Nielsen may have launched Online Campaign Ratings into the Australian market, but brands will be reluctant to shift the “mythical 10%” of TV budgets into online video buys unless the industry can work out a set of metrics everyone understands.
On the flipside, top media agency bosses have argued that 50% accuracy for in-target video views is something “TV buyers would snap your hand off for”. That means the media industry needs to work with the data it has got and explain how digital video combines with TV buys and what it brings to brands. At the moment, that discussion is being led by technology companies and the market is in a state of confusion.
That's the view from media agencies.
Speaking last week at a conference organised by Adap.tv, which inked a deal with Nielsen on OCR, GroupM's Danny Bass, Omnicom's Leigh Terry and Ikon's performance director Phil Cowlishaw flagged the data issue. While Nielsen partners with OzTam on data, the TV ratings provider doesn't share data, that means nothing can be overlapped between digital video and traditional TV, so data on true extension and frequency is patchy.
It may be that OzTam is talking with Nielsen and the broader industry about the issue. But for now, that risks leaving brand marketers, who want more concrete metrics before they place big dollars into something they don't fully understand, in limbo and reliant on inferred data.
Some though, are willing to take the gamble. The conference heard that one media agency had an automotive client that would go “digital first” next year, placing 40-50% of budget online.
Omnicom boss Terry said that some marketers would put those kinds of levels into digital and digital video “because they believe it is the right thing to do irrespective of the metrics.” But others would always be more cautious “and wait for the Nielsen gold ribbon.”
“Is there a gold standard that the industry agrees with which would allow us to move $300m of TV into video? Not yet. Clients need surety. We spend billions of dollars on their behalf. That said, clients would be missing the opportunity that online video brings with media technology and consumption habits having changed so much in the last decade.”
Bass said that there was a need for “more clarity on data … but it is not going to happen any time soon. So we have to use what we have got and explain it to clients.”
Bass said that with a market saturated with mainstream and trade media, the issue is cloudy for marketers, who understand TV metrics and may be reluctant to leave that comfort zone.
“They talk in TARP bands for three and six to nine. Everything we do is in billions and it gets to a point where people stop listening. We have to simplify it a bit and that is where the IAB needs to take a leadership position.”
Cowlishaw agreed that it wasn't the shortage of data that was the issue, but “a shortage of a unified platform … and that is not going to change [in the near term].”
He said the answer was to move away from reach and frequency to understanding the role of the channel and the complementary impact of digital video.
“What we are seeing is that TV is strong in driving the brand, whereas digital video, a one-to-one medium, is really strong at driving a connection with a particular product we are selling. So we are seeing great steps forward when we look at how they are playing off against each other, not just how they are running in increments against each other.”
Terry argued that while the talk was of online video eating into TV budgets, it was not necessarily the case, and that arguably, outdoor, radio and print could feed into the pot, “so it doesn't all have to come out of television.”
Bass said whatever the shortfalls, the industry would get there if it didn't tie itself in knots seeking perfection. Although it would not be easy.
“The fundamental issue is that TV is served to a mass audience in one go, video is one person at one time. Until TV is streamed via IP it is going to be very difficult to bring the two together.”
“But as an industry we spend a lot of time asking what's wrong, the roof's falling in. We have got to take a step back. Print, despite its current challenges had 100 years to refine the model. TV had 60 years. YouTube got commercialised eight years ago. So we will figure this out.”
Updated: Doug Peiffer, CEO has said the company is happy to discuss with Nielsen at OzTam.
“Online Campaign Ratings (OCR) and Cross Platform Campaign Ratings (XCR) are Nielsen products. OzTAM can’t speak for those services," said Peiffer in a statement.
“OzTAM’s remit is to provide a world-class television audience measurement service. We consider requests to use OzTAM data alongside other services on a case by case basis to ensure the proposed use is robust and that it doesn’t confuse the market by producing different TV ratings estimates from those our subscribers derive.
“We’d be happy to discuss Nielsen’s product when they’re ready.”
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.
Have something to say? Send us your comments using the form below or contact the writer at brendancoyne@yaffa.com.au
Have something to say on this? Share your views in the comments section below. Or if you have a news story or tip-off, drop us a line at adnews@yaffa.com.au
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.