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 logo

Menu

Tags containing: "digital advertising"

Advertising | Industry-Research | Perspectives

Brands and agencies struggle with the pros and cons of walled garden advertising strategies

In what seems to be a timely intersection with the furor over rebates, fraud, and lack of transparency in the online advertising community, a recent survey from Deloitte, Industry Index, and Flashtalking “Confined by the Garden Walls” highlights the increasingly volatile but interdependent relationship between the biggest advertisers and walled platforms – namely, Google and Facebook. Its findings “illustrate the disconnect between what clients want from their advertising platforms and what they can expect to get.”

WalledFig1Despite the fact that rebate issue continues to get regular coverage by major media outlets like The Wall Street Journal and Ad Age, few advertisers are rushing to openly join the conversation. In the same vein, conclusions from the study highlight the ongoing struggle to understand the dramatic contradictions at play. To wit: While “only 22% of brands noted discomfort with Google’s data policies,” at the same time, “95% think data transparency at a user level is important or very important.”

While it’s easy to highlight the obvious conflicts at work here, making sense of the situation is more nuanced. Our take:

  • Consolidated Market Conditions Dramatically Favor Digital Giants. In Q1 of this year, Google and Facebook combined to realize 85% of online advertising market share. So it’s not surprising that the two companies don’t have to negotiate terms and conditions much. This situation won’t persist forever – with Bing investing significantly in its platform, and Verizon’s acquisitions of AOL and Yahoo! expected to impact the marketplace – but it’ll continue to be a bumpy couple of years for large digital advertisers, absent of significant regulatory changes, which seem unlikely.
  • The “Lure of Ease” Has Very Strong Appeal. Few brands have been able to construct digital marketing operations over the past decade that can provide the requisite scale. This will happen in due course, as “marketers at top brands have long realized that to own your customers you have to own your data”. And they’re investing furiously in marketing infrastructure to get there. In the meantime, they need to continue to nurture uneasy alliances with the digital behemoths in order to feed their own massive marketing engines.
  • Even With Challenges, Digital Preferable to Alternatives. Sure, brands are forecast to spend a smidge more on digital advertising this year than TV, for the first time, to capture $72 billion (36.8% share) in the U.S. marketplace – which is forecast to total $195 billion in 2016. But that means they will spend more than $120 billion on TV, radio, print, and out-of-home – all of which are generally considered to be inferior when it comes to ROI precision or user data access.
  • Alternatives Do Exist, But Require Work. Without question, Google and Facebook offer incomparable digital advertising scale and targeting – one-stop shopping at previously unimaginable heights. And their brands are of course blue chips, and no one appreciates top brands like marketers do. But taking a scrappy approach to digital marketing can pay dividends. Going off-brand allows advertisers to strike better deals, and not just lower prices, but also much greater transparency and data control. This is approach requires legwork and explanation up-and-across the organization about avoiding the recognizable brands, and might not even perform as well in the final analysis, but in some (possibly many) situations, a beat-up pickup truck can do the job almost as well as a shiny new Cadillac – and for a fraction of the cost.

    BourgeoisTim Bourgeois (@ChiefDigOfficer) is a partner at East Coast Catalyst, a Boston-based digital consulting company specializing in working with clients on strategic roadmaps, digital marketing audits, and online marketing optimization programs.

 

Advertising | Perspectives

Seeing the data for the trees: Overarching themes from Advertising Week

Pictured: (from left to right) Simon Whitcombe, Group Director, Global Marketing Solutions, Facebook | Jen McIsaac, VP, Retail Partnerships, Oracle Data Cloud | Paul Jankauskas, General Manager and Chief Revenue Officer, Verifone Media | Christopher Heine, Technology Editor, Adweek

I won’t lie: My positive experience at Advertising Week wasn’t that different from previous years. But, when you consider the magnitude and impact of an event such as this, that’s really no small feat.

Whether it’s brushing shoulders with some of the greatest minds in the industry, or gaining a pulse for significant topics—be they bubbling under the surface and overflowing within every category in the marketplace—there’s value to be lifted from the experience. Advertising Week is ultimately the place where crucial conversations take place in real-time about the real challenges we’re presented with at this particular moment in digital.

Nothing could be more advantageous.

The live performances weren’t anything to scoff at either, with musical acts from the likes of De La Soul, Common, The Roots, and Sting. Entertainment and networking aside, my focus was getting to the bottom of the massive data explosion in the industry and better understanding its grip on media companies, agencies, publishers, and marketers alike.

Getting on the Right Side of the Data Track
At Outbrain, a growing number of our internal marketing initiatives are being driven by data-supported research. And as a recommendation network that is powered by its own sophisticated algorithms, it has always been important for us to communicate the value of that data on both the brand side and media company side.

