Tomorrow Will Be Televised … and Predicted

I know from years of experience that predicting viewer behavior and the performance of programs is as much of an art as a science, which is why I was happy to participate in a recent Simon Applebaum podcast for his program Tomorrow Will Be Televised. Marc Berman, Programming Insider's Founder/Editor-in-Chief, and I sat down and discussed various aspects of the TV landscape. The overarching subject was how TV was performing so far in 2020 and where it might be going as the year progresses- an imposing subject especially during a pandemic.

The Big Story So Far in 2020
For me, the biggest story for 2020 so far is the uncertainty and sense of unknown. Will we get a second wave of the pandemic? Will consumers regain their confidence? How will that impact advertisers? From a measurement perspective we have seen over the past six months an expanded use of screens, a jump in co-viewing as families are sheltering-in-place and children are attending school virtually. We have also seen a great increase in news viewership to inform us about unprecedented past events as well as the upcoming election.

Berman concurred. "We are in a world of unknowns now. We don't really know what is going to happen. Anything can happen." He noted that finally in the previous week, the five broadcast networks announced what they are planning for the new season. "But the question is will they be starting the fall season in the fall?" Last season, he pointed out, there were 17 new series, 36 new shows. This year we have only 8 new TV shows. "What they are doing is using content from other sources to fill the schedule." He added that another unknown is live sports. "Will we have Sunday night Football? I don't know." I added that the absence of live sports, such as NFL Football could depress ratings.

The pace of production is a concern according to Applebaum, whether in LA or New York. "Everyone is on pins and needles as to when the shows will be produced," he stated. "When the coronavirus pandemic started there were 70-75 scripted TV shows that were in production here in New York. Pilots that weren't made and we don't know when production will be coming back."

A Cause For Some Optimism
My note of optimism here is the sudden availability of what I call "origination content" from sources such as, for example, the Metropolitan Opera that are streaming past performances from their library or the ability to sample programming from international providers. This enables viewers to sample content from a range of heretofore undiscovered sources. Discovery is a positive aspect of all of this uncertainty.

For Applebaum it is the smart TV which is the center of all of the activity. "We are seeing more people watch television over their Smart TV sets and smart devices, subscription, the major services such as whether it is Disney+ or Apple+ or Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon. We are seeing more Smart TV services get off the ground," he noted. And advertisers are taking note of this trend.

Add to this the various new uses for these screens such as online wellness – meditation and yoga – gaming, virtual meetings that bring people together, so the screen will expand as it becomes smarter, I added. It is also humanizing a lot of the talent when they broadcast from their homes, offering fans a way to connect even more to their favorite hosts. "It's an interesting situation," stated Berman, "because in the time of uncertainty … it's almost a creative challenge and there is a lot out there to consume." For Berman, he couldn't imagine a show like American Idol as working virtually, "but it did work. The contestants were at home performing and it felt personal. It felt comfortable."

Data, Program Production and the Viewer
With all of these wonderful streaming services and new places to discover content, the researcher in me is a little worried about how all of this will be measured. There are still many walled gardens and our ability to compile all of these proprietary data sources continues to be challenged. For the viewer it is a great opportunity to see more content. For the industry, it may be a challenge collecting the data.

Berman wondered if there is a tipping point where there are so many choices and the viewer gets fatigued. But with all of the potential new and co-productions being available through the myriad of services, it may spark viewer enthusiasm as it increases choice. "The way to make all of this work, financially as well, is (co-production and partnerships) as a growing trend," he stated, "The content has been stellar."

With all of this content out there, how can your programming be discovered by the consumer? Marketing plans will have to be re-evaluated and very creative to best navigate all of the available platforms and opportunities to view. "I've been noticing a lot of live events," noted Berman, who attended a special event for The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel before the pandemic, "They were making it more interactive, more live. That is on hold now but maybe it will go back again."

The future may be uncertain but one thing is sure, the media industry remains an indispensable element in people's lives and what happens in the next six months may set the tone for the foreseeable future. Certainly a medium that continues to offer compelling, original content in flexible formats is here to stay … providing we can figure out how to best measure it.

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com

Podcast: A Conversation with SMI CEO James Fennessy

With the media world reliant on data, strong analytics become the key to actionable insights.  Hear how Standard Media Index (SMI) does that for TV networks to Wall Street fund managers, and what their Global Chief Executive Officer, James Fennessy, projects for TV and Digital advertising this year.  For Episode 16 of Insider InSites, I asked MediaVillage data/research reporter Charlene Weisler to join me in-studio for a conversation with SMI about their process for aggregating spending data from agencies and prognostications for the industry.  The transcript below has been edited for clarity and length.  Listen to the complete interview here .

