Mike Bologna Predicts the Future of Addressable Television

As the structure of the TV buy and sell paradigm evolves with advancements in automation, technology and protocols, the future of television is filled with a range of dramatic possibilities. Mike Bologna, President one2one Addressable, Cadent, presented his views of what he sees as the future of Addressable TV at the recent TVB conference held in New York. 

Bologna spoke with Videa President Shereta Williams about what’s next in targeted TV and automation for broadcasters. The discussion focused on the automation of the business model to, as he explained, “enable new business models; what broadcasters are doing to advance standard API adoption through the TIP initiative; what is the local broadcast Addressable Advertising opportunity now and in the future; and how will connected TVs and ATSC 3.0 adoption enable Addressable Advertising.” The TIP initiative is a partnership between system providers in order to streamline transaction workflows and create greater inter-activity between various buy and sell systems. 

The Pressure is On

For Bologna, TV once involved the entire family sitting around a wooden TV box viewing content together. But that was a long time ago. “TV was easier to plan, buy and measure,” he reminisced, “But that is not the case anymore. Now no one is at home watching TV. We are now in a world where consumers have all the choices in the world.”

All players in the ecosystem have their challenges. Overall, the industry needs to be nimble and forward-moving. There is a natural tendency to strive for the perfect solution but that can hamper progress but hesitation is lethal. “TV is changing,” he stated, “and we can't wait until its ‘perfect’ to adopt addressable.” He also pointed out that data and technology are the center of the TV business and the industry is poised for great change.

Brands are under a lot of pressure to “get the most bang for their buck,” while, “Media owners need the highest rent they can get so they can continue to produce great content. It is a complex marketplace,” he noted. And agencies, according to Bologna, have the hardest job of all. “Agencies have the burden of putting all of it together holistically and not in silos.”

Actionable Steps

Broadcasters face their own unique challenges in implementing addressable (including carriage agreements, unified measurement system). Marketers are limited with two minutes per hour. And between the two entities, there are a myriad of legacy buy/sell systems that have “a lot of pieces to be stitched together across twelve different systems. There is no way we can scale without solving that problem. That is where the TIP initiative comes it.” The opportunities are there for these two sides of the buy/sell to facilitate the targeting of messages to reach the right consumers at the right time.

“Define a segment and send a message to that particular home,” he stated. “Addressability should deliver audience at scale. Not 120 million households but whatever the percent of the U.S. your target audience is. And it should tie back to a sale or whatever you are trying to achieve.”

The messaging “has to be efficient as calculated by price divided by return in investment,” he noted and added, “It has to be transparent in terms of scale and it has to drive results you want. (Addressable) is the only area of TV where you start with a segment, match it, feed it in and tie it back to a sale.”

New Technology

Broadcasters need to take full advantage of the emerging technology of smart TVs. “If your TV is connected to the internet you can receive an addressable ad. This is the broadcaster's marketplace to win and conquer,” he said. “Today, implementation of addressable advertising faces challenges of scale. With an alliance between the TVB and several Smart TV OEM’s, this is a great proof of concept and interim solution until ATSC 3.0 is in play,” he advised. 

But he is also realistic about the timeline for ATSC 3.0. “Speaking specifically about broadcast, ATSC 3.0 will solve this for us tomorrow if it was mandatory, which it is not. Because it isn't mandatory and it costs money it will be a slow roll out.” Despite this, he is bullish on the ATSC 3.0 Protocol Stack as a future game-changer. “It will speed up adoption of addressable TV, though it could be a while until this protocol is widely adopted,” he hedged.

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com

.

TV Legacy Systems Holding Back Advanced Advertising Efforts?

Legacy data may provide a standardized measurement platform, but “data is advancing more quickly than our ability to transact on it,” Mike Rosen, NBCU’s evp, advanced advertising and platform sales, told attendees at NewBay Media’s Advanced Advertising conference in NYC Mon. “In TV, there are so many legacy principles that have been around for decades. Data is happening so quickly that the industry has trouble figuring out how it fits.”

One2one Media pres Mike Bologna, argued that “if advertising has to be advanced, then the data has to be better than the past. We need different forms of data to best calculate.” TV’s legacy infrastructure, however, can impede advanced advertising growth.
“We are dealing with a lot of legacy systems, and they are not going anywhere,” said Doug Hurd, co-founder, evp business development, clypd. “We are trying to reduce friction, but it is hard and the least sexiest part of the business.”

