Guaranteeing Attention by Tracking Eye Movement. A+E’s Roseann Montenes and Dentsu’s Cara Lewis Show Us How It’s Done.

The burning question in this media age of fragmentation is, does the current currency measurement capture true consumer behavior? More and more, networks and agencies are looking for metrics that are more precise for the KPI. This led to a fascinating and successful collaboration between A+E Networks and Dentsu to calibrate, measure and post against viewability for an ABI campaign.

“Our clients are continually looking for different ways to measure campaigns in marketplace and making linear TV as smart as it can be beyond the traditional behaviors that we have,” Cara Lewis, Executive Vice President Head of US Investment, Dentsu - Amplifi, explained.

First Steps and the Pandemic

According to Lewis, “ABI came to us. They have a partnership with the TVision data that we used for this test. They asked us to propose a partnership with networks to guarantee on viewability data that they have. TVision has eye tracking devices in 5000 households.” A+E stepped forward to be the first network to guarantee on viewability eye tracking impression data which can register exactly when eyes are on screen for at least two seconds.

As for timing, “I think the pandemic slowed us down,” stated Lewis, because the project hit a pause during Covid.  “We were on this path of auditing how to get there and talking to the vendors. It then took a bit of a back seat. But then, overall, we just picked up right where we left off,” she noted and added that it may have impacted adding other networks to the study. Roseann Montenes VP Precision + Strategic Audience Sales Partnerships, A+E shared that, “Even as we were noticing the ratings erosion, we were still able to get positive results out of the campaign. We were able to see a lift once we optimized against ABI’s historical data through TVision. We were still able to see improvement against every single network in our portfolio even in this challenging time, we were able to find positive results.”

Challenges and Opportunities

“There were a ton of challenges,” admitted Montenes. “To be very transparent, Cara and I started this conversation in March 2020 and we started to go down this path to figure out the feasibility. When we are working off of a panel size that is so small, it’s hard to get that confidence in stability. Do we trust that this small of an audience to actually give us the results that we are looking to accomplish? What are we getting out of this?”

But A+E is known for driving innovation and the opportunity to test case, as she explained, “Guaranteeing against metrics that mean the most to our clients, really interested us.” The risk was worth it and now the study is in its second wave and the partners are trading on this currency. “It’s proven, especially to us at A+E Networks that we really do believe that finding different metrics to guarantee off of is something that drives partnerships even further. Now, next time when Cara has an opportunity of a different metric that she wants to guarantee off of, maybe we will again be one of the first ones she comes to with it.,”

Successful Execution

As a result of the study, A+E was able to establish a new baseline and new benchmark with the agency. According to Montenes, “If you think about the way we traditionally do business, we have a starting point and for years, we traded off of CPMs. But now all of a sudden we were trading off of a new metric. So it took a lot of time to come up with that new benchmark and that new confidence level in guaranteeing off of a viewability score.” Her team analyzed historical information and attributed the new data to ABI specifically. They were then able to come up with a new scoring metric that could lead to tracking towards a guarantee. “We went to the highest potential possible so we could push our boundaries to over-perform and over-deliver for this first campaign,” she stated.

“GRPs are important. But there is obviously waste in the impressions that we are buying. So to make sure that the impressions are more viewable, and that is by using this data, was the main part of the structure of the campaign as well as making sure that the data was viable so that we could then build it out across the ecosystem,” Lewis stated.

Delivering Results on the KPIs

Among the KPIs for the campaign, “One was to get the campaign greenlit and guaranteed,” Lewis explained, “The other one was to see an increase or incremental lift in the overall viewability percentage. The third was to get a like-minded client counsel; We’ve been having a lot of client conversations across the Dentsu clients, many of whom have said they want to see how the test goes.” In addition, it was important to be able to build it out and make it scalable across the media landscape especially within linear TV.

The fourth quarter result, according to A+E, was a 7.6% lift. There has been a second campaign in first quarter and they are in discussion for a third campaign for second quarter. “We want to show our clients that it is a viable way to guarantee,” Lewis concluded.