Subscribe to all of our podcast episodes on Apple podcasts, Stitcher and now on iHeartRadio and PodSearch.

E.B. Moss:  How is SMI unique? 

James Fennessy:  Standard Media Index was founded in Australia nine years ago [by Sue Fennessy, who ran marketing agencies, and Jane Schulze, former media editor for News Corp Australia]  based on a "give to get" model of data consortium.  Agencies were having trouble getting at their own data and thus reporting problems with clients.  So, the idea was for SMI to work with their data to normalize it, standardize it and structure it, so they could report faster and more accurately ... and then get access to that aggregated data.

Charlene Weisler:  How do you get your data?

Fennessy:  We get data every week from the agencies via an AWS environment and take automated extracts from all of their invoices across TV, digital, radio, print and out-of-home.

Moss:  What companies work with SMI?

Fennessy:  Our partners include big holding groups like Omnicom, Publicis, Dentsu Aegis Network, Havas, Horizon … and leading independents like MDC Partners, RPA and others, and organizations in the marketing effectiveness and measurement space, like Accenture and McKinsey & Co.

Weisler:  Does your data also help Wall Street?

Fennessy:  We have about 15 hedge fund clients in the US -- particularly those who invest directly in media stocks -- because they get to see the advertising revenue of major media companies, which could be a Google, a Facebook, a Snap … before those companies report.  They have successfully modeled our data for a competitive edge around how those companies are going to perform in their next earnings period.

Moss:  Let's talk about trust ... 

Fennessy:  We've got very strict privacy protocols.  We never see the agency clients spend.  We take it at the category level.

Weisler:  How do others work with SMI?

Fennessy:  Our big relationships are with the national TV networks ... across pricing/planning/inventory management.  [We] can help them size the entire marketplace and understand their position and the flow of dollars.  We just launched a major ROI research piece with Fox Network Group. There are very good services -- the Kantars, the iSpots -- but unfortunately cost data has been 50 or 60 percent off.  We fixed that problem.

Weisler:  What percentage of the U.S. and the world's advertising spending do you track?

Fennessy:  We have about two-thirds of all U.S. national TV market invoices ... about 50 percent of all premium digital invoices (excluding Google search part) … about a third of the market in print and out-of-home, and about 40% of national radio.  In other markets around the world we have between 50 and 60 percent of ad spend.

Weisler:  What trends are driving the advertising market?

Fennessy:  [See Fennessy's detailed summary here.]  Cable news continues to be on fire.  In the first couple of months 2018 it was up 13 percent. We continue to see real strength in sports; the Super Bowl was up 3.4 percentage points [and] the Winter Olympics were up more than 10 percent over the 2014 Games.  The NFL regular season was down about six percent, but the playoffs were up about 1.5 percent.  We've also seen real strength in tentpole events like the Grammys.

Weisler:  What areas are not really doing that well?

Fennessy:  Late night programming on broadcast is down 15 percent for the year, but late-night comedy on cable is doing much better.

Weisler:  When does the drop in TV ratings impact pricing?

Fennessy:  The ROI studies show national TV in particular is [still] a powerhouse for return on ad expenditure.  The massive problems that digital is having [with brand safety and security] are playing right into the hands of TV networks.  So, we expect a strong Upfront.

Weisler:  SMI reported digital grew double digits last year, but there's been a lot of talk about pulling back data.

Fennessy:  Digital has probably been overbought.  As advertisers have taken more money out of TV and put it into digital, their market share has actually dropped.  Now they're starting to put it back into national TV and there's a direct correlation to an increase in sales.  But I think you do have to have the right mix.  The ARF says an ideal mix is about 82 percent TV and 18 percent digital ... and they work well in tandem, reinforcing each other.

Weisler:  What are the biggest trends in digital and TV for the next couple of years?

Fennessy:  In digital it has to be around privacy and security.  On the TV side we'll continue to see innovation … less ads, but much more expensive ads; advanced targeting; different types of creative like the six second ad; high-quality drama programming, and a real focus on live events.

Photo at top: (Left to right) E.B. Moss, Charlene Weisler, James Fennessy

egta Insights - Making Data Work for TV

The tables have been turned! Instead of me interviewing a media executive, egta's Matthew Carver interviewed me  as part of this fascinating and extensive whitepaper on Making Data Work for TV.

