Disney’s Upfront by the Numbers

Disney’s highly anticipated upfront comes at the heels of its acquisition of Fox properties. So the event this year not only heralds in a new expansive era for the company, it also presented a synergy of established, previously frenemy properties. As part of their presentation, it was also announced that Disney has just acquired full operational control of Hulu with the ability to acquire full ownership at a future time.

Storytelling in all of its forms is a paramount vision for the network group, from ESPN (focusing on gaining more rights, weaving compelling stories and showcasing more live events), National Geographic (focusing on premium factual storytelling), FX (scripted shows) and Freeform (embracing disruptive voices).

In addition to a range of network specific content, Rita Ferro, President, The Walt Disney Company Advertising Sales and Partnerships, announced there were, “investments around data and technology. There has been tremendous advancement in that space with an emphasis on reach, effectiveness and delivering on those results that are important to our clients.”

Disney+, the OTT subscription service, loomed large with some of the properties slated to be included in the service and other waiting to hear. The aggregation of compelling content has been ramped up in this new expanding company with each network offering something for a different audience segment.

ESPN announced a deal with Caesars to be the official odds provider for the network for, as Connor Schell, EVP Content, ESPN, stated, “for fans interested in betting content.” He noted that in 2018, and for the 5th straight year, ESPN was “the top network in every key male demo,” and added that the network had the “best portfolio of rights across the industry for live events – 25,000 of them.” He proposed an aggressive social media strategy including 200 live shows on Twitter, all with advertising.

For FX CEO John Landgraf, there is, “a lot to figure out as to how this (acquisition) will work out in its optimal form.” But with an array of original scripted programming, the network has the inventory. “Over the past 15 years, we went from one to 15 scripted shows,” he stated, and then added, “but 15 scripted shows aren’t enough.” He is examining non-linear rights and expects to see “a lot of innovation about what can be done in this new system.” Rather than placing FX on Disney+, Landgraf sees Hulu as the best streaming service for his network.

Courteney Monroe, CEO, National Geographic, noted that her network is a recent addition to Disney and sets itself apart with “premium factual storytelling,” and “quality, excellence and distinctiveness above all else.” The network is adding scripted anthologies such as the Genius series and reaching bigger and broader upscale audiences. “Entertaining and smart are not mutually exclusive,” she concluded.

Tom Ascheim, President, Freeform, positions the network for young adult women and highlights inclusiveness. “We are embracing disruptive voices,” he explained and added that one of the benefits of the merger is that Freeform will air The Simpsons. “Millennials currently outnumber boomers,” he stated, “and we are the leading brand for that audience.”

Karey Burke, President ABC Entertainment, concluded the event with an overview of the new season’s schedule, stressing the importance of stability and the need to carefully craft every show before it’s ready to launch. “We are stabilizing the schedule and scheduling fewer new series,” she explained, “There are too many messages to get out there so we will have fewer and bigger launches. There is a value in nurturing the shows you already have.” ABC network is aiming for a strong female POV and this strategy is paying off. “ABC dominates with women. We are #1 since January,” she concluded.

This article first appeared in Cynopsis.

It’s Time to Welcome the 55+ Demo into the Media Mainstream

Some topics of conversation in media never get old and that includes the ongoing discussion of the value of older consumers. For years, many of us in programming, marketing and advertising have been engaged in one long conversation regarding the accuracy of age-based demographic breaks that effectively exclude Adults 55+ from the sales value equation. “Oh we don’t need to specifically target Adults 55+,’ they will say, “because we can reach them anyway – they are heavy TV viewers.” Well not so fast, sonny. Today’s 55+ are not like 55+s of yesteryear.

While this has been argued before, it bears repeating. According to economic trends, today’s older consumers command much greater buying power compared to current and previous generations. Boomers alone represent 70% of the total net worth in America and account for 40% of total consumer demand.  It is time for the media metrics to keep pace with economic realities.

Media Ecologist Jack Myers believes that it is vital for the industry to come together and change the traditional age-demo breaks. “We need to recognize the economic and societal evolutions that have occurred since the 1960s and embrace a new set of demo standards,” he stated. He proposes the following breaks:

Ø  Teens/Tweens (11-17)

Ø  Gen-Z (18-24)

Ø  Millennials (25-45)

Ø  Gen X/Y (45-62)

Ø  Boomers (63-75)

Ø  A new combination for sales targeting purposes (45-72)

The History

Let me share some history that will help explain why this makes sense. It all started out innocently enough. In the early 1960s when advertisers divided the media pie into simply households and men or women, upstart network ABC, which trailed in overall household performance, had a great idea; why not further divide the population into age breaks? After all, the younger-skewing ABC argued, younger people were less fixed in their brand loyalties and were more open to change and experimentation. At the time, they were referring to the rebellious Baby Boomers who were very different psychologically from previous (and future) generations. Unfortunately, the idea of youth worship based on age alone resonated with advertisers and programmers. Today it has stultified into dogma.