For A+E, “We were the first to announce three years ago that we were the first to guarantee on business outcomes,” stated Montenes who added, “We are not slowing down in the space. We are going to continue to make sure that we are talking to the right audiences at the right time at the right places. Next steps for us and ABI is to continue to do everything we can to help them rise.”

This article first appeared in www.MediaVillage.com

What about TV Viewability? An Interview with TVision’s Luke McGuinness

Viewability is a challenge for many forms of visual media. How do we really know if a piece of content is seen? “IPG recognized that the industry had never effectively measured TV viewability,” explained Luke McGuinness, President of TVision. “Ads are bought and sold on the assumption of 100% viewability - but that assumption is false.” He should know since his company tracks a range of television consumption behavior.

IPG MAGNA recently released a TV Viewability study using TVision data. The study noted that regardless of device, viewability indicates whether an ad has the opportunity to be seen but it does not guarantee that a viewer has actually seen the ad or whether that ad is effective. The difference between digital and TV viewability is that with digital, the consumer is present, but not all served ads appear on the screen. With TV all ads appear on the screen, but the consumer may or may not be present.

In this interview, McGuinness discusses the study, its genus and its future.

Charlene Weisler: What prompted the study?

Luke McGuinness: More than $59 billion will be spent on TV ads in 2019, without knowing if the ads are viewable. IPG sought to quantify TV viewability so that TV advertising could be measured in a manner similar to digital. 

Weisler: What are its implications?

McGuinness: The study from IPG Media Labs, using TVision data, found that 29% of all TV ads are not viewable. That means they air to an empty room. When we think about the $59 billion (or more depending on the source), ads that air to an empty room are costing advertisers quite a large sum. By evaluating TV for viewability, advertisers can determine what is working, what is not, and optimize for better performance, and therefore substantially reduce ad waste.

Weisler: Please give me an overview of the methodology.

McGuinness: IPG reviewed 6 months of TVision data, tracking 5,388 individuals in a nationally representative panel, tracking 39,464 hours of ads for households, 2,992,414 unique ads, 5,961,757 impressions, persons 2+ and C3. Programming and ads were captured via ACR (automatic content recognition). Participants opted to install TV viewability detection technology in their household. Viewability and attention were measured by using computer vision algorithms.

Weisler: Would you say that the results show that TV and digital are comparable in delivering ad messaging? What are the differences that you found?

McGuinness: The fact that the size of the Viewability issue for TV very closely mirrors digital video shows that the two face similar (29% for TV; 31% for digital video) challenges in delivering ad messaging, but there are some natural differences in viewability for TV and digital. And these differences are rooted in the fact that digital video on PC and mobile are inherently different experiences. With digital, it is presumed that the consumer is there because of the nature of the medium. Someone just clicked to watch a video. As we all know, TV is very different. People leave the room or even leave the home with the TV on. 

Advertisers measure digital viewability as they do not want to invest in ads that do not have the opportunity to be seen. The way we measure viewability for TV delivers the same value proposition - investing in an ad strategy that will deliver an opportunity for people to see the ads. The methodology is different, given that are different mediums, but the value proposition is consistent. 

Weisler: What is your recommended course of action to improve ad delivery and consumption?

McGuinness: TV’s viewability challenge lacks uniformity. It is not limited to specific networks, times of day, programs or content types. While viewability varies across industries, no advertiser is immune. Every brand can improve their return on ad spend with this data. The best step forward for brands is to measure what’s working or not for their historical TV advertising, benchmark versus competitors’ performance, plan a more effective strategy along with their existing planning tools, and measure and optimize on an ongoing basis. By using TVision viewability and attention data, combined with other data such as cost and ratings data, brands can identify higher performing opportunities. For example, the study suggests that brands can find value by buying ad spots outside of prime, and outside of the first spot in the pod.

Weisler: What about pod position?

McGuinness: In general, the first position in an ad pod may not be worth a premium. Ads appearing first in a pod had 72.2% viewability. Ads in the middle of the pod had 70.3% and those at the end of the pod had 69.9%. Longer ads have higher viewability but doubling the length of an ad does not double the viewability, so the cost of longer ads must be considered.