Here is my interview. Please check the link for the full report.

egta: To start with audience measurement, what do you see as the state of the industry at present? 

Charlene Weisler (CW): There are a number of challenges that need to be solved, and I think that there are a lot of efforts to that end. In my opinion, one of biggest challenges is coming up with a standardisable message for cross-platform measurement. That would be capturing usage across devices and across platforms in a way that the industry can use the data to ascertain actual deliveries and help content providers maximise their revenue by capturing every single bit of usage. And it’s easier said than done. Not just because we’ve yet to agree what the standard measurement might be, because there is a difference between digital and traditional television at this time. It’s also having to take into account print, radio, outdoor and so on. There are a number of components, a number of media points that touch the consumer every day. And its growing, its morphing, its evolving, and it becomes almost a moving target.

egta: Are we talking here about all touchpoints across all media, not just focussing on bringing traditional television together with video but rather the whole scope of how a marketer could reach a consumer?

CW: Absolutely. I know that we’re probably starting with the basics of television and video and digital, but there’s a lot more. There is a lot of fascinating and very usable data being collected beyond the home in digital outdoor, and if you were a CNBC or an ESPN, those collections of data would be very important for you. So, yes there are the basic, traditional media points, but then there are also the new technologies and digital place-based media, which should be brought in as far as possible into the standard measurement. 

egta: You have companies, such as Nielsen in the US, that measure TV viewing across the whole population and more recent solutions, for example collecting return-path data, that are very good at capturing particular types of viewers or ways of receiving TV with high granularity. Is it possible to move towards a hybrid model where you can extrapolate some of that rich data onto the wider population that’s not so well measured?

CW: You have the whole area of OTT; it’s not through the cable box but it’s fragmented to a certain degree because it’s being collected through different points. There’s a lot of extrapolation, you’ve mentioned Nielsen, which is panel-based, and they extrapolate off of a panel sample of viewers, people in homes. So, extrapolation has been part of the industry for its history for more than sixty years, and I think there will still be some of that. But I also think that with STB data and with other ways of collecting other big data sets that can be merged with TV usage data, we’ll have a larger base with which to make extrapolations.

egta: With the companies that are now entering the space, with comScore going into TV with the acquisition of Rentrack for example, do you think that there could be a fundamental change to the way television itself is bought and sold, or is it more an icing-on-the-cake type of evolution?

CW: I’m going to give my personal opinion on this. Age and gender is a proxy, and I think a lot of people would agree that not all woman aged 18-49 are alike. In fact, not all women aged 18 years old are alike. I think it’s actually based on lifestyle and a variety of other factors. The age and gender proxies that we currently use to post against media buys have always been an easy way to ascertain delivery and that the contract was delivered to the guarantee. Will we move away that? It would make sense that we should, because of the limitations of proxies, but I’m not sure we will do so fast enough! 

Everybody’s talking about segmentation, and it’s a terrific idea to have behavioural segments, so that the advertiser as well as the content provider understands who is really consuming. Maybe age and gender doesn’t matter if you have a certain product, you just want that brand’s aficionados, no matter how old they are, no matter what gender they are. That would work better for everybody, because viewers would receive content that really speaks to them, no matter what their age or gender. Advertisers would reach people who are truly enthusiastic about the product they are advertising, and content providers can provide the best in entertainment for that special interest group. 

It’s just very hard to standardise that, and I think if we want to try and maintain some kind of traditional standard metrics by which the industry is measured, it’s a pretty tall order to come up with a strict set of behavioural segments. If you look at one particular auto manufacturer, for example, different models will have different behavioural segments, so it’s not just at the individual advertiser level, but at the individual product level. 

egta: You mentioned that we probably won’t move fast enough, what would you say are the potential risks of not moving beyond proxies into audience segmentation and actually pushing that further forward?

CW: I would think the biggest risk is that you’re leaving money on the table and that you’re not maximising the benefits of your budget or your inventory.

If you look at the recent claims about the role of traditional television, it still commands the majority of viewership. Whether that will erode over time remains to be seen, but I think more in the short term the risk is just not maximising what you already have. And, of course, in not really being able to fine tune to a specific behavioural segment. In a way one might think that that might accelerate viewership to other platforms yet to be developed or in development now, because they will target more effectively.

egta: Would you say that the barriers we currently face are primarily technological limitations or legacy attitudes to doing business? 