A sales positioning idea that was initially conceived to more easily categorize audiences into future, peak and declining brand building and spending years has, in my opinion, led the industry astray. In fact, one could argue that 18-34, 18-49, 25-54 and 55+ breaks never really made much sense. Did an 18 year old ever really spend like a 49 year old? Does one fall off the face of the economic earth on their 55^th birthday? Of course not!

If there was ever a cohort that should be actively sought by advertisers and programmers, it would have to be psychologically based, not necessarily age-based. Who came of age when consumerism was at its peak, when advertising was the epicenter of choice consideration and when media technology was young and experimental? Baby Boomers. Today they are still active in the workforce, are in their peak earning years and are as changeable and rebellious as ever. Maybe it’s time to finally reevaluate the age-break demographic to better reflect the behavioral dynamics of the generations it purportedly represents.

Changing Business as Usual

Older consumers in 2018 are very different from older consumers in 1960. In 1960, if you were 55+ you could have experienced a Depression and two World Wars in your formative spending years. There were also much fewer brands and the major forms of communication were newspaper and radio. Today’s older audiences grew up in a time of relative luxury and peace, the grand expansion of media communication and advancements in healthcare that has extended not only longevity but also quality of life. How today’s older adults live and spend are worlds apart from their grandparents and parents.

Getting to Consensus

In this highly competitive media world where reaching the “right” audience is pivotal to success, how do we get all of the players to agree on a modification of the standard age-break ranges? Megan Clarken, President Watch, Nielsen, understands the dynamics of the marketplace. “Reaching industry consensus is always a journey, especially when it comes to determining changes to the currency,”  ​she said. “For example, if an older-skewing network pushes for an age-break re-definition, there will be a younger skewing network that would push back. Our role is to encourage the conversation and provide the data and insights - whether its age-gender or advanced demographics beyond the standard demos - that the industry needs to transact with confidence.”

But there is some movement in reaching a new consensus. “While the vast majority of industry deals remain a demo currency, revisiting demographic breaks is an important piece,” advised Radha Subramanyam, Executive Vice President, Chief Research and Analytics Officer, CBS Television Network. “Going forward, moving away from age/gender as the foundation of planning and buying seems to make the most sense. The framework needs to be audiences and audience cohorts, though defined more broadly than some of the segments currently popular in the programmatic ecosystem,” she added.

In a world quickly moving to more addressable consumer segments, some believe that a change in the standard age breaks are unnecessary at this time. “Given the industry’s continued push to implement purchase-based targeting, I am not sure there is a strong rationale for what looks to be subtle changes,” stated Ed Gaffney, Head of Implementation Research and Marketplace Analysis U.S., GroupM. “Targeting begins with planning. The buying teams simply refit the planning target to a demo to facilitate media deals.”

Further, as we head more towards cross platform measurements, Gaffney believes that it will inevitably lead to a new targeting consensus. “The linear networks will most likely not be interested in moving to different demos when they could move to targets that better align with those used in digital buys (signal based), and digital is not very interested in using age based targets for anything but comparative purposes,” he added.

Others believe in going further by dropping age-break metrics entirely, even for comparison purposes. John Rosso, President Market Development, Triton Digital, a leading online audio measurement service, explains, “The real question in my mind is this: why care about age at all? The digital world has moved on to audience targeting and, through initiatives like Open AP, the traditional media world seems to be embracing more advanced audience segmentation as well. Do we still need to use demographics as a proxy for behaviors and intents when we can target those things directly?”

Nielsen remains the unbiased arbiter of age-break demographics preferring the industry to decide for itself what metrics work best for the buy/sell paradigm. Because of this, Nielsen must remain neutral. “We don’t set the rules for the industry. We rely on the industry to negotiate the rules amongst themselves. And there isn’t any general industry committee that I know of that actually says ‘this is the rule’ which makes it tough to reach a consensus. Nielsen is a third-party, independent organization so it's difficult for us to do it on behalf of the industry,” Clarken concluded.