While more data is a huge opportunity, it is not without its complexities and challenges. This past week, our own struggles with data were echoed by leaders in the industry and solidified into some key themes:

1. Solving for Too Much Data Involves a Simplified Approach

With this new level of granularity, data is changing the conventions of how many brands have been built up until today. More importantly, it has raised a glaring issue, which was shared across panelists who have represented and worked alongside many legacy brands, including Jon Suarez-Davis, Chief Marketing and Strategy Officer at Krux Digital:

“We’ve put together dumb pipes. And It’s not about putting in smarter dumb pipes, it’s about changing the system entirely.”

First, there needs to be a much deeper understanding of how the data has changed. Second, while data is now far more actionable than ever before, we can’t lose sight of how it drives business. This means applying clear objectives.

That’s because data can mean a lot of different things. From a user ID, to post campaign analysis, or, in our case, the consumption patterns of how audiences are interacting with our content across publisher sites.

The trick, according to Julie Fleischer, Managing Director of OMD, is simplicity and focus:

“The key is keeping an eye on what I’m trying to understand, what the best measurement approach available is, and what that mean in terms of whether it’s a complete or partial view. We need to stop looking at data as an answer, but more as an input to what we do. If we challenge where the flaws in measurement are, we can get to a better understanding of how to fill those gaps.”

When it comes to the data explosion, the challenge—and goal—is to find the metrics which are most indicative of wins and learn to measure what matters.

2. We Need to Put Data in the Hands of the Right People

A multitude of data types means a multitude of applications and outputs for data. And with that, a variety of potential business objectives that impact a variety of different stakeholders—whether it is informing product decisions, leading creative decisions, or driving better customer journey’s within the context of the content funnel.

Yet, currently, organizations struggle with interpreting and communicating all the data they now have at their disposal. Many are noticing a major talent gap when it comes to making their data actionable, due to poor cross-department translation and communication.

Charlie Chappell, Head of Media and Advertising at The Hershey Company, declared, “We need to get much more comfortable with much more data. We have to make that transition.”

Global Director of Business, Jeffrey Rossi shared similar sentiments about how data is used at Spotify, stating, “It’s not about just using data. It’s about living data. For us, the data goes into driving a product, we can market ourselves with data, and have conversations with data. It can’t be some jenky add on.”

So, while the digital advertising ecosystem is currently built to solve individual problems, we all need a much deeper understanding of the big picture to change the entire infrastructure of what we do. That means teaching up current talent and scouting the right new hires.

The only way to do it is to learn it.

3. Targeting for the Entire Dartboard and not Just the Bullseye

It’s easy to get swept up in the promise of reaching the right consumer on the right platform at the right time with the right message through data-enabled microtargeting but these insights don’t always live up to the hype. A real problem has been an over-reliance on these targeting capabilities as we try to lead with precision first. At the end of the day, though, context still matters.

In fact, that’s a large part of why Outbrain has been working with brands to better sequence the experience consumers have with their content. Overall, as an industry, we need to be thinking more holistically. Rather than just considering how we’re going to reach consumers, we need to invest in understanding all of the different touch points within the customer journey and create value for consumers at every point.


In the words of Tamara Alesi, Managing Partner and Integrated Planning Strategy at Mediacom, “You don’t always have to use the data on the front end, but to get smarter on the back end. That’s where you see your ROI.”

Looking Forward
As marketers and brands we sometimes get lost in our own worlds and forget about how our data impacts the customer experience. In order for us to not completely silo ourselves or our data; events like Advertising Week help center our work.

This week and fresh into Q4, we can all take these learnings and focus on innovation as well as better empowering the audiences we cater to online. In the quarter ahead, we will need to discipline ourselves when it comes to our data—focusing on how we want to use it and how it impacts our customers. Otherwise, all our data and tech is ultimately useless.

Eric_Hadley_Outbrain_GlobalMarketingHeadEric Hadley (@erichad) serves as Head of Global Marketing at Outbrain (@outbrain). He joined Outbrain in 2015, and is responsible for the company’s global go-to market strategy and for driving strategic value and large scale opportunities with its premium brand and agency partners. Hadley has over 20 years of experience in marketing leadership positions in consumer, media and technology companies. Previously, he served as Head of Partner Marketing at Pinterest leading the social network’s agency outreach organization. Prior to his work for Pinterest, he held roles at Yahoo, The Weather Channel, and Microsoft. While at Microsoft, he was involved in the launch of its search engine, Bing.

Advertising | Industry-Research | Perspectives

Social media revenue trends register mix results

Top social media platforms registered strong revenue gains in Q2 2016, however, CPM increases varied according to the Salesforce Advertising Index Report for Q2 2016. Further, growth in mobile usage contributed to an overall increase in mobile’s share of revenue among social media platforms.

Facebook, often referred to as the king of social media, reported $6.4 billion in total revenue with a 59% year-over-year increase and $6.2 billion in ad revenue with a 63% increase year-over-year in Q2 2016. Mobile ad revenue for Facebook accounted for 84% of total ad revenue. Further, Facebook’s global CPM at $6.33 for Q2 2016 increased 65% from a year ago. CPM growth ranked highest in France and Canada at 130% followed by the U.S at 70% year-over-year.