CW: It’s a little bit of both, I think. It’s easy to stay within the traditional forms of measurement; your five-year plans are based on delivery of age and gender. And all of the systems that are being used by the agencies and the networks are built towards delivering along those age and gender targets. So, you have an immense job to transfer over in an automatic way to a new standard. It’s a bit of the traditional mindset and it’s also a bit of the technological, because you would have to modify the systems to take into account behavioural segments in a standardised manner. 

egta: I understand there are companies like Simulmedia that are focussed on finding the value in inventory that could otherwise we seen as undervalued or even worthless. Do you think that there is quite a rich mine to be tapped there, or does this approach have its limitations?

CW: I think it’s incredibly rich. Part of the challenge with proxy measurements, with age and gen

der, is when you’ve crossed that threshold from aged 49 to aged 50 you are suddenly not very valuable to advertisers. And in fact, if you read the results of studies, the wealth is being concentrated in the 50+ cohort. And just because you’ve turned 50 doesn’t mean you don’t want to buy a car or buy a house, a vacation home, or furnish it, or take a holiday. So, I think that there is a lot more value that is not being mined for advertisers, and for content providers, and it’s diminishing an audience that could actually prove to be very fertile in terms of variety of different purchasing behaviours.

It’s not just the audience that might be undervalued, but there might also be inventory that is undervalued. Maybe you should be buying in overnight, as opposed to prime time. So, I think that there is a lot of value in looking beyond and using the technology and the data sets that are becoming available to recognise value where we may not ascribe it right now.

egta: Are you seeing different types of skillsets coming into broadcasters and sales houses to be able to develop some of these new approaches?

CW: I have always believed that there is an advantage in being creative, strategic and innovative, I would like to think more people are being hired with those skill sets. But I also think that they are very hard skill sets to find and to develop. I believe that the best media companies are those that encourage innovation and strategic thinking and will embrace challenges in order to overcome them. There are companies that are very traditional, and then there are those that want to expand beyond. And I think that those who hire to expand beyond the traditional will be the ones that will be around in the future and thrive.

egta: It's sometimes said that the US might be more advanced in the way they are able to collect and use data; what advice would you give to European broadcasters order to be able to maximise the opportunities of data in the next five to ten years?

CW: It's interesting you should talk about US vs. Europe. I think that Europe has something I wish we had in the United States, which would be a JIC to help set policy. It’s something that I think the time has come in the US, so that we can all be heard at the same time and share ideas and solutions, and I think that’s where Europe might have an advantage over the US. And my advice would be to work with the JIC that you have and start to develop protocols based on leanings internationally, and the data that you have on hand where you are.

The Consumer (Truly) Empowered

My first job out of graduate school was at a broadcast network where, in the late 70s, we used to joke that owning a broadcasting license was like a license to print money because it was so easily profitable. Good times. When cable came into the picture in the 80s there was initial discomfit but no real cause for alarm. And soon, many broadcasters either bought or launched their own cable networks so the television hierarchy remained intact. Viewers craving home entertainment were still captive to the television delivery box as we always knew it. Yes, customers were paying more for television but it expanded the choices available and was for many, worth the cost. Thus began the slippery slope for media companies.

Fast forward to the 21st century as we come face to face with the end of the television network model as we know it. We always like to give lip service to the viewer. “The viewer chooses”, we like to say. But it is never as true as today and many major media companies from magazines to newspapers to radio to television are at a loss as to how to fully monetize. Not only can viewers choose, they rule.

There are many factors placing stress on the current model such as the explosion of viewing sources and devices (many of which inter-relate with each other), faster connectivity so higher quality video can be delivered almost anywhere, burgeoning consumer choice and flexibility at a lower cost point, creation of new content on the consumer side in addition to the professional side as well as a plethora of new and finely divined data sources that challenge Nielsen’s measurement currency.

About five years ago I sat across from a senior executive of a network group and told him that we needed to bulk up our websites, negotiate for full program rights and create unique original content for the web because within the next 3 to 5 years viewers would be watching television on their computer. He said it wouldn’t happen because the industry could not monetize it. “Websites are just for marketing and branding the network”, he said. But now it doesn’t matter what we can or can’t monetize. The consumer is driving this change, not the media companies.

There are too many short term thinkers in the industry. How else to explain the crash and burn of so many once great media properties? As long as we reward short term thinking in place of long term strategies we will always be at the mercy of outside influences that reshape our industry beyond our control.