In my next article on this topic, I will explore how outdated and irrelevant media buying and planning tactics are costing the media industry billions of dollars.

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com

ABC and Accenture Strategy Discover the Secret of Sales ROI

One of the more challenging aspects of advertising sales is calculating ROI. This is made even more complex with the proliferation of content platforms and consumer devices. What really contributed to Sales uplift? ABC, in addressing this issue, just released Phase 2 of an attribution analysis conducted by Accenture Strategy. Phase 2 is the follow-up to a custom study completed in 2016 and used four big data sources to prove the role and value of content in context in driving Sales ROI. 

Cindy Davis, Executive Vice President Consumer Experience, Disney ABC Television Group, took me through the study and how it contributes to their overall research strategy. “Our objective in this study is to measure what matters and there was industry pressure to measure ROI,” she stated. To that end, “we found a very interesting connection between engaged audiences and their content and the sales and ROI we can drive to clients who participate.”

To achieve that goal, Disney|ABC commissioned Accenture Strategy which, according to Davis, “had a robust database of marketing spend. This year in our Phase 2 of the study, we examined 26 national brands over six industries and their corresponding sales data representing $25 billion in marketing spend, with $11 billion in television spending.” 

Mike Chapman, Managing Director, Accenture Strategy, global lead for Media and Entertainment Strategy Practice added that his company provided three years of data, which provided a “closed loop view of advertising ROI – types of impressions delivered, how many, which channels, what prices were paid and the impacts from those impressions delivered on incremental sales week over week.”

In addition to Accenture’s marketing data, Davis asked Accenture Strategy to incorporate four other datasets in their recent study – Nielsen ratings, E-Poll, Nielsen Social and Magid’s Emotional DNA, which Davis described as, “intriguing because we are in the business of connecting with viewers emotionally and Magid’s DNA work speaks to that.” 

Phase 1 Takeaways

Davis and her team, focusing on the impact of multi-platform TV (premium long-form video across screens and devices) and how advertisers can leverage that impact, discovered three major takeaways from the Accenture Strategy 2016 study:

      1.       There is a halo effect on sales with multi-platform television. “This doesn’t get talked about a lot,” Davis noted, “You hear about last click attribution in digital advertising. But TV goes a long way to establish and amplify the impacts of all media.”

      2.       Multi-platform is under-valued, under attributed and under-represented in the industry. Eighteen percent of all of the ROI impact is traditionally attributed to digital but it should actually be attributed to multi-platform television. “Television has been traditionally undervalued and digital over-valued,” Davis concluded.

      3.       Multi-platform TV has a long-term amplification impact. The study compared sales lift over years and found that by year two or three, you no longer see a sales lift impact from digital. But the study proved that there is a long-term effect on sales lift with TV.

Phase 2 Takeaways - Drivers of ROI        

Davis highlighted three key drivers to ROI that were identified in the Phase 2 study. 

      1.       Audience size matters. “Higher-rated programs deliver more ROI than lower rated programs by 2X,” she stated, “so not all programs are created equal which makes sense.” And notably, these higher-rated programs deliver more ROI than their cost premium indicating that higher rated and therefore more expensive programming is worth the cost in greater sales lift ROI. This is because these programs have a greater footprint, greater social amplification and therefore have the ability to reach people beyond a narrowly defined target audience.

      2.       Consumers’ to commitment to the content matters.  “We looked at both the expressed and the observed commitment to the content,” Davis stated, “and found that the greater the effort to watch, the greater the ROI.” And there is 2X the ROI with Magid’s Intentionality measurement.

  

      3.       Content quality matters. Davis’ group examined perceived quality, as defined by the viewer, and quantified quality indicators using Magid’s emotional dimensions.  They found that the higher the perceived quality of the content, the greater the ROI. And, using Magid, the three most impactful dimensions for higher ROI were Smarts (programs that are informative, real and inspiring), Edge (unpredictable, outrageous and funny) and Relatability (originality, suspenseful and intelligent). “There is a direct connection between the emotions viewers feel about a show and the benefits advertisers gets in terms of greater ROI,” Davis concluded.

“We are already starting to have good conversations with clients as to what this means for them,” Davis stated. “It goes without saying that not all GRPs are created equal and now we can prove that. Yes, higher-rated shows command a premium but they deliver even greater ROI at that level.” Adding to all of this insight the impact of social connection and emotional dimensions, ABC is poised to help their clients take advantage of the best that multi-platform TV can offer.