InstagramCPMInstagram’s mobile footprint is strong as well. Instagram users identify mobile as their most important device for getting online. In Q2 2016, Instagram’s global CPM registered at $6.30, an increase of 42% quarter-over-quarter.

Twitter reported total revenue of $602 million, a 20% increase year-over-year. Their advertising revenue totaled $535 million, an increase of 18% year-over-year. Twitter’s mobile advertising revenue accounted for 89% of total advertising revenue. Interestingly, while total advertising revenues increased, their global CPM at $4.29 declined by18% compared to a year ago.

LinkedIn’s Global CPM for Q2 2016 was $20.43, a 13% increase year over year.  LinkedIn is known as a strong B2B platform with 60% of its total revenue generated from sponsored content.

Social media delivers a large and dedicated audience for advertisers, especially on mobile devices. Just as social networks drive mobile advertising’s growth, mobile drives advertising on social networks. Social media also continues to evolve with the addition of LIVE and VR playground to further build more immersive content and new opportunities to engage consumers.

Advertising | Perspectives

Publishers need automation, too

Digital advertising has been a boon for brands. Automation technologies allow them to hone in on their exact audiences, and—quite literally—cherry pick the impressions for their campaigns. Want to target East coast moms with high household incomes who’ve visited your site within the past two weeks but only pay for impressions that we in view? No problem! Solutions are available and ready to help. And thanks to their big budgets, VC-funded technologists have rushed in, developing new tools to help brands and agencies optimize every component of their campaigns. Publishers, on the other hand, have been the technologist’s afterthought.

For years, publishers have been at the mercy of advertiser demands, who’ve forced the digital publishing industry to adapt to big changes that dramatically affect their bottom lines. Unfortunately, they’ve done so without the technology or automation to help make it happen (although header-bidding just may be the big exception to this). As a result, they’ve seen serious risks to their yield.

This is an urgent issue. The industry can’t continue to benefit one side of the market—the advertiser—without equally benefiting the other—the publisher. Markets function best when all players benefit equally. It’s fair to say that the digital advertising market isn’t functioning as well as it could be, and that as an industry, we must focus on providing publishers with better automation tools, or face an ecosystem with fewer premium publishers.

Case in point: viewability. There are myriad ways automation will help publishers with viewability, both reactively and proactively. For instance, the publisher ad server and the agency ad server will always report different viewability counts; that’s just a fact of life. For the publisher, reconciling those discrepancies is a time-consuming and manual effort. And that manual labor makes it difficult for publishers to defend their counts, forcing them to accept counts (and revenue) that are lower than they should be.

While advertisers are easily able to target impressions based on viewability, the same isn’t true for publishers. So how do we level the playing field? If publishers had access to accurate and automated measurement and reporting, they’d have a much better sense of which ad units are likely to be in view. Moreover, they could automatically direct to those units for campaigns where viewability is a targeting criteria. Such a capability will allow publishers to meet their viewability guarantees with far less impression waste.

As it stands, challenges like discrepancies represent untold sums of lost revenue, vast amounts of time spent sifting through data to reconcile and invoice campaigns, along with make-goods that take valuable inventory away from future campaigns.

But discrepancies are not the problem per se, they are a symptom of a bigger problem – the imbalance of power between the buy side and the sell side. The former has all of the tools, automation and budgets; the latter is asked to compromise far too often. If more of the publisher workflow was automated, we could begin to level the playing field. And that would do more than just drive higher yields for publishers—it would ensure that advertisers continue to have ample premium and brand-safe environments in which to engage their audiences.

Dave Marquard 2(3)Dave Marquard is currently Vice President of Product Management, Publisher Solutions and RTB Products at Integral Ad Science. For the past 15 years he has held leadership roles in product management, engineering, and marketing at internet technology and enterprise software firms such as Google, IBM, and Lombardi Software.

Advertising | Perspectives

Facebook: When the fox guards the hen house

Facebook: ” We have our own measurement and how we measure.”

Last night, The Wall Street Journal reported that Facebook has been overestimating the time spent on its highly-lucrative video programming for two years. I’ll let you review their report. After reading it, I thought it would be relevant to share the transcript from a panel I moderated on Wednesday at the Conference on Time and Attention in New York City. On the panel were three premium publishers and Facebook’s Head of Sales for North America, Erwin Castellano.

The excerpt below covers a part of our conversation that’s relevant to the WSJ article exchange, highlighting the significant gaps between how Facebook measures time spent and how the rest of our industry does.  As I pointed out before moving on to the rest of our panel discussion, Facebook is able to set its own rules because — together with Google –Facebook captured 90% of the growth in digital advertising in the first quarter of 2016.  Advertisers will have to determine for themselves if or how this information will impact their spending. I’ve already concluded that this type of confusion only does a disservice to our entire industry.

Transcript from
Publisher Panel at Conference  on Time and Attention (Wednesday, Sept 21st)

Note that the following excerpt starts at 2:10:

Erwin Castellano, Head of Sales, Facebook, N.A.: You asked a question. On Facebook, we do not sell on MRC.

Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next: You don’t?

Facebook: We don’t.

Kint: You said your ads are “in view.” So what does that mean?

Facebook: So we have our own measurement and how we measure.

Kint: OK, I don’t want to go down a rathole but…

Facebook: but fortunately the ad has to definitely be in-view. We are later this year going to offer I believe for advertisers the ability to buy 100% in-view so that means both the top and bottom portion of the ads will have to be in view or some portion.

Kint: Both the top and bottom of the ad are in view?

Facebook: Right.

Kint: For a minimum of one second?

Facebook: I don’t know the time measurement. We haven’t said so we’re using our own measurement.

Kint: OK. (sighs).

Facebook: The reason we’re not on MRC is MRC doesn’t break out any sort of guidance on mobile. It’s just based on desktop and today Facebook’s audience is 80% mobile. Look, MRC has stated that they recognize that the value and impact can be extracted earlier in a mobile newsfeed but that they haven’t given guidance yet on what the appropriate measure should be on mobile just yet.

Kint: (sigh). We’re talking about time and attention but I’m on the MRC committee and I think that guidance is out. There is separate guidance for desktop, separate guidance for mobile. I think it’s 50% of the ad for a minimum of one second so maybe you’re just not there yet.

Facebook: (inaudible)

Kint: Or haven’t agreed to it yet. Certainly if you’re Facebook you can decide what the rules are, no disrespect, that’s a respectful comment to your business. You’re capitalists.

Kint: So… I’ll tie it in a bow.  If we’re building the bricks in the house of time everybody has to agree on what the bricks are…hopefully as an industry.  Otherwise we’ll get stuck in stupid discussions for a long time. We’re trying to create consistency and build an industry here…

Advertising | Industry-Research

Mobile internet advertising rising fast to eclipse desktop in 2017

Mobile isn’t just causing a seachange in consumer behavior by increasing our demand for formats and features that are easy and enjoyable to access on smartphones and tablets. Mobile is also causing a seismic shift in advertising spend allocation, a surprise trend documented in the Zenith Advertising Expenditure Forecast released earlier this month.

The forecast, upgraded from numbers the company published in June, still expects mobile advertising to overtake desktop–but the new forecast predicts this will happen much sooner.

In fact, forecasts for mobile growth this year are upgraded from 46% to 48%, and next year from 29% to 33%. While it may only amount to a few percentage points, the impact on the total is tremendous. Zenith now expects mobile ad spend to exceed desktop by $8 billion in 2017, up from the $2 billion that was predicted in June.

Zenith1

Overall, desktop is going to suffer a steep drop in 2017 – one from which it will not likely recover as Zenith further forecasts mobile to account for 60% of all internet advertising in 2018, up from it’s previous forecast of 58%.

Zenith2

Why is the shift to mobile causing desktop advertising to shrink faster than newspapers, magazines and TV? The answer is inextricably intertwined with consumer behavior and people’s preference for experience over interruption.

At one level, mobile ad spend is merely following the trajectory it must if brands and marketers are determined to be where their customers are. People are spending more time on mobile devices, so ad dollars must follow. This brings us back to the most “clipped” slide in the annual Mobile Internet Trends Report deck from Mary Meeker, Internet guru and partner at venture capital fund Kleiner Perkins Caufiled & Byers. In it Meeker pointed out the gap between time spend on media (specifically mobile) and percentage of media spend.

Zenith3

But the exodus of ad spend is also fueled by the hard truth that consumers are annoyed by banner ads, and reaching in increasing numbers to ad blockers in order to tune out interruptive display advertising on desktop (as well as mobile).

Another driver causing the rapid decline of desktop ad spend in no doubt the surge in social media and native advertising. Reams of research and campaign results shows social and mobile is an unbeatable combination–particularly since social media is a perfect fit with the fiercely personal nature of our mobile devices and aligned with how we spend the majority of our time on mobile (namely, engaging in social media conversations and the contextual ads that show up in our feeds).

Mobile is where we focus our time and attention, so it makes business sense for ad spend to shift to our “first” screen. However, the rise in mobile spend doesn’t mean the death of desktop. Zenith is bullish about the outlook for other desktop formats such as video, a format that it notes has “benefited from the transition to programmatic buying, which allows agencies to target audiences more efficiently and more effectively, with personalized creative.”

In a world where experience trumps–well– everything, all ad formats can count on being a line on the budget as long as they are highly engaging, not annoying, and highly relevant.

Peggy Anne Salz is the Content Marketing Strategist and Chief Analyst of Mobile Groove, a top 50 influential technology site providing custom research to the global mobile industry and consulting to tech startups. She is a frequent contributor to Forbes on the topic of mobile marketing, engagement and apps. Her work also regularly appears in a range of publications from Venture Beat to Harvard Business Review. Peggy is a top 30 Mobile Marketing influencer and a nine-time author based in Europe. Follow her @peggyanne.