And yet, I see potential opportunities which are not short term or quick fixes.

 Radio and print could arguably have the most to gain from the internet revolution. They can, for the first time, break out of their historical media forms. A radio or magazine website can stream video, for example. And, no longer limited to the strength of its signal, a radio station site can reach a listener anywhere and everywhere, programming as many genres as there are tastes.

 For all media forms there is global advertising potential. I viewed Susan Boyle’s video on ITV’s Britain’s Got Talent website which was skinned with a Domino’s ad. There are many global brands. So why aren’t more American media companies reaching out to global advertisers … or creating new global advertisers? If I can buy British Telecom stock on the internet, why wouldn’t BT advertise to me on CNBC, CNN or Fox News outlets?

 New ways of using media require new metrics and measurements. There are more and more data sources, collected in real time and offering highly granular data points for valuable insights and trends. Let’s finally move from age and gender posting and create more up-to-date measurement systems that reflect a 360 degree media buy… or should we say a 720 degree buy taking into account the multi-tasking and interactivity of platforms?

The future of media is filled with opportunity if we are prescient enough to take advantage of it and cooperative enough to reach some consensus on certain issues such as measurement. Mitch Oscar of MPG has formed a committee on the latter and there are many strategic researchers at media companies who can contribute to the former, should senior management decide to listen.

Set Top Box Data - the First Analysis

This most recent article that I wrote for MediaPost in May 2009 came on the heels of a Nielsen data glitch where Nielsen was unable to deliver viewing data to their customers for about three consecutive days. The industry was in an uproar and I thought it would be helpful to demonstrate how set top box data can be used to bridge any data lapses in the future:


The Current And New Television Data Currency
Charlene Weisler, May 15, 2009

Although it happens occasionally, when a giant stumbles, he causes the ground to shake for all. So when Nielsen Media Research has problems with processing its audience data, the entire media industry is put on hold… and shakes.

This is a crucial time of year for the broadcast and cable networks. Not only are they embarking on the next upfront sales season, many networks are considering the fate of their original series for possible renewal or cancellation. Without the Nielsen ratings currency, no one feels comfortable making any important program-related decisions.

This is not the first time nor will it be the last, we expect, for this company to experience server and delivery problems. In fact, Nielsen’s track record is fairly good, compared to other consumer and B to B companies. But because Nielsen is the dominant player when it comes to television currency, any blip in data delivery, processing or collection is potentially catastrophic to its clients.

For the common good, the current currency must expand beyond Nielsen and it is up to the industry – broadcast, cable, advertisers, agencies, satcasters, telcos etc – to decide and agree on the expansion of data providers, processors and metrics.

Currently there are many streams of new set top box based viewership data available from various DMAs and footprints. There is nothing, at this time, totally replicating Nielsen’s national footprint but collectively, all this set top box data can be nationalized to form a fairly good national footprint in the future.

There are companies out there such as TNS, TRA, Rentrak, TIVO and the Telcos, all of whom have data. A company like TNS with Direct View data has an extensive footprint that spans a range of markets with the potential to be nationalized. TNS has graciously provided me with performance data for comparison purposes to Nielsen – for days where there was no Nielsen data problem and the days where Nielsen had to reprocess their data.

While there is a very strong correlation between the TNS Direct View and Nielsen ratings (+0.96) for the days examined, the two services will report different levels due to underlying differences in sample compositions and the fact that Direct TV homes have many more available channels than the average Nielsen home. With that in mind, we compared Direct View set top box data ratings to Nielsen Live ratings as a percentage of gross rating points based on household primetime performance for the five broadcast networks for April 27, 28, 29 and May 4, 5, 6, 2009 – three days of delayed data vs week ago.



TNS Live/ Nielsen Live/ Gross Difference
Monday, April 27, 2009
ABC 30%* 34% -4
CBS 30% 26% +4
CW 4% 5% -1
FOX 21% 21% 0
NBC 16% 14% +2

Tuesday, April 28, 2009
ABC 23% 18% +5
CBS 29% 32% -3
CW 4% 4% 0
FOX 24% 25% -1
NBC 20% 21% -1

Wednesday, April 29, 2009
ABC 15% 17% -2
CBS 28% 28% 0
CW 5% 6% -1
FOX 34% 31% +3
NBC 19% 18% +1

Monday, May 4, 2009
ABC 31% 37% -6
CBS 29% 25% +4
CW 4% 4% 0
FOX 20% 19% +1
NBC 15% 14% +1

Tuesday, May 5, 2009
ABC 23% 18% +5
CBS 29% 32% -3
CW 4% 4% 0
FOX 24% 25% -1
NBC 20% 20% 0

Wednesday, May 6, 2009
ABC 14% 15% -1
CBS 28% 29% -1
CW 5% 6% -1
FOX 35% 32% +3
NBC 18% 17% +1

Source: Nielsen, NTI Galaxy, as dated. Live
TNS, as dated, Second by second ratings projected to DIRECT TV’s digital residential household universe
*To be read: According to TNS, ABC received 30% of the total 5 Broadcast network primetime household gross rating points on Monday, April 27, 2009 .