Weisler: What are next steps?

McGuinness: The immediate next steps are for advertisers and networks to incorporate viewability into their ad buying and selling - and many have already started to do so. They can do this by analyzing their historical performance for viewability, analyzing their competitors’ performance, and learning from that.  Additionally they’re leveraging broader planning data from TVision to best optimize their campaigns and they are now measuring their specific performance on an ongoing basis.

This article first appeared in www.Mediapost.com

What about TV Viewability? An Interview with TVision’s Luke McGuinness

Viewability is a challenge for many forms of visual media. How do we really know if a piece of content is seen? “IPG recognized that the industry had never effectively measured TV viewability,” explained Luke McGuinness, President of TVision. “Ads are bought and sold on the assumption of 100% viewability - but that assumption is false.” He should know since his company tracks a range of television consumption behavior.

IPG MAGNA recently released a TV Viewability study using TVision data. The study noted that regardless of device, viewability indicates whether an ad has the opportunity to be seen but it does not guarantee that a viewer has actually seen the ad or whether that ad is effective. The difference between digital and TV viewability is that with digital, the consumer is present, but not all served ads appear on the screen. With TV all ads appear on the screen, but the consumer may or may not be present.

In this interview, McGuinness discusses the study, its genus and its future.

Charlene Weisler: What prompted the study?

Luke McGuinness: More than $59 billion will be spent on TV ads in 2019, without knowing if the ads are viewable. IPG sought to quantify TV viewability so that TV advertising could be measured in a manner similar to digital. 

Weisler: What are its implications?

McGuinness: The study from IPG Media Labs, using TVision data, found that 29% of all TV ads are not viewable. That means they air to an empty room. When we think about the $59 billion (or more depending on the source), ads that air to an empty room are costing advertisers quite a large sum. By evaluating TV for viewability, advertisers can determine what is working, what is not, and optimize for better performance, and therefore substantially reduce ad waste.

Weisler: Please give me an overview of the methodology.

McGuinness: IPG reviewed 6 months of TVision data, tracking 5,388 individuals in a nationally representative panel, tracking 39,464 hours of ads for households, 2,992,414 unique ads, 5,961,757 impressions, persons 2+ and C3. Programming and ads were captured via ACR (automatic content recognition). Participants opted to install TV viewability detection technology in their household. Viewability and attention were measured by using computer vision algorithms.

Weisler: Would you say that the results show that TV and digital are comparable in delivering ad messaging? What are the differences that you found?

McGuinness: The fact that the size of the Viewability issue for TV very closely mirrors digital video shows that the two face similar (29% for TV; 31% for digital video) challenges in delivering ad messaging, but there are some natural differences in viewability for TV and digital. And these differences are rooted in the fact that digital video on PC and mobile are inherently different experiences. With digital, it is presumed that the consumer is there because of the nature of the medium. Someone just clicked to watch a video. As we all know, TV is very different. People leave the room or even leave the home with the TV on. 

Advertisers measure digital viewability as they do not want to invest in ads that do not have the opportunity to be seen. The way we measure viewability for TV delivers the same value proposition - investing in an ad strategy that will deliver an opportunity for people to see the ads. The methodology is different, given that are different mediums, but the value proposition is consistent. 

Weisler: What is your recommended course of action to improve ad delivery and consumption?

McGuinness: TV’s viewability challenge lacks uniformity. It is not limited to specific networks, times of day, programs or content types. While viewability varies across industries, no advertiser is immune. Every brand can improve their return on ad spend with this data. The best step forward for brands is to measure what’s working or not for their historical TV advertising, benchmark versus competitors’ performance, plan a more effective strategy along with their existing planning tools, and measure and optimize on an ongoing basis. By using TVision viewability and attention data, combined with other data such as cost and ratings data, brands can identify higher performing opportunities. For example, the study suggests that brands can find value by buying ad spots outside of prime, and outside of the first spot in the pod.

Weisler: What about pod position?