Sarah Foss, chief product officer, advertising management systems at Imagine Communications, said the TV model needs some creative re-adaptation. “The business model has always changed. We are multichannel now,” she said. “We are selling TV to get to audience and devices in different ways. Most of our clients are selling impressions and Macgyvering it back into the system.”
Of course, when it comes to cross-platform measurement, “frenemies” must sometimes work together, and OpenAP is one example of three major media competitors doing just that. Noah Levine, svp, advertising data & technology solutions at Fox Networks Group, explained that OpenAP was designed to offer “consistency in audience definitions and sizing, consistency in sharing across sellers and facilitating a mechanism to provide posts from OpenAP data companies such as Nielsen and comScore.”

VideoAmp chief strategy officer Jay Prasad said predicted standards adoption within the next two years: “Advanced currencies backed by attribution data will replace GRPs and siloed digital measurement.” — Charlene Weisler for Cablefax

Working Together to Advance TV Advertising. Takeaways From NewBay Media’s Advanced Advertising Conference

Data and its use in advanced advertising targeting continue to be core topics of NewBay Media's Advanced Advertising Conferences. In today’s conference, the impact of data targeting efforts in linear TV spurred discussion about OpenAP, attribution and programmatic.

The major takeaways were as follows:

Legacy Data vs Newer Datasets

To some, legacy data is a paramount measurement tool, offering legitimacy and safety with established, industry accepted standards, quality and auditing. To others, legacy data is holding TV back. “Data is advancing more quickly than our ability to transact on it,” noted Mike Rosen, EVP Advanced Advertising and Platform Sales. “In TV there are so many legacy principles that have been around for decades. Data is happening so quickly that the industry has trouble figuring out how it fits,” he added.

So where does an established TV media company start? "Never start with age and gender," Rosen advised, "Everyone is 25-54 so 25-54 is not a target. What is your outcome for your campaign? Sales? Reach?" Mike Bologna, President of one2one Media, agreed, “If advertising has to be advanced, then the data has to be better than the past. We need different forms of data to best calculate.”

Business Infrastructure is Holding TV Back

Beyond data, it is the legacy infrastructure of the TV business that can impede its advanced advertising growth. Facebook and Google have put TV in a corner as a branding tool. “TV much more powerful than brand building and we tend to get trapped. We say, ‘That is what you do, so just keep doing it.’ But TV offers much more value beyond branding,” noted Rosen.

“We are dealing with a lot of legacy systems and they are not going anywhere. We are trying to reduce friction but it is hard and the least sexiest part of the business,” explained Doug Hurd, Co-Founder, EVP Business Development, clypd. However, Sarah Foss, Chief Product Officer, Advertising Management Systems, Imagine Communications, saw the TV model as more flexible, though it needed some creative re-adaptions. “The business model has always changed. We are multichannel now,” she stated, “We are selling TV to get to audience and devices in different ways. Most of our clients are selling impressions and macgyvering it back into the system.”

Cross Platform Measurement is a Team Sport

There is a lot of talk about "frenemy" companies working together to find solutions. OpenAP is a great example of three major media competitors working together for a common solution. Noah Levine, SVP Advertising Data, Technology Solutions, Fox, explained that OpenAP was designed to offer, “Consistency in audience definitions and sizing, consistency in sharing across sellers and facilitating a mechanism to provide posts from OpenAP data companies such as Nielsen and comScore.”

This collaborative effort might be the tipping point for more joint initiatives. "The industry is ready to work together" to move cross platform measurement forward, according to Jay Prasad, Chief Strategy Officer, VideoAmp. “It’s time to figure it out and to measure impressions,” he added, advocating measurement progress in three steps:

·         “Crawl” = getting an age and gender metric across linear and digital.

·         “Walk” = measuring advanced targets such as age and gender plus income across linear, addressable, and digital.

·         “Run” = Measure any digital target, even advertiser CRM based segments on all video playback formats including the above plus OTT plus VOD plus DVR over an entire flight of a campaign, and not just C3 or C7.

Prasad believes that the adoption of standards is close at hand. He forecast that in the next two years, “Advanced currencies backed by attribution data will replace GRPs and siloed digital measurement.”

Conclusion

Whatever the new technologies and datasets bring to TV and advanced advertising, it will be exciting and will require constant adaption to change. Some companies are getting out ahead of the change by partnering with competing companies. Others are creatively adapting legacy systems to the new normal. Whether we crawl, walk or run, the great takeaway of the day is that we need to do it together.

This article first appeared in CableFax.

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