Despite the sample differences, the two services report similar share of grps by broadcast network indicating that set top box data can help yield similar competitive standing results to the current currency. This is an encouraging first step in helping to establish a relationship between set top box data and the current currency. Obviously much more research is needed in this area.
But should future data delivery problems occur, we are not without resources. In this case, Direct View percentages could be applied against an established (and agreed upon) gross rating point universe to get a sense of the possible ratings level. Or, a grp share metric might be established to be used in lieu of ratings to glean performance.

Charlene Weisler is a research veteran and media strategist.

Set Top Box Data - Issues Part 2

This is a follow-up to the March 2008 article I wrote on set top box data. This one was published in MediaPost in February 2009 and continues the discussion about the need for standardization and cooperation between the various data processors.



Set-Top-Box Data: Next Steps
by Charlene Weisler , Wednesday, February 4, 2009

ONCE A HYPOTHETICAL EXERCISE, SET-TOP-BOX data as a measurement tool is quickly becoming a reality. At this time there are several well-positioned companies jockeying for dominance with their varying methodologies, data footprints and sources. But in this seemingly chaotic competitive land rush, there are those who are actively seeking conciliation and structure. MPG's Set Top Box Data luncheon on Jan. 7, organized by MPG's Mitch Oscar, was a very positive step in this direction.

Attending were agency researchers, content company researchers, data processors and providers, developers and programmers, all of whom engaged in lively discussion of possible next steps for data usage and acceptance.

As an advocate for the use of set-top-box data as a measurement tool, I think that now is the time to examine the next steps needed to standardize, analyze and ultimately monetize this breakthrough data source.

Here are a few suggested next steps:
Set up a non-affiliated, non-partisan advisory council either through an established industry or respected accreditation organization. This council, composed of programmers, agencies, processors and suppliers, would help build consensus and guide the formation of a new measurement currency that works for all interested parties.

Standardization of data processing rules. Can we agree on certain data attributes as the foundation for which other data points are based? For example: standard latency periods.

Standardization of the metrics and nomenclature. Do we conform to the current currency of ratings, shares, HUTS and PUTS? Or do we find new, relevant measurements that all processors can agree upon?

Address and overcome data deficiencies. Yes, there are bonafide issues with set-top-box data. For example: There is no agreed-upon national footprint, and efforts to weight the data to make it more national are not universally accepted.

Agree to dispense with "red herring issues" that only serve to confuse. Some stated problems are not really problems. For example: Lack of demographics is not a deficiency with the data, since datapoints can be matched to actual spending and lifestyle information via companies such as Acxiom. Isn't that what advertisers and programmers really want? Not all women 18-49 are alike or equally valuable to advertisers.

Aggressively market data advantages. Set-top-box data remains the only source of second-by-second measurement. That, along with DVR usage, extensive and stable out-of home information, the ability to integrate seamlessly with online usage, and the ability to parse out actual ad performance, makes the data unique and valuable to a range of customers and is currently unavailable within the current currency. These are market positions worth repeating.

Cooperation and partnerships can help form a foundation for data acceptance and provide the missing pieces of this media measurement puzzle.

Work with Accreditation services to help vet the process and speed acceptance of the data as a possible industry currency.



Charlene Weisler was recently senior vice president, research, Rainbow Media Networks and Services.

Set Top Box Data - Issues Part 1

I wrote the following article on MediaPost in March 2008 and offer it here as a launch point to a fuller discussion of set top box data that will occur in the 4th Quarter 2009 with Mitch Oscar's set top box data initiative.

The challenge with set top box data has been, and continues to be, lack of standardization across data providers and platforms. Different definitions for the same term, different calculations for the same metric, etc all contribute to industry confusion and delay in acceptance. This article briefly outlines some of the concerns:


What Do you Mean Set Top Box Data?
By Charlene Weisler, SVP Research Rainbow Networks and Services

With all the recent Mediapost articles on set top box data, I thought I would add my two cents on set top box data measurement. The more I researched the issue, the more I found different methodologies for the same piece of data.