McGuinness: In general, the first position in an ad pod may not be worth a premium. Ads appearing first in a pod had 72.2% viewability. Ads in the middle of the pod had 70.3% and those at the end of the pod had 69.9%. Longer ads have higher viewability but doubling the length of an ad does not double the viewability, so the cost of longer ads must be considered.

Weisler: What are next steps?

McGuinness: The immediate next steps are for advertisers and networks to incorporate viewability into their ad buying and selling - and many have already started to do so. They can do this by analyzing their historical performance for viewability, analyzing their competitors’ performance, and learning from that.  Additionally they’re leveraging broader planning data from TVision to best optimize their campaigns and they are now measuring their specific performance on an ongoing basis.

This article first appeared in Mediapost.com

Military-Grade Ad Verification. Interview with Daniel Avital, CSO CHEQ

With all of the industry talk about ad verification, it may take a former Israeli intelligence officer to develop a military-grade protocol to detect and prevent ad fraud. 

CHEQ, founded by Guy Tytunovich, is positioning itself as “a cyber-security company looking to replace traditional ad-verification platforms with a fully autonomous and pre-emptive solution.” It is certainly an area of importance for agencies and advertisers who are concerned about brand safety, ad viewability and fraud prevention.

I sat down with CHEQ’s Chief Strategy Officer, Daniel Avital, to find out more:

Charlene Weisler: How does CHEQ prevent ad fraud?

Daniel Avital: Every time a user is about to be served an ad, our system rapidly analyzes almost 700 parameters and sets multiple honeypots (bot traps) to determine the authenticity of that user and ensure that only human traffic gets served. The name of the game is speed – after analyzing all of that data and making a decision, we need to prevent that impression from being acquired by our client. All of that needs to happen in record speed.

Charlene Weisler: Does it protect privacy?

Daniel Avital: Ultimately, our mission is to protect the digital ecosystem and privacy is a big part of that effort. To that end, we are fully compliant with the new GDPR regulations and have brought on board designated personnel to ensure that our privacy practices continue to be protective of user privacy, which we believe to be a basic right.

Charlene Weisler: How does CHEQ work in real time?

Daniel Avital: To enable real-time prevention, our engineering teams have had to continuously optimize our algorithms to ensure all our fraud prevention and brand-safety NLP (natural processing language) modules run simultaneously, cost-efficiently and at great speed. This allows CHEQ to make an accurate decision before an ad is ever served.

Charlene Weisler: Could it be said that it is in the programmatic space or works with programmatic in some form?

Daniel Avital: We cover all digital advertising environments, including programmatic, whether it be display or video - where we are introducing unique and cutting-edge capabilities to the industry.

Charlene Weisler: Can CHEQ be used for other media applications?

Daniel Avital: Absolutely. At this point in time, CHEQ’s focus is on transforming the ad-verification space (ad fraud, brands safety and viewability), but our ultimate goal is to help advertisers take back control of their digital media, a goal that transcends ad verification. Our R&D teams are developing exciting applications for our tech which will give advertisers new tools like Autonomous PR (crisis management, reacting to competitors, breaking stories).

Charlene Weisler: How does the technology work?

Daniel Avital: For fraud prevention, CHEQ's platform applies various proprietary modules to detect suspicious non-human activity, data discrepancies and behavioral anomalies. On the brand safety side, we apply advanced NLP (Natural Language Processing) modules to intelligently analyze content at page level and ensure advertisers only serve ads alongside brand-safe content.

Charlene Weisler: What advice would you give a digital advertiser?

Daniel Avital: Stress-test your ad-verification vendors and don’t blindly trust the accuracy of their measurement and reporting. Do not put up with a vendor who offers a “black-box” solution. Always ask them to provide you with raw data (flagged IP’s, flagged “unsafe” URL’s, traffic sources etc.) so that you can assess their work with an external party.

Charlene Weisler: Where do you see your part of the business going in the next 3-5 years?

Daniel Avital: We want to put the control back in the hands of advertisers. Today the hottest issues are brand safety, ad fraud and viewability but in the next few years we plan on transcending the verification space and launching innovative products which will help advertisers get an even stronger grip on their digital presence.

This article first appeared in www.Mediapost.com