Advertising | Perspectives | Revenue

Why Google’s crackdown on mobile pop-ups might be a good thing

It’s a relief for consumers and a worry for publishers: Google is cracking down on interstitial ads on mobile websites, thereby forcing publishers to rethink and revamp their mobile advertising strategies. And while the rationale might be good for Google and the ecosystem, it is worrying that the tech giant has so much power to act unilaterally.

These pop-ups, which publishers typically use to get a visitor to “like” a page on Facebook or sign up for a newsletter or serve an ad, for example, have become nearly ubiquitous across websites. Online publishers rely on them to help generate more subscribers or ad conversions. On mobile devices, where screens are smaller, these interstitials sometimes take up the entire screen, making users hunt around for a way to close them.

Dissuading Publishers
Let’s face it: These ads can be very annoying. And effective January 10, 2017, Google plans to dissuade publishers from using them by ranking those websites lower in its search results. As Mashable’s Emma Hinchliffe put it, “Google is pushing websites to choose between a high search ranking and obtrusive but lucrative ads.”

To be clear, not all interstitial ads will be penalized. Google has outlined the specifics of what it will deem appropriate versus obtrusive. Interstitials asking for age verification or permission to utilize cookies on a device are fine if used responsibly, as are banner ads that only take up a “reasonable amount of screen space,” according to a blog post by Google. But other commonly used ads that make content inaccessible, such as a pop-up that covers the main content of a website, or an interstitial that blocks the page unless a user closes the ad, are a no-no.

It’s an example of just how much authority Google has when it comes to advertising, as lower search rankings lead to less traffic on a website. But of course, more traffic—and the revenue that comes with it—is precisely what publishers and online operators want. So with this new scheme set to go into effect, using interstitials is tantamount to a lose-lose situation, as “Google’s continued nudges could make a difference in the long run,” according to The Verge’s Jacob Kastrenakes. The company had previously issued a penalty in November 2015 for the interstitial ads that asked users to install a mobile app, and is now somewhat rolling that penalty into this new decree.

Advantage of ad scrollers
What’s a publisher to do? Well, re-conceptualizing a mobile advertising strategy is obviously in order, to find out what mobile formats actually work. But it may not be as hard as some publishers think. A recent study by the IAB, the mobile advertising services provider PadSquad and the company Celtra, which works in display advertising, for example, found that “ad scrollers” may be the way to go. It’s an emerging mobile ad concept that allows the user to scroll the advertisement smoothly on or off the screen, and decreases “the tendency to block or overlook ads in the process,” The Drum’s Laurie Fullerton reported. The study delivered some stunning results on what happened when the scroller was used:

  • Brand category awareness increased by almost 26%
  • Ad awareness increased by almost 10%
  • Those who saw the ad were 17% more likely to consider it “distinctive”
  • Thirty-five percent of those who viewed the scroller ad expressed “positive feelings” about how the ad revealed itself
  • Sixty-three percent of those who saw the ad reported a higher purchasing intent after viewing

The study also showed that these ads were a hit with certain target audiences, namely Millennials. Forty-four percent of Millennials who viewed the ad reported positive feelings about the way the ad revealed itself, compared to 31% of those age 35 and over. Moreover, “while women saw the larger brand increases, men were much more impressed with the scroller’s look and feel,” according to the IAB.

Given that mobile advertising spending in the U.S. will increase by 41% this year and constitute 72.2% of all digital ad spending in 2019 (to become a $65.87 billion industry), publishers can’t afford to use ads without thinking of the big picture. But with smart and strategic understanding, publishers should be able to roll with Google’s changes. In fact, it might just push publishers onto better methods.

Advertising | Perspectives

To mock or not to mock? Avoiding fraudulent advertising campaign verification

To mock or not to mock? That is the question frequently asked by media publishers trying to meet advertiser demands related to digital campaign success. The industry’s intense focus on viewability and transparency issues associated with ad fraud hijacks the limelight from another vital area of interest for advertisers: Are campaigns actually running as contracted?

What the advertiser wants, the advertiser gets
To justify the millions (and millions!) of dollars spent promoting products, advertisers rightfully demand proof that their campaigns execute as promised. From expected ad rendering on the page to accurate targeting by geography and behavior profiles, advertisers want to know that the right ad has been served in the right way in the right location on the right page to the right demographic. In fact, when considering the average spend of a large-scale national campaign flight, many advertisers will assert they deserve to know their campaign is performing as promised.

Authenticated ad inventory yields benefits
The advertising ecosystem is a dynamic environment processing millions of ads covering billions in spend at any one time. Considering that 5% of display and mobile ads are served incorrectly at launch and countless more break during flight, publishers need to actively monitor and protect their ad-generated revenue channels.[i]

Authenticated ad inventory helps publishers secure ad revenue by avoiding pre-planned delivery overages to compensate for anticipated discrepancies. In addition, it also reduces the frequency of misfiring campaigns, thus minimizing instances of “make good” campaigns.