The media marketplace is in a constant state of change. Off platform, non-linear, broadband, DVRs and HD all create a vibrant yet unsettling advertising environment. The current standard of measurement needs to keep pace.

Enter set top box data. Described by media experts as a new standard of measurement, set top box data resides in household cable boxes and tracks user activity. Tracking varies by system and by processor. Currently various MSOs and Satellite providers are partnering with measurement services like Nielsen, TNS and Rentrak. In this rush to market, it may be helpful to explore definition of terms of measurement and address issues. Here is a short list to start the conversation:

Footprints:
The issue of “Polling” vs “Census” data where polling data is a subset of the full footprint. Data processors have no control over the amount of data they can receive from an operator. Therefore some data are census and some are a subset of the full footprint. Since sampling methodologies vary from operator to operator, the data must be used directionally until there is a census (or a consensus) for all data sets.

Data Collection:
Appears to vary by system. Some pull data on a second by second basis, others during an interval of time (like quarter hour intervals) and others pull at activity points like channel change.

Rating or Delivery:
In order to gauge viewership, the boxes are “pulled” at a certain point in time. The channel that the box is turned to at that moment is the channel that gets credit for the viewership. Box pulls might be regarded as ratings (in the case of a partial footprint), delivery or perhaps a new metric?

Smallest viewing increment:
If someone is channel surfing, then a pull to that box for that second would not represent actual viewing. Most processors say that the standard length of time should be in 5 second increments. However Rentrak uses a formula to calculate a standard length that varies by programming genre and changes as the amount of data increases.

Trick play:
DVR metrics need to be decided. According to TNS this data is not currently available in the U.S. but is available in the U.K. Rentrak says that it depends on the operator and the device. Some operators have trick mode data available and Rentrak says that it is in the developmental stage.

Latency:
Lag time as the box changes channels or uploads. How is this viewing ascribed, if at all? The standard here appears to be at 5 seconds but this could vary based on the operator and their platforms.

Tuning event:
Some processors are using channel change activity to denote tuning events. Others say they are using 5 second intervals. A combination of both might indicate actual viewing.

Dwell Times:
Nielsen uses the term “dwell times” to describe tuning event intervals. Dwell times are impacted by “latency”.

Picture in a picture as well as simultaneous viewing/ net usage:
Cannot currently be measured. Therefore no standards are in place yet.

Differences in set top boxes:
Can impact measurement insofar as the output data looks different. DVR capability (or not) impacts data because of behavioral difference.

“Set Top Box On TV Off”:
Current processors offer varying solutions. Nielsen match streams to the people meter boxes. TNS and Rentrak use a series of algorithms. Another company will use an entirely different data source that is currently in development.

”Lack of Demographics”:
Nielsen will match to its sample. Other techniques include data fusion with lifestyle, segmentation and geodemographic databases such as PRIZM and Cohorts and purchasing behavior databases such as Experion.

Box availability within the home (“Not all homes have boxes” or “Not all televisions have boxes” or “Not all televisions in the homes have digital boxes”):
The general position is that the data reflects the digital footprint and makes no claims to measure beyond that. Further, the 2009 retransmission makes the issue irrelevant.

Back channel:
A way to get data back to the operator. Cable systems have a back channel but satellite operators can only send data back via the phone lines. Since not all satellite set top boxes connect to phone lines, this must be taken into account when receiving set top box data from satellite homes. TNS says there is no significant difference in the satellite homes with and without the back channel. Rentrak says boxes are connected in different ways – some need to back channel to get scheduling data, others connect via broadband. It all varies by operator. More examination may be in order.

One last point:
All this is emerging and changing – what an operator uses today can evolve or change tomorrow. I am sure that there are other issues and terms and would appreciate your input. Please send it on.

Q&A Interview with Brad Adgate, SVP Research Horizon Media

As the market slowly moves into upfront mode, I interviewed Brad Adgate, a media research veteran of 31 years. He is an industry expert on media trends with experience at cable networks and at agencies.

There are seven separate videos in this interview, which cover a range of subjects including Brad's views on research quality, crowdsourcing, set top box data, the upfront season and an assessment of future trends in the media landscape.


Video                                         (length)
Background                                 (3:42)
Future of TV                                (3:39)
Past Trends                                  (2:43)
Crowdsourcing                            (4:03)
Predictions                                   (4:14)
Quality of Research                    (1:45)
Conclusion                                  (1:41)

CW: Brad, you are one of the best people in the industry to answer this question – what do you think has been the most dramatic change in the industry in the past five years?

BA: I think one of the biggest changes and how that impacts research is the availability of information. It used to be that research was a gatekeeper. This may go back more than five years but when I was starting out in this industry in Research we were the ones who did all the runs, the crosstabs, the rankings, the ratings and all but because of the technology it is now available on desktops for planners, buyers and account people throughout the industry so I think Research has changed a little bit in following trends. There is so much that is going on that aren’t available on desktops and I think part of the challenge in Research is just trying to find out what is good data, what is bad data. You can look at five different studies in reports and see five different answers and that can be a little frustrating. But I think that Media is just in an exciting time. There are so many different opportunities going out there for marketers and I think it is Research’s job to find out what is going to work and what is not going to work. We can talk about whether it’s crowdsourcing or whether it’s cars becoming living rooms on wheels or pretty soon you’ll be able to watch live tv broadcasts on your cell phone with the digital transition that took place in June. These are things that all of us have to pay attention to and I think research companies are struggling to keep up with that. Research departments have become a conduit between what the marketers want because a lot of marketers want to be ahead of the curve. Right now a lot of it is a concept buy of an idea of what is going to work and what is not going to work. Research is lagging behind that: the Nielsens, the Arbitrons and MRI try to keep up with the industry but there is a lag there. So we have to pull the two together and try to make some sense of where marketers should allocate their dollars.

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about how he got into the Research field and his work background in this video taken in July 2009:

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about the future of television and the potential of set top box data in this video taken in July 2009:

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about past trends in television and media in this video taken in July 2009:

CW: Let’s talk a little about crowdsourcing. How are you using it? How are you defining it? And how applicable is it for your part of the business in advertising?

BA: I think it is more of a collaboration today between consumers and marketers. It is no longer the top down approach. It’s almost like a bottom up approach. And the internet has made this more of a level playing field – more of a democratization. The strategy of building brand awareness to try and sell product, while still viable, is also how consumers experience a brand or product and how they share that experience with other consumers. You see whether it’s through blogs or Youtube or social networks or any other internet applications. Crowds of consumers are in control of the success of a product.

CW: It sounds like crowdsourcing is “word-of-mouth squared”.

BA: Well it is. I’ve found that the irony in all of this new technology is that two of the oldest media – word of mouth and out of home – are having a renaissance.

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about crowdsourcing and word of mouth marketing in this video taken in July 2009:

CW: Where do you see the upfront this year? How do you think it is going to go?

BA: I just think this is going to be the Cuban Missile Crisis – who is going to blink first. Although not as catastrophic, because it’s just between marketers and networks. For years people have been writing off the networks and their ability to get dollars during this period. We had the writers strike last year and everyone predicted doom and gloom because of that but they wound up doing pretty well dollarwise. The year before that it was DVRs and the C3 ratings but it was pretty much business as usual. The networks have been suffering ratings erosion as the competition from cable networks continue to proliferate and yet they still do okay. Now this year we are faced with a slow economy and a lot of product categories like automotive and financial and banking and investment companies that have been beforehand very prominent product categories for television and are having a tough time and we are starting to see perhaps a start of a little rollback – and I would expect to see that there would be a rollback.

CW: In terms of dollars versus last year, do you feel comfortable making a prediction – will it be flat? Will it be down? Up?

BA: I think probably it will be down. It’s just a question of how much down it will be and I think that is what is the delay is right now. I think the marketers want a percentage and the networks want another percentage and that is why there is pretty much of a standstill, why there has been a delay in the upfront right now. What those numbers are, I really don’t know.

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about his predictions for the next five years in this video taken in July 2009:

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about the upcoming upfront marketplace in this video taken in July 2009:

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about the quality of research today in this video taken in July 2009:

Brad Adgate, Senior Vice President of Research at Horizon Media talks to Charlene Weisler about Horizon Media's research blog in this concluding portion of the interview video taken in July 2009:

CW: Brad, is there anything that you would like to add?

BA: I think as a research person it is always good to try keep up with the latest in consumer trends and how consumers are using things. Recently we opened up a blog call the Bradgate blog that is on the Horizon Media website. There is a link there that will take you to the blog. It has some thoughts and things that are going on in the industry.