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com

 

Trends Revealed at the Cynopsis Data and Measurement Conference

For those of us navigating the brave new world of media, the data rushing into the market has been met with both exhilaration and, let’s face it, a bit of dread. What datasets are most predictive and valuable? How can a company best manage all of its data and connect it seamlessly across platforms? What metrics are most useful and capable? 

The recent Cynopsis Data and Measurement Conference offered some insights into these questions, showcasing trends in media data from its impact, its measurement, its use by advertisers and its targeting applications. Here are some takeaways:

Lazy Data Confounds the Path to Purchase

Lazy data is misleading data, according to Mike Rosen, Executive Vice President Portfolio Sales and Strategy, NBCU. Lazy data is essentially those datasets that are not efficiently and accurately attributed back to the sale or are not adequately counting the value of certain consumer groups. “Data in the service of marketing and media is a very human endeavor,” he explained, “We can use data to understand human behaviors.”

But as a Baby Boomer, Rosen believes that his spending patterns are not given the credit they deserve. He does not have a social footprint but he spends on a variety of goods and services from shopping at a range of online and offline stores, using credit cards, “I own two cars, I have insurance policies, I travel, own loyalty cards and spend on entertainment. I throw off lots of data but because of lazy data, they can't find me.” Advertisers are “targeting demos like Millennials and Gen X. I am a Boomer. I am out.” Advertisers consider older consumers acceptable waste, reached anyway. “If you market to me do I not shop?” he intoned, “I am a human consumer with a high credit rating. You can't seem to find me.”

The root causes of lazy data, according to Rosen, are:

       1.       Sticking with age and gender categorizations which don’t count valuable consumers.

       2.       Buying by network and not by program, diluting the ability to efficiently reach target viewers.

       3.       Equivalizing platforms. Platforms have different viewing experiences and different levels of engagement.

       4.       Correlation Causation. “We so badly want to relate things to each other but it could just be coincidence. I live in Westport. I love Greek yoghurt … but not because I live in Westport,” he stated.

Without an attribution model, the problem of lazy data will not go away, “It is never quite that simple to determine the path of purchase,” Rosen concluded, “The messaging route by platform each carries a different role in purchasing.”

Unified Measurement Pessimism

Let’s face it, finding a unified measurement that works well across platforms is not an easy task. In fact, according to a questionnaire floated by Cynopsis before the conference, 60% of all respondents believe that we will never attain unified measurement. This is a staggeringly high percentage of pessimists.

George Ivie, Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer, Media Ratings Council, is writing the viewability standard. He asked his panel, “What metrics matter? Which are the most relevant? Why are we rushing to try and equalize metrics? Shouldn’t we focus on value and let them be different?” There was general agreement here. According to Manu Singh, Group Vice President Commercial Insights and Digital, Discovery, “not all impressions are created equal.” Brian West, Director, Multiplatform Research, ABC added that he is, “focusing on the full life cycle of measurement by setting requirements in place, implementing measurements, validating them and using them to drive insights,” implying the creation of many metrics. “Inventory is the goal to measurement,” noted Ed Davis, Chief Product Officer, Fox. “What delivers attention to the brand - how much and how long?”

There is no ideal. It all depends on the campaign goals. There may be multiple ad formats that, in my opinion, make standardization difficult. So it may come to pass that there is never going to be a unified measurement across platforms. But according to some industry executives, we may not need one.

Measurement Surprises

Taking unified measurement one step further is the idea that technology advancements are creating unintended considerations that are bubbling up in measurement discussion. For example: In a world where media companies can disable fast forward … or not … how do you measure forced versus organic viewing durations comparably? Ivie discussed duration weighting and developing metrics that demonstrate how platforms and content perform differently. Singh noted that, “We want to standardize those metrics. We support duration weighting.” The MRC is also tackling deduplication, focusing a great deal of attention on its methodology. “When it comes to unduplicated reach, there is still work for us to do as an industry,” noted West.

The measurement wish list is long. Singh would like, “all interactions of consumers to funnel into one repository,” and to also, “take into account qualitative data.” While West added, “It's not a one size fits all. We work consultatively with our clients. What is the ROI? What is the impact on brand? We make some form of compromise. Data is device based when we want persons based, for example. We need to advance on that.”

Jamie Power, Chief Operating Officer, one2one Media may have summed it up by saying, “When it comes to multichannel measurement, it is easier to find audiences but harder to measure them.” With all of these great minds pondering the measurement universe, maybe we can convince the pessimistic 60% that some form of standard measurement (or measurements) might indeed be possible one day.

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com