Ad verification is more than good looks
Reputable publishers recognize the value of their high-quality inventory and demonstrate it by providing proof of ad delivery according to established terms. This is a complicated prospect in an age of large-scale campaigns incorporating ads of varying formats (i.e., HTML5, pre/mid/post-roll video, native, etc.) through multiple platforms (i.e., display, tablet, smartphone, gaming consoles, etc.) across increasingly granular targeting segments.

A Photoshopped mock-up or full-page capture of the ad on a screen is a start, but it isn’t enough. Presenting a “mock-up” of how an ad should look could be considered fraudulent as it’s not a true representation of how an ad performs across all formats, devices and geographies. In fact, several industries (Tier 2 automotive, pharmaceutical, etc.) and countries (especially those in Latin America) regulate advertising-based billing processes and require third-party verified screenshots upon invoice presentation.

Beyond the visual of “how” an ad looks on a device, publishers must prove that each ad is delivered as contracted with the advertiser. Continuous monitoring of campaigns at launch and throughout flight will quickly detect errors associated with targeting, creative and device-specific issues that impede optimal campaign execution.

Authentication of possibly hundreds of ad combinations—by size, format, device and geography—is used by publishers to substantiate inventory value and by advertisers to audit and measure campaign ROI.

Consider this
To verify accurate ad placement, execution and targeting, a publisher must consider these five factors:

  1. Legitimacy: Screenshots of ads in a live environment truthfully demonstrate that an ad is delivered to the right target. A “mock-up” or “test page” may display how an ad appears on a site, but in reality it provides a false sense of security for how the ad is actually executing. It also infers that the ad will render the same across all devices, OS, formats and geographies.
  1. Accuracy: Mock-ups can’t prove ad placement as many ad units only occur behind paywalls or require an IP address in order to serve the correct messaging to the individual user.
  1. Automation: Imagine scaling the manual process of verifying ads across the overwhelming number of devices, browsers, user profiles, formats, sizes and geo-locations. Without automation, the task is almost impossible. Leverage technology to streamline the process.
  1. Costs: Carefully consider the total cost of ownership when deciding between an in-house or outsourced process. While in-house resources are easier to control, it is difficult to secure funding and keep the staff engaged. On the flip side, outsourcing requires integration, training, probable coordination with targeting vendors, and continuous oversight which could ultimately be more costly than anticipated—not to mention the complications of managing a remote team, in a case of choosing a non-local entity if a non-native entity is selected.
  1. Quality Assurance: Reliance on mock-up designs to certify campaign execution will no catch errors that occur at launch or throughout the campaign flight.

Ad verification is a complex, yet critical endeavor for publishers looking to highlight inventory value. Don’t mock it.

ChrisChris Olson founded The Media Trust (@themediatrust) with Dave Crane in 2005. He currently serves as CEO, where he drives the company’s vision, direction and growth plans. Prior to establishing The Media Trust Company, he spent four years as the chief operating officer and board member at Spheric Media. From 1998 until 2000, he was the vice president, global equities at Commerzbank; and from 1993 until 1998, he was the vice president of electronic trading at Salomon Brothers, Inc.

[i] The Media Trust analysis of millions of ad campaigns verified over the course of 10 years
Advertising | Industry-Research

Publishers increase mobile investment

Mobile is an ever-increasingly important platform in digital publishing as consumers spend more time on their devices. In fact, three-quarter of publishers (75%) stated they will increase their mobile investment in the next 12 months, reported AOL’s 2016 Publisher Outlook Report, which surveyed 300 publishers in the U.S.

Further, nearly half of the publishers plan on increasing their mobile investment up to 25% more and 10% plan on increasing their investment from 50-100% more in the next 12 months. Publishers also anticipate video ad sales to be the top revenue performer of the year.

Ad blockers, quality creative and quality experiences are top challenges publishers face today, while better audience metrics, interactive and engaging ad units, mobile-first video and faster ad loads offer big opportunities.

Publishers rank their biggest mobile opportunities as:

  1. Better audience metrics – 43%
  2. Interactive, engaging ad units – 43%
  3. Mobile-first video (creative and formatting) – 42%
  4. Faster ad loads – 42%
  5. More mobile web-based content – 42%
  6. Cross-screen tracking and measurement – 40%
  7. Customized / personalized creative – 39%
  8. More app offerings – 38%
  9. Mobile commerce – 38%
  10. Gamification of content – 27%

And rank their primary challenges as:

  1. Ad blockers – 49%
  2. Quality of consumer experience – 44%
  3. Quality of content/creative – 42%
  4. App installations – 38%
  5. Measurement deficits – 31%
  6. Platform and service costs – 30%
  7. Off platform monetization – 30%
  8. Off network traffic / audience – 27%
  9. Lagging advertising spend – 27%
  10. Inadequate revenue/ROI – 24%

Distribution platforms for content have also emerged this year. Companies like Facebook, Apple, Twitter and Snapchat are all trying to attract readers to keep using their platforms while consuming publisher’s content. Over 90% of publishers believe distributed media has had a positive effect; 53% report it’s “extremely positive.” By and large, publishers also said that syndication is vital with approximately 25-50% of their traffic coming via syndication referrals.

