it’s bleeding obvious that publications have a political bent. The polarization of the news media is readily apparent, and we do a disservice to our audiences if we say that journalists don’t have a political agenda when their parent publications do. We shouldn’t be trying to pretend we’re objective individually. Rather, we should aim for absolute transparency about why we make the decisions we do  – even around theoretically impartial sources like data.

As The Financial Times’ senior data visualization journalism John Burn-Murdoch put it: “I think any data journalist who says that data is objective, and it’s the highest form or the purest form of journalism, I think they’re pulling your leg.

“And so the way you have to do it is you just have to put all of the politics of it aside. Think: what is the fairest, or just sort of straightest way of doing this stuff? And I think the nice thing for me in this process is that because I’ve been quite open and transparent in communicating the rationale for this stuff on on Twitter, for example, or in interviews. I’ve had to hold myself to that really.”

Clear vision

Secondly, you can’t trust what you can’t see. Having journalists simply vanish from the public conversation makes them faceless. It wouldn’t deflect criticisms of bias  – we have to trust that our audiences are smart enough to know journalists are people too. But it would remove a key way to counter those accusations personally. 

Many publications are making access to their journalists a core tenet of their membership and subscription models, for exactly that reason. Publications as diverse as The Athletic and The Atlantic offer direct contact with journalists as a major selling point. And as a byproduct, trust improves because we trust the people we communicate with directly.

Thirdly, there’s the issue of newspapers needing to get their own houses in order. Many pay their columnists specifically to be opinionated. And, while most label the distinction between reportage and columnists’ articles clearly, there is no clearer indication of a newspapers’ bias one way or another than the columnists they choose to employ. 

Money matters

Beyond the potential boost to trust of having visible journalists, there’s a financial incentive for boosting their visibility on social media. For one thing, journalists are the most ardent proponents of their own work. Typically that’s been played to the hilt by papers looking to drive traffic, but there’s evidence it works for driving subscriptions too. Membership-based publications like Tortoise gave its employees a specific discount code to pass onto potential new subscribers, and have seen significant success as a result.

Meanwhile, the Dallas Morning News is trialing a system that allows its journalists to give would-be subscribers a reporter-specific code for a month’s free access. Writing for Nieman Lab, Hanaa’ Tameez says: “The Dallas Morning News‘ latest experiment to boost digital subscriptions is something you’ve seen before. If you’ve ever been tempted to buy a lipstick off Instagram because an influencer gave you a discount code (guilty), this works in the same way.”

Influencers and Instagram

The concept of journalists as influencers is bound to raise hackles among some. Despite that, I’ve argued before that journalists have traditionally done a bad job of communicating the value of their own publications. And they could learn a lot about being ambassadors from influencers. As it looks like Instagram might become more vital for driving conversions than Twitter, that could become an even more apt comparison.

Beyond even that, allowing journalists to be more visible and outspoken on social media could help salve one of the biggest issues of the past few years. Journalism has a real problem in not accurately reflecting the public. That’s doubly true in the UK where graduates of two universities hold a disproportionately high number of senior roles in the industry, and BAME journalists are hardly represented at all. If journalism is to regain the trust of the public, better representation is paramount. 

Papering over the cracks by hiding the opinions the public knows we hold anyway is a sop to an impossible ideal. Instead of obfuscating them and squirreling them away, we should be loud, proud  – and completely transparent.

Perspectives

DCN Board of Directors condemns Maria Ressa verdict

“The conviction of Maria Ressa is a travesty. This entire case is a brazen attempt to silence her news organization and should be considered an affront to freedom and democracy itself. It is vital we value and protect the independence of media organizations and journalists around the world. The United States Congress has recently condemned the Philippine government’s harassment of Ressa and we encourage global leaders and the press community to make it clear this absolutely cannot be tolerated.”


– DCN Board of Directors

Rappler CEO Maria Ressa says 2020 is the year that we must fight the battle for truth

Rappler CEO arrested just weeks after outlining Philippine media attacks at DCN Next: Summit

Perspectives

DCN’s must reads: week of June 11, 2020

Here are some of the best media stories our team has read so far this week:

Featured Post | Perspectives

Media execs weigh in on Covid-crisis inspired trends: creativity, productivity, and growth

Throughout the course of the Covid-19 pandemic, media organizations have had no option but to rapidly – and even radically – change their existing processes to keep things running smoothly. despite being unable to work within their usual offices and create content in the manner to which they’d become accustomed.

We reached out to some of the members of Digital Context Next and asked them the following question:

“Given the way companies have been necessarily adjusting and adapting to the Covid-19 crisis, what trends have particularly caught your eye, and which ones do you think are most likely to continue into the post-pandemic digital landscape?”

As you’ll see below, the responses were wide and varied, with each exec offering insight from their own unique perspective. But there were also several distinct similarities of observation, hinting at some potentially noteworthy trends in creative problem-solving, consumption of news and information, and increased productivity in a remote work environment.

“The increase in news consumption among younger demographics has caused an influx of new advertisers to the genre. We have also seen a decrease in keyword blocking over the last month compared to the start of the pandemic. Marketers realized that keyword blocking was being applied too broadly and that they were missing important, brand safe content.”

– Jeff Collins
Executive Vice President, Advertising Sales
FOX News Media

“Advertisers, agencies and publishers continue to navigate these challenging times with flexibility, speed and increased communication. The rapidity of creating solutions and working together across the industry has been impressive, and surely that nimble nature will be a constant moving forward. Additionally, the power of live news in a digital environment has been a force. Partners are embracing cross-platform service advertising to support necessary journalism while communicating brand campaigns and messages with mission at the helm. The value for partners and consumers alike is inherent, and from here, we’ll continue to see that grow in importance.”

– Christine Cook
Senior Vice President & Chief Revenue Officer
CNN Digital, WarnerMedia Ad Sales

“I’ve been impressed with how productive our staff has been in a fully remote work environment. I worry that our strong culture supports an effective WFH structure, but that over time, with departures and new hires, that could erode. Even with that concern, I do think that we will be much more accepting of remote work arrangements and lower occupancy in the office.”

– Michael F. Finnegan
President
Atlantic Media

“In addition to some obvious trends that will stick, involving remote work and public health precautions, I’m hoping that the speed and agility of our response to the crisis as publishers will be long lasting. In the AP’s case, we converted to remote operations worldwide, including complex video newsgathering and distribution. The move required us to move master control rooms to staffers’ homes immediately and implement remote tools for video editing to staffers worldwide. Not every project in the future needs to be run as a fire drill like this, but my hope is that we will retain a lot of the muscle memory from our response to the Covid crisis.”

– Jim Kennedy
SVP, Strategy & Enterprise Development
Associated Press

“Independent trustworthy journalism has proven itself in the crisis and is emerging even stronger than before. However the advertising markets across the globe have collapsed significantly and we cannot be sure whether they will return or shift even further towards the mega-platforms. Increasingly, a very few mega-platforms decide if, where and how citizens can use and access journalistic offerings and other services. The Covid crisis has accelerated this development. The policy response in Europe and in the US must be faster, more determined and more comprehensive in order to safeguard free, independent journalism and to re-establish fair competition in digital markets.” 

– Dr. Dietrich von Klaeden
Senior Vice President Public Affairs
Axel Springer SE

“The pandemic is forcing us to look more closely at who we’re reaching and when. And it’s making the case for more surgical, performance-based advertising in lieu of broader brand marketing efforts. Going forward, I think we’ll see a more concerted effort to tie media investment to business outcomes, but those business outcomes will still include brand building KPIs in addition to performance focused KPIs.

“We’ll also see an increased emphasis on flexibility and agility across the media industry as a whole, specifically in relation to upfront/annual budget commitments and creative production. With so much changing so quickly, the last several months have created an environment in which marketers want to mitigate risk as much as possible, especially when it comes to media distribution or to creative campaigns that may need to be altered based on micro/macroeconomic conditions and societal issues.”

– Craig Kostelic
Chief Business Officer, U.S. Advertising Revenue and Head of Global Advertising Solutions
Condé Nast

“Mobile has been a central part of our business but Covid-19 has brought that to a new level – people aren’t in the office so that workday routine is out the window. Our audiences are toggling between mobile devices, laptops, and Connected-TVs at all hours. This means more news during the day (especially streaming broadcasts) but also on evenings and weekends. Offering a great experience across all devices is so important. We’re also seeing the value of effectively pushing content out through app notifications, search optimization, email and third-party aggregators. It’s a very competitive market and you can’t sit back and hope people find your content.

“We’re seeing how important it is to be ready to tell stories with video and with text. Video does well on social media, text does better on search – people have different preferences. By consistently telling stories in multiple ways, we maximize our audience and the engagement we receive. Explainer videos that offer foundational information have been extremely important during Covid-19. Things like ‘What you need to know about Covid-19’ have been consistently among our top videos and most shared on social media. They also have companion articles that share similar information and that’s been a winning formula for us.”

– Marian Pittman
SVP, Content
COX Media Group

“In our space, OTT and other platforms have seen explosive growth. We are also seeing an uptick on online donations, even in these challenging economic times. This is directly related to an increase in the consumption of PBS content both on air and online. We’ve also seen marked growth in PBS Learning Media as more students and teachers and parents look for online educational tools and growth in PBS Kids content, especially the games app that launched only a few years ago but is now used as much as the PBS Kids video app. For PBS I believe all these trends will continue as consumers adopt new habits and discover the quality content Public Media and our local stations bring to them.”

– Ira Rubenstein
Chief Digital & Marketing Officer
PBS

“Three trends catch my eye. One is the necessary acceleration of creating value from audiences other than via advertising, which is proving to be a fickle friend. That means specifically paid content/membership strategies, but also the value in analysis and research via first party direct relationships with readers. In a world without a compass, insight into the thoughts and inclinations of key audiences are gold dust, both for publishers and partners. 

“The second trend is the changing definition of ‘journalism’ from the spoken, video or written format to a more data-driven and graphical experience. The Covid-19 crisis has been played out – and devoured by readers – in charts and graphs. I think there’s a lot more potential to engage readers in the future with this format.

“The other trend is of course the reinvention of the event space. Digital events were always thought to be a poor relation of the live experience. But I’m seeing audience appetite, bags of creativity, and lots of opportunity to develop engaging, valuable events online. 

“It’s a terrifying time for a lot of reasons, but there are exciting opportunities out there, too.”

– Jon Slade
Chief Commercial Officer
Financial Times
©2020 Digital Content Next. All Rights Reserved.