More and more publishers are increasingly assessing new and alternative monetization strategies beyond advertising. For now, more than 75% of publishers pursue subscription and ad supported business models. Of those focused on subscriptions, over 75% expect to grow their subscription choices in the next 12 months.

While publishers are still very dependent on advertising revenue, the way of doing business has changed. Seven in 10 publishers (71%) sell inventory via programmatic with many using a private marketplace. Private marketplaces allow publishers to offer their own inventory to buyers in a more transparent and controlled environment. More than half of publishers (56%) depend on at least one private marketplace and 28% use multiple PMPs.

Publishers continue to evolve with the times, building new technologies, developing new revenue sources and even creating internal agencies to develop new creative. Publishers must continue to re-think how people are consuming content, how to deliver it, how it lives across platform and how to monetize it beyond advertising dollars.

Advertising | Perspectives

What’s Verizon’s master plan after nabbing Yahoo?

The rumors were true, and Yahoo, one of the pioneers of the web, is now part of Verizon, the largest wireless carrier in the U.S., after an all-cash deal of $4.83 billion.

It’s a small sum for one of the most popular websites, which was worth more than $125 billion at its zenith in 2000. Many are dissecting Yahoo’s downfall, which likely stemmed from an ongoing struggle with its focus: Amazon owns shopping, Google owns search, Apple owns mobile hardware and Facebook owns photos and the social graph, as the New York Times’ Mike Isaac outlined. Yahoo insisted on branding itself as a media company when it could have focused on building out its technology, and tried to do too many things at once. The result is that it never became known for anything in particular, and did a mediocre job at everything.

But there’s still plenty of potential upside in the acquisition for Verizon. All eyes are now on the company to see what kind of strategy it will take, and whether it can turn Yahoo’s downfall into a climb to the top for itself.

Consumer Behavior and Ad Tech
Anyone who’s been paying attention knows that what Verizon was really after when purchasing Yahoo was not the brand itself. What Verizon did want was Yahoo’s 22 years’ worth of data on consumer behavior and ad technology. Verizon previously acquired AOL, another once boehmouth and now faltering web property, marking Verizon’s push into content and ad tech. Now, with the scale from the Yahoo purchase, as well as Yahoo’s “mobile applications and advertising technology for video and handheld devices,” as Bloomberg’s Brian Womack wrote, Verizon might be able to lift itself into a higher echelon on the web.

And why would it want to do this? Perhaps investing in the advanced technology of ailing web companies is a good way for Verizon to stay relevant, according to Wired’s Brian Barrett. Because Verizon is one of the largest carriers, it already saturates the market, and so growth in its traditional business is limited. Moving up in the evolving digital advertising business, though, is a way for Verizon to diversify and grow. So now Verizon — with AOL and Yahoo, both of which have sophisticated ad tech — can aim higher.

As the New York Times’ Vindu Goel and Michael de la Merced reported, “The idea is to use Yahoo’s vast array of content and its advertising technology to offer more robust services to Verizon customers and advertisers.” Verizon has the benefit of location data, although that is probably limited to Verizon users, and other Internet companies have similar data.

Taking on Facebook and Google
And let’s be clear: The duopoly currently at the top of digital advertising are Google and Facebook, both of which posses a staggering amount of data from users. They’re certified Internet behemoths. The two companies together took in 55% of the digital ad market last year, according to eMarketer. A combined Verizon and Yahoo, meanwhile, would take in six percent of the digital ad market. Verizon may have climbed a few steps on the ladder with the acquisition, but Google and Facebook are already in the clouds as Verizon finds its footing.

Does that mean Verizon should back down in digital advertising, and succumb to the fact it’ll probably never reach Google-Facebook levels? Yes and no. Trying is the only way it will continue to make a dent in the industry, especially as people spend more time on their phones. So investing in ad tech and mobile video, like Verizon’s video service go90, is a smart decision. Because “ultimately, AOL’s ad-sales technology could encourage brands to spend more money across a range of Yahoo websites and apps,” as the AP’s Tali Arbel wrote.

But Verizon will have to keep its expectations realistic. That goes not just for competing with Facebook and Google, but also for ensuring its targeting doesn’t amount to a privacy breach. It already got in trouble with the FCC in March for enabling a “supercookie.” Now, as the AP’s Arbel reported, “the FCC wants broadband providers like Verizon to seek a customer’s permission in most cases before sharing data with advertisers.” That’s not something that tech titans Google and Facebook will have to deal with because their Internet access plans are still nascent.

Bottom line: Verizon is now a serious player in ad tech and online content, with even more consumer data—but it has a long way to catch the leaders.

Advertising | Industry-Research

Marketers increasingly favor viewability and third-party verification

The majority of advertisers chose viewabilty as their campaign objective, followed by click thru rate and view thru rate according to a study by data software company Videology. Of all campaigns that ran on the Videology platform in Q2 2016, 43% used viewable rate as an objective KPI. Of those campaigns, 89% chose to measure viewability using the MRC standard (50% of pixels on screen for at least two consecutive seconds) while the additional 11% chose to use their own custom standard for determining if an ad was viewable.

Advertisers continue to emphasize demographic, geographical and behavioral data to target their campaigns. Over half of all campaigns Videology analyzed used behavioral targeting, while TV Viewing accounted for 14%, with advertisers looking to add incremental reach to their TV buys. It is interesting to note that more marketers are emphasizing the need for in-demo delivery of campaigns, a metric originating from the traditional methods of non-programmatic TV buying; Videology has seen a 115% year-over-year increase in the number of campaigns using Nielsen or comScore to measure in-demo targeting success.

Cross-screen advertising saw a 20% year-over-year increase (compared to Q2 2015), with the bulk of the activity consisting of combined PC, mobile, and connected TV placements. Campaigns using PC alone made up just 12%, a fraction of where this was one year ago when they made up a quarter of all placements.

YoYViewability

 

Advertising | Industry-Research | Perspectives

CMOs: Do You Know Where Your Ads Are? New research proves why it matters. 

Editor's note: The comScore study “The Halo Effect: How Advertising on Premium Publishers Drives Higher Ad Effectiveness” was not commissioned by Digital Content Next (DCN) or any of its member companies. While the results were shared with DCN prior to publication, DCN did not have any influence over the design of the research or its findings.

Programmatic advertising and its aggregation of inventory are often viewed as the key forces behind the commoditization of digital ad impressions. The shift to audience-centric media buying from earlier practices emphasizing context has left many questioning whether or not the environment surrounding advertising really matters. It is important that we examine what extent does quality drives advertising effectiveness.

Today’s release of comScore’s independent research, “The Halo Effect: How Advertising on Premium Publishers Drives Higher Ad Effectiveness” presents empirical findings that Digital Content Next member sites delivered significantly higher branding effectiveness results than other sites.* Importantly, the research finds that the primary driving force for the brand lift is the positive impact of the “halo effect” of the contextual environment in which an ad is seen. In other words: A good environment drives better ad campaign effectiveness. In fact, while some of the positive effect can be contributed to higher ad viewability and less invalid traffic on premium sites, comScore found that the most significant driver of increased effectiveness is the halo effect of appearing on premium sites. This “premium” designation is one that our own research has borne out as a distinguishing factor in other areas, such as the quality of ad inventory and the significantly lower bot traffic on DCN member sites.

What value does the halo factor have for marketers? Used properly, it can help a brand cut through the clutter and save money on marketing by using this momentum to operate effectively and efficiently throughout the marketing funnel, particularly in the brand consideration stage where the “halo” lift was 3x.

This is demonstrated by the research, which first compared the overall brand lift effectiveness of ads delivered on DCN members’ sites versus non-DCN premium publishers sites. DCN premium publisher sites significantly outperformed those on non-DCN sites—by 67% (0.89 brand lift vs. 0.53). Measuring brand lift answers some of the biggest questions marketers have such as are my ads influencing consumer behavior, are they influencing sales and to what degree. Knowing a campaign is 67% more effective in influencing consumer behavior and intent to purchase is a win-win situation giving marketers a lead in the marketplace.
averagebrandlift
comScore also identified ad effectiveness metrics in other parts of the marketing funnel. DCN publisher sites performed 32% better on top funnel metrics, which includes awareness, recall and message association (.56 brand lift vs. .42). The mid-funnel—where consumers have the potential to develop a stronger interest in your brand—performed more than three times as effective for DCN publisher sites with a 1.87 brand lift vs. 0.51. Premium publisher sites can influence the mid-funnel by 255% more effectiveness, a potential accelerator of brand sales. The lower and final part of the funnel includes purchase intent and share of consumer choice metrics. DCN premium publishers performed 9% better on the bottom-funnel metrics (.38 brand lift vs. .35).

We know that the quality of ad inventory and the substantially lower bot traffic on DCN member sites is a positive driving force but the comScore research determined how much of a factor this is in driving higher ad effectiveness. To arrive at the pure value of the “halo effect,” comScore factored these elements out of the equation deriving that DCN publisher sites drive a “halo effect” of 51% higher ad effectiveness.

comScore’s independent research provides a clear message that brands benefit from advertising on premium publisher sites. While the research found that premium publishers perform better across all phases of the marketing funnel, the value in driving mid-funnel metrics is especially important to convert awareness into positive brand consideration. So, while digital continues to create opportunities for targeting and increase opportunities for efficiencies, it is clear that placement within the context of quality environments provides a “halo effect” that drives ad effectiveness.

*This study was not commissioned by Digital Content Next (DCN) or any of its member companies. While the results were shared with DCN prior to publication, DCN did not have any influence over the design of the research or its findings.
©2024 Digital Content Next. All Rights